Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Hyderabad
Reported in : (2004)90ITD344(Hyd.)
1. These are three appeals in all, for the assessment year 1991-92. Two of them are filed by the assessee, and the third one, viz. ITA No.253/Hyd/95 is filed by the Revenue. Of the two appeals filed by it, the assessee did not press the appeal, ITA No. 460/Hyd/95. The same is accordingly dismissed. In effect, we are left with two appeals, viz.ITA No. 99/Hyd/95 by the assessee and ITA 253/Hyd/95 by the Revenue, which are cross-appeals, directed against the order of the CIT(A)-V, Hyderabad dated 24.5.94.2. The assessee company has two manufacturing units -one for fertilizers and the other for cement. Initially, the Company was incorporated on 16.10.61 for manufacture and sale of fertilizers. It set up a cement unit in 1984. The said cement unit was sold as per an agreement executed on 9.6.1990 between the assessee company and a Madras based company, the India Cements Limited, for a consideration of Rs. 105,69,54,104 and this consideration comprised of Rs. 105.30-crores for fixed assets ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Hyderabad
Reported in : (2004)91ITD384(Hyd.)
1. This is an appeal of the Revenue challenging the order dated 22.9.1998 of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as erroneous.2. Facts of the case as gathered from the record are briefly these. The assessee is a sitting Judge of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh. Prior to his elevation on 5.2.92 he carried on his profession of advocacy as also a Government Pleader in the High Court of ASP. from 5.8.88 till the date of his elevation. During the accounting period relevant to the assessment year in question, he was in receipt of the sum of Rs. 6,61,610/- as professional fees for the services rendered as Government Pleader. In the statement of income filed along with the return the assessee disclosed these receipts and deducted an amount of Rs. 1,92,098/- as expenses incurred to earn the income and arrived at the net income of Rs. 4,69,512/- The net income so arrived was claimed as not taxable but as exempt. The Assessing Officer rejected his claim as such and also disallowed of one s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Hyderabad
Reported in : (2004)90ITD814(Hyd.)
1. These two appeals are filed by the assessee for the assessment year 1996-97. They are directed against two separate orders of the CIT(A)-IV, Hyderabad, dated 10th December, 1999 and 9th December, 2002.They were heard together and they are disposed off, by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience.2. The assessee-company runs a membership club. It has different categories of members from whom membership fees have been collected, and in return, the club provides services and facilities to its members. The club is situated at a resort, called 'Treasure Island Resort', near Gandipet.3. For the assessment year 1996-97. the assessee filed a return on 29.11.1996 declaring a loss of Rs. 2,51,477. A survey was conducted on the premises of the assessee on 25.11.98 under Section 133A, which was converted into a search action under Section 132. The first assessment was completed vide order of the assessing officer dated 31.3.1999, which is the last date of the limitation period. The ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Hyderabad
Reported in : (2003)81TTJ(Hyd.)831
1. All these appeals are filed by the assessee directed against the separate orders of the CIT(A)-I (I/c), Hyderabad. As the issues arising in all these appeals are common, for the sake of convenience, they are heard together and disposed of by way of this common order. "Whether the interest received by the assessee-club on fixed deposits with banks is not exigible to tax or not on the principle of mutuality". (1) Whether reopening of the assessments under Section 147 in valid in law, (2) Whether receipts from the members of the affiliated clubs is taxable or not on the doctrine of mutuality. (3) Whether the assessee-club can be assessed in the status of AOP under the Act.3. For some of these assessment years, the ground of reopening was taken as an additional ground. In all the appeals, the ground of status is taken as an additional ground. The learned counsel for the assessee relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of NTPC Ltd. v.CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC) and submi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Hyderabad
Reported in : (2004)90TTJ(Hyd.)555
are filed by the assessee against separate orders of the Commissioner-4, Hyderabad, dated 8-3-2002, and 22-3-2002, respectively, passed under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, while IT(SS)A No.121/Hyd/2002 is filed against the order of the Commissioner-3, Hyderabad, dated 28-3-2002, under section 263 of the Act. As all these appeals belong to the same group and the issues are common, for the sake of convenience, they are heard together and disposed of by way of this common order.This group known as the Kawality Group, is engaged in the manufacture and sale of automobile lamps, liquid electronic diodes, display units, two wheeler panel displays and railway signal lamps and is also involved in the business of amusement park as well as in the business of construction. A search and seizure operation was conducted against this group under section 132 of the Act on 24-10-1997. At the time of search the assessee admitted undisclosed income of Rs. 135 lakhs under section 132(4) of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Hyderabad
Reported in : (2004)90ITD34(Hyd.)
