Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh
Reported in : (1984)8ITD667(Chd.)
1. This is an appeal directed against the order dated 27-3-1982 passed by the competent authority being the IAC, made under Section 269F(6) of ths Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'). The impugned order is in respect of an agricultural land measuring 69 kanals 16 marlas along with house building therein situated in village Badrukhan, District Sangrur. The aforesaid property belonged to HUF of Major Tikka Khushwant Singh and the same was sold by him to Swaraj Spinning Mills Ltd., a public limited company, incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at Singla Niwas, Shahi Samadhan, Patiala. The property in question was sold vide three different registered sale deed Nos. (i) 1653 on 29-10-1974; (n) 1663 on 31-10-1974; and (ii) 1719 on 11-11-1974. As per each sale deed, one third share in the property in question was sold for a sum of Rs. 49,000 each. In other words, the entire property was sold for a total sum of Rs. 1,47,000. The impugned order shows that the c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh
Reported in : (1983)6ITD146(Chd.)
1. In this appeal by the revenue against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dated nil relating to the assessment year 1980-81, the issue involved is whether the addition made by the ITO to the total income of the assessee by taking the annual letting value of the portion occupied by the members of the family at Rs. 6,000 was rightly reduced by the Commissioner (Appeals) to Rs. 834.2. The assessee before us is Shri Hira Lal Sibbal, advocate. He derives income from legal profession, house property, dividends, interest, etc.Shri Sibbal had acquired House No. 29 in Sector 5, Chandigarh, as his individual property. He threw this properly into the common hotchpotch of the family of which he is the karta. A portion of this converted property was let out for a consideration of Rs. 10,000 per annum. A part of this property was used for self-residence by the members of the family.3. When the ITO took up the assessment for the year under appeal, he estimated the income from the self-occupie...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh
Reported in : (1983)6ITD107(Chd.)
1. This appeal by the revenue is directed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), dated 26-5-1981, relating to the assessment year 1978-79.2. The issue before us as brought by the revenue is whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in directing the ITO to allow registration to the appellant firm. For determination of this issue, the facts that we have to take into consideration are as under : 3. The assessce is a registered firm working under the name and style of Luxrni Rice Mills, Pehowa. It had been assessed as a registered firm for the assessment year prior to the assessment year under appeal.Therefore, on 10-7-1978, when the return of income was filed by the assessee, the assessee also enclosed Form No. 12 for continuation of registration in terms of Section184(7) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'). The firm actually consists of six partners, one of whom is Smt. Sarla Singal.4. On receipt of the above docum...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh
Reported in : (1983)6ITD215(Chd.)
1. In this appeal, preferred by the revenue, the action of the AAC taking the income of the assessee at nil and holding that, if at all any income arises the same belongs to the deity Jawalamukhi, is contested 2. The assessee in this case, which is Mandir Parbandhkarni Committee, Jawalamukhi Temple, had not been subjected to tax by the ITO for the first time during the assessment year 1964-65, which is under consideration, but earlier in respect of the assessment year 1972-73 assessment of this very assessee had been before the ITO, who held that the assessee-committee's job was only to manage the affairs of the temple and it does not earn any income of its own. However, the revenue resorted to Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') proceedings for the year under consideration and, firstly, the assessment was framed ex parte under Section 144 of the Act, but subsequently as it was set aside under section 146 of the Act, fresh assessment came to be made by the ITO on the a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh
Reported in : (1983)5ITD282(Chd.)
1. The sum and substance of all the grounds raised by the revenue in this appeal is to dispute the action of the Commissioner (Appeals) who accorded exemption to the assessee under Section 10(2(18) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 reversing the finding of the ITO that the assessee was not entitled to any exemption under Clause (26B) of said Section 2. In order to appreciate the issue, a brief resume of facts in the background shall be of immense help for adjudication of the issue under consideration. The assessment year involved is 1978-79. The assessee is the Haryana Harijan Kalyan Nigam Ltd., registered under the Companies Act, 1956. It came into existence as a consequence of the Haryana Government decision dated 5-8-1970. The total paid up capital comprised of Rs. 1,13,50,000 in equity shares numbering 11,350 of Rs. 1,000 each and the said shares were held as under :1.Commissioner and Secretary to Government, Haryana 11,349 Welfare of Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes Department, Ch...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh
Reported in : (1983)5ITD508(Chd.)
