Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Indore
Reported in : (1998)67ITD36Indore
1. These appeals are preferred by the assessee against the orders of the CIT(A) pertaining to the asst. yr. 1988-89. Since these appeals were heard together, they are disposed of by this single consolidated order for the sake of convenience.2. This appeal has arisen out of the order of the reassessment framed under s. 143(3)/147 of the Act. In this appeal the order of the CIT(A) is assailed on various grounds. Mainly the assessee has challenged the validity of reopening of assessment under s. 147(a) of the Act and addition of Rs. 95,17,841 in the computation of income under s. 115J of the Act.3. Briefly stated, the assessee is a public limited company doing the business of manufacture of synthetic blended yarn. The previous year relevant to the assessment year involved ended on 30th April, 1990. The assessee has filed the original return on 21st June, 1988, declaring income at Rs. 35,66,693 which was later on revised by filing a revised return on 6th March, 1989, declaring income ther...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Indore
Reported in : (1998)67ITD151Indore
1. These first appeals are preferred by the assessees against the assessment orders dt. 20th November, 1996, framed under s. 158BC r/w s.143(3) of the IT Act in their respective hands. Since the assessment orders are challenged on common grounds, these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order.2. The assessment order is assailed on the following grounds by the assessee in this appeal: (i) The learned AO has erred in treating the income below taxable limit pertaining to asst. yr. 1986-87 to 1991-92 at Rs. 47,723 as discussed in paras 7 and 4 as undisclosed income under s. 158 BB(1)(C) ignoring the instructions of col. No. 5 of p. 2 of the return Form 2B prescribed by the CBDT, Ministry of Finance, which is equivalent to Board's Circular as the return form is approved in rules by Board and is of binding nature on all officers under the IT Act, 1961 and also ignoring the provisions of s. 139(1) of the Act and, therefore, the addition of Rs. 47,723 w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Indore
Reported in : (1998)66ITD408Indore
1. This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order of the CIT (Appeals) pertaining to the assessment year 1985-86 on various grounds.2. The first grievance of the assessee is that the CIT (Appeals) has erred in upholding the return of the assessee not to have been filed under the Amnesty Scheme without appreciating the facts that the notice issued under section 148 was a routine notice and the return has been filed within the period prescribed under the Amnesty Scheme.3. We have heard the rival submissions of the parties and carefully perused the orders of the authorities below and the documents placed on record. It is obvious from record that a notice under section 148 was issued on 2-12-1986 for filing the return of income and in response to that the assessee sought extension of time for filing the same upto 28-2-1987 but his request was rejected by the Assessing Officer vide letter dated 8-1-1987 and he issued a statutory notice under section 142(1) fixing the case for h...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Indore
1. The appeal by the assessee arises out of the order dt. 28th June, 1993 of Dy. CIT(A), Bhopal, pertaining to the asst. yr. 1984-85.2. The facts relating to the grounds of appeal are these. One Shri Dharmichand left India around 1962 and settled in USA, where he is working as a Professor. With a view to settle in India, the non-resident, Shri Dharmichand, purchased a plot of land admeasuring 3,600 sq.ft. at Saket, Indore. The Plot No. was E-22. This was purchased on 19th July, 1972, for Rs. 14,000. However, he could not construct the house thereon and sold the plot for a consideration of Rs. 1,26,000 in the year 1984.3. The ITO, A-Ward, Ujjain, issued notice dt. 21st February, 1986, under s. 148 to one Shri Rameshchandra Bordia of Ujjain as agent of non-resident, Dharmichand, of USA for asst. yr. 1984-85. The notice was served on the said Rameshchandra Bordia on 25th February, 1986. On receipt of the notice, he wrote a letter dt. 16th March, 1986, to the ITO starting therein that Shr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Indore
Reported in : (1998)60TTJIndore211