1. 1. These appeals are filed by the assessee. They are directed against similar, but separate, orders of the Commissioner (Appeals)-IV, Hyderabad dated 21.11.2002 for the assessment years 1998-99 and 1999-2000. As common issues are involved, these appeals are heard together for being disposed of, by a common order for the sake of convenience.2. Assessee filed return for the assessment year 1998-99, declaring a loss of Rs. 15,39,743 under the normal provisions of Income-tax Act, and deemed income of Rs. 2,67,039 under Section 115JA of the Income-tax Act. The assessing officer completed the assessment determining the deemed income under Section 115JA at Rs. 9,16,465. In terms of Section 115JA certain adjustments have to be made to the 'Book Profit'. So far as the present appeal is concerned, adjustment contained in Clause (viii) of Explanation to Section 115JA is relevant. Under this provision, the book profit has to be reduced by the profits eligible for deduction under Section 80HHC....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Hyderabad
Reported in : (2004)91ITD228(Hyd.)
All these appeals are filed by the revenue against separate orders of the Commissioner (Appeals)-I on the following effective grounds : (1) The Commissioner (Appeals) ought not to have deleted interest income on fixed deposits from the income of the HUF.(2) The Commissioner (Appeals) erred in not considering the so called family arrangement as nothing but a partial partition which is not recognised in section 171(9) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.(3) The Commissioner (Appeals) also erred in not holding the so called family arrangement (which deprives the rights of the unmarried minor daughters which rights are conferred on Hindu girls unmarried as on 5-8-1985) is illegal and therefore, invalid.The assessee is a specified HUF consisting of Shri Shankaraiah Yadav, Kartha, his spouse, a son and six daughters. On 9-3-1990, a family arrangement was executed whereby it was mutually agreed and settled that fixed deposits and cash would be set apart and settled in favour of each of the six minor...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Hyderabad
Reported in : (2005)273ITR103(Hyd.)
1. All these appeals are filed by the Revenue against separate orders of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-I on the following effective grounds: (1) The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ought not to have deleted interest income on fixed deposits from the income of the HUF. (2) The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in not considering the so called family arrangement as nothing but a partial partition which is not recognized in Section 171(9) of the I.T. Act, 19613 (3) The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) also erred in not holding the so called family arrangement (which deprives the rights of the unmarried minor daughters which rights are conferred on Hindu girls unmarried as on 5-8-1985) is illegal and therefore invalid.2. The assessee is a specified H.U.F. consisting of Shri Shankaraiah Yadav, Kartha, his spouse, a son and six daughters. On 9.3.90, a family arrangement was executed whereby it was mutually agreed and settled that fixed deposits and cash would be...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Hyderabad
Reported in : (2004)83TTJ(Hyd.)802
By this petition, the petitioner mentions that there is a rectifiable error in the order of the Tribunal dated 9-10-2001, in ITA No.378/Hyd/1997 for the assessment year 1993-94 ((2002) 81 ITD 106 (Hyd)).This is the second petition filed for rectification of the said order.The first petition, viz., Misc. Petn. No. 60/Hyd/2002, has been rejected by my order dated 4-9-2002.It is stated in the present petition that the view taken by the Tribunal holding that the assessee is entitled for exemption in respect of certain interest incomes is erroneous. The interest incomes in question are said to be the following : Interest on deposit towards bank guarantee money in favour of Central Excise and Customs Department It is mentioned that the SLP filed by the assessee against the decision of the Honble Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. Pandian Chemicals Ltd. (1998) 233 ITR 497 (Mad) holding that the assessee is not eligible for exemption in respect of interest on deposit with State Electrici...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Hyderabad
Reported in : (2004)89ITD625(Hyd.)
1. By this petition, the petitioner mentions that there is a rectifiable error in the order of the Tribunal dated 9.10.2001 in IA No. 378/Hyd/97 for the assessment year 1993-94 (81 ITD 106). This is the second petition filed for rectification of the said order. The first petition, viz., Misc. Petn. No. 60/Hyd/02, has been rejected by my order dated 4.9.2002.2. It is stated in the present petition that the view taken by the Tribunal holding that the assessee is entitled for exemption in respect of certain interest incomes is erroneous. The interest incomes in question are said to be the following-Excise & Customs Department Rs. 6,484(b) Interest on deposit with APSEB Rs. 3,190 It is mentioned that the SLP filed by the assessee against the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Pandian Chemicals holding that the assessee is not eligible for exemption in respect of interest on deposit with State Electricity Board, has been dismissed by the APEX Court, vide order dat...
Tag this Judgment!