1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the AAC dated 15-6-1981 relating to the assessment year 1975-76. In order to understand the grievance of the assessee, a look at the factual canvass of the case would be very essential.2. The assessee is a HUF. For the assessment year under appeal, the assessee filed the return of its net wealth declaring net wealth of Rs. 6,27,600. In this net wealth was included the value of a house owned by the assessee at College Road, Ludhiana. This value was taken at Rs. 71,917. For this house, the value had been declared by the assessee at Rs. 98,513 in the immediately preceding assessment year. The WTO, therefore, asked the assessee to explain the discrepancy. The assessee explained that some portion of the land appurtenant to the house was proposed to be acquired by the Government leading to fall in the fair market value of the house. The WTO did not accept this contention. He took the value of the house at Rs. 1,10,000 as agains...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh
Reported in : (1983)6ITD129(Chd.)
1. The sum and substance of all the grounds raised by the revenue in this appeal is that the A AC has erred in granting registration to the assessce-firm.2. In order to appreciate the issue, the facts in the background may be stated, in brief, as under. The assessment year involved is 1978-79, for which the relevant 'previous year' ended on 31-3-1978. On 15-7-1977, Shri Mohan Lal son of Shri Ratti Ram and Navneet Rai son of Shri Mohan Lal, i.e., father and son, executed a deed of partnership.In the said deed, one of the clauses was that the partnership shall be deemed to have commenced with effect from 1-4-1977 and it shall be a partnership at will. Navneet Rai on 15-7-1977 was major but on 1-4-1977, he was a minor. The assessee had claimed registration and filed application in Form No. 11 on 3-2-1978 along with the partnership deed in original. The ITO in the course of the assessment proceedings rejected the registration claim of the assessee under Section 185(1)(b) of the Income-tax...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh
Reported in : (1983)6ITD4(Chd.)
Per Shri F. C. Rustagi, Judicial Member - The appeal by the revenue and the cross-objection by the assessee under the Gift-tax Act, 1958 (the Act), since are in respect of one and the same assessment year 1974-75, both the matters were heard together and are disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience.2. The revenue in its appeal has contested the action of the AAC setting aside the assessment for valuation to be made as per the Supreme Court decision in the case of CGT v. Smt. Kusumben D. Mahadevia [1980] 122 ITR 38 in order to determine the value of shares sold by the assessee-trust in respect of which deemed gift was subjected to tax by the GTO whereas the assessee in its cross-objection originally supported the order of the AAC but at the time of hearing before us, came forward with a newly raised legal plea that the assessee being a recognised charitable trust under the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the 1961 Act), enjoys exemption under the 1961 Act as the same is ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh
Reported in : (1986)17ITD982(Chd.)
Per Shri F. C. Rustagi, Judicial Member - The accountable person has come forward with three grounds in this appeal under the Estate Duty Act, 1953 (the Act) the first main ground being in respect of Rs. 1 lakh received as ex gratia payment by the specified members of family of the deceased Shri Lalit Bhatia, who died in an air-crash. Lalit Bhatia was employed in the Air force, Government of India. The Assistant Controller subjected the said amount of Rs. 1 lakh to levy to estate duty and while doing so he placed his reliance on the Case of CED v. A. T. Sahani [1970] 78 ITR 508 (Delhi). When the dispute came before the Controller (Appeal), he also confirmed the action of the Assistant Cotroller for the reasons given by him in his order.2. While disputing this action of the Controller, the learned counsel for the accountable person, Mr. D. K. Gupta, submitted that payment of Rs. 1 lakh received on the death of Shri Lalit Bhatia had two important characters - first being that it was ex ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh
Reported in : (1983)6ITD541(Chd.)
1. This is an appeal preferred by the assessee Oriental Science Apparatus Workshop. The assessment year involved is 1976-77 for which the relevant 'previous year' ended on 31-3-1976. Besides the two grounds raised in respect of 'business promotion expenses' amounting to Rs. 1,247 and Rs. 477 and the assessee's claim of weighted deduction in respect of Rs. 33,691 received less as 'difference in exchange value on exports' and weighted deduction on Rs. 3,58,633 paid as 'air and sea freight, railway and truck freight and insurance charges of goods', the assessee came forward with an additional ground in respect of : Expenses of Rs. 3,10,902 out of total of expenses of Rs. 8,82,832 in proportion to the export sales of 91 per cent.and prayed that weighted deduction on that too may be allowed. While addressing the Bench on the admission of additional ground, the learned counsel for the assessee, Mr. O.P. Bansal, submitted that powers of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal are very wide. He was...
Tag this Judgment!