Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Guwahati
Reported in : (1988)24ITD440(Gau.)
1. This appeal by the revenue is directed against the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)'s order cancelling the Income-tax Officer's order of re-assessment under Section 147(a)/144B dated 16-7-1932 by raising the following ground : For that the learned CIT(A) erred in cancelling the reassessment under the provisions of Section 147(a).However, during the course of hearing before us, an additional ground was raised by the learned Departmental Representative, which reads as under : The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in holding that the assessment is barred by limitation.After hearing both the parties, we have admitted the said additional ground as the same arises out of the CIT(A)'s order.2. The facts in brief are that originally an assessment for the year under appeal was made under Section 143(3) on 29-9-1977 determining the total income of the assessee at Rs. 69,810. Subsequently, the ITO re-opened the assessment under Section 147(a) by issue of a notice under Se...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Guwahati
Reported in : (1986)16ITD100(Gau.)
1. The department has filed thisa ppeal which is directed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) by which he has cancelled the reassessment made by the ITO under Section 144/147(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') and thereby deleted the addition of Rs. 5,04,127.The relief claimed by the revenue is that the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) may be reversed and that of the ITO be restored.2. From the assessment order it is seen that the assessee was the proprietor of Ashok Industries for the assessment year nder review. The ITO pointed out that the original assessment was revised in the light of the direction of the appellate authorities. He pointed out that after completion of the original assessment dated 19-2-1975, it was detected that the assessee suppressed the stock of goods in the accounts to the extent of Rs. 5,04,127 and as the assessee has concealed his income which has escaped assesssment by reason of the failure of the assessee to disclose fully and truly ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Guwahati
Reported in : (1986)15ITD503(Gau.)
1. As all these appeals filed by the revenue arise out of the consolidated order dated 15-2-1983 passed by the AAC and give rise to a common issue, they were heard together and for the sake of convenience, are being disposed of by this single order.2. The assessee applied for adjournment on the ground of his illness.The prayer is not supported by a medical certificate or any other material. We, therefore, refuse the prayer for adjournment. Moreover, we do not find it necessary to adjourn the hearing of the appeals. At the time of hearing of the appeals none put in appearance on behalf of the assessee. The appeals were, therefore, heard ex parte and have to be disposed of on the basis of submissions made on behalf of the revenue and the materials available on record.3. The assessee is an individual. The assessment years involved are 1968-69 to 1974-75. Shri B.B. Kundu, the learned departmental representative, stated before us that the assessee carries on bus iness as a contractor and t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Guwahati
Reported in : (1984)9ITD314(Gau.)
A combined order of assessment passed by the assessing officer giving effect to directions of Tribunal and also culminating proceeding under section 147(a) was justified.The Income Tax Officer was justified in passing a combined order. There was nothing in law to prevent the Income Tax Officer from passing a combined order giving effect to the directions of the Tribunal and also culminating the proceedings under section 147(a).1. This appeal relates to the assessment year 1971-72. Though as many as 14 grounds of appeal had been preferred, only three points were stressed before us by the learned Counsel for the assessee for adjudication.2. The first grievance of the assessee in the present appeal arises from the nature of the assessment order. The ITO has described the said order as having been passed in term's of Section 143(3)/147(a)/253' of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'). The original assessment order in the present case was passed by the ITO on 20-3-1974, on the bas's of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Guwahati
Reported in : (1983)5ITD420(Gau.)
1. All these ten matters involve a common dispute and are, therefore, disposed of by this single order.2. The facts leading to this dispute are that the assessee was owner of one-fifth share of land measuring 95 bighas, 4 kathas, 11 lechas which was acquired by the Government for setting up railway marshalling yard on 31-10-1960. Some compensation was ordered to be paid regarding which the assessee agitated and ultimately on 22-11-1977, the arbitrators awarded a sum of Rs. 22,37,874. According to the WTO, the assessee's interest in this awarded amount came to Rs. 4,47,574. He, accordingly, included this amount in the assessee's net wealth on the relevant valuation dates, i.e., 31-3-1967, 31-3-1968, 31-3-1969, 31-3-1970 and 31-3-1971.3. The assessee filed appeals before the AAC who reduced the addition by Rs. 1,79,124 on the ground that the compensation money awarded as the cost of the land was only Rs. 13,42,320. The balance was on account of 15 per cent solatium amounting to Rs. 2,01...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Guwahati
Reported in : (1983)3ITD368(Gau.)
1. This is a departmental appeal challenging the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), directing the ITO to grant registration to the assessee-firm.2. The facts bearing on the controversy are in a narrow compass and may be noted. The assessee-firm consisted of five partners named below as per partnership deed dated 31-5-1975 : The accounting year of the firm, constituted as above, was calendar year. The above deed continued to be in existence up to 27-1-1976. The period from 1-1-1975 to 27-1-1976 thus came to be governed by the above deed. On 28-1-1976, five partners mentioned above agreed to admit two more partners named as below : 3. Clause 1 of this partnership deed 'superseded' the partnership deed dated 31-5-1975 and as per Clause 2, it was provided that "all the terms and conditions of this deed shall be deemed to have come into operation from 1-1-1976,...". Clause 7 provided that the net profit and loss of the firm will be determined from year to year in the usual commercial man...
Tag this Judgment!