The appeal by the assessee arises out of the order dt. 28th June, 1993 of Dy. CIT(A), Bhopal, pertaining to the asst. yr. 1984-85.2. The facts relating to the grounds of appeal are these. One Shri Dharmichand left India around 1962 and settled in USA, where he is working as a Professor. With a view to settle in India, the non-resident, Shri Dharmichand, purchased a plot of land admeasuring 3,600 sq.ft. at Saket, Indore. The Plot No. was E-22. This was purchased on 19th July, 1972, for Rs. 14,000. However, he could not construct the house thereon and sold the plot for a consideration of Rs. 1,26,000 in the year 1984.3. The ITO, A-Ward, Ujjain, issued notice dt. 21st February, 1986, under s. 148 to one Shri Rameshchandra Bordia of Ujjain as agent of non-resident, Dharmichand, of USA for asst. yr. 1984-85. The notice was served on the said Rameshchandra Bordia on 25th February, 1986. On receipt of the notice, he wrote a letter dt. 16th March, 1986, to the ITO starting therein that Shri D...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Indore
Reported in : (1997)59TTJIndore794
This appeal is preferred by the Revenue against the order of the CIT(A) pertaining to the asst. yr. 1989-90.2. In ground No. 1 the order of the CIT(A) is assailed on the ground that the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance of royalty payment of Rs. 3,92,685 to an associate company holding that the associate company and the assessee-company are different entitles in the eyes of law even when it was accepted that the assessee-company is controlled by the directors of the associate company.3. The facts relating to the issue are that the assessee has been in the business of making rivets of different metals since long and as per an agreement dt. 18th February, 1986, between the assessee and its associate concern, Precision Gears (P) Ltd., Bombay, the assessee obtained right to manufacture blister packing machines for which the associate concern had originally obtained a licence from West Germany under an agreement dt. 26th February, 1973. The associate concern was entitled to sub...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Indore
1. This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A) pertaining to the asst. yr. 1978-79 on various grounds.2. The first grievance of the assessee is that the learned CIT(A) has erred in not treating the returns under the Amnesty Scheme.3. With regard to this issue, after hearing the rival submissions of the parties, we have carefully perused the orders of the authorities below and find that the CIT(A) was justified in holding that the scheme will not be applicable to any return if as per admission of the assessee no tax is payable. Even otherwise, where it is found that the income declared in the said return is not true and full and complete disclosure, the assessee would not be entitled to the benefit of the said scheme. The CIT(A) discussed this issue in detail in his order and we do not find any cogent reason to disturb the findings of the CIT(A).We, accordingly, subscribe the view of the CIT(A).4. Ground No. 2 is general in nature. As such it does not requi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Indore
Reported in : (1997)59TTJIndore768
The appeal by the Revenue and the cross-objection by the assessee arise out of the order dt. 26th August, 1993 of the CIT(A)-II, Indore, pertaining to the asst. yr. 1989-90.2. We take under the appeal of the Revenue first. The first grievance of the Revenue is that the CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 42,745 made on account of undervaluation in silver, silver ornaments account Briefly stated, the assessee is a firm engaged in the business of purchase and sale of gold and silver ornaments. The account year consisted of 17 months. The AO found that the assessee had 6506 gms. of silver bullion, which was valued @ Rs. 6,500 per kg. The assessee had 5,462 gms. of closing stock of silver fancy ornaments, which was valued @ Rs. 5,000 per kg. Likewise, the assessee had 25,421 gms. of silver ornaments in closing stock which was valued @ Rs. 4,800 per kg. The AO did not accept the above valuation of the closing stock. Applying the sale rate as disclosed in the last sale bill of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Indore
1. The appeal by the assessee arises out of the order dt. 4th June, 1992 of the CIT(A)-I, Indore, pertaining to the asst. yr. 1989-90.2. The only grievance of the assessee relates to the sustenance of addition of Rs. 62,900 by the CIT(A) and all the grounds of appeal relate thereto.3. Briefly stated, the assessee is a firm of three partners engaged in the trading of suitings and shirtings on semi-wholesale and partly on retail basis. In the year of account, which consisted of 17 months, the assessee disclosed gross profit at 9.25 per cent. on total sales of Rs. 82,77,702. The AO found that there was fall in GP by 1.5 per cent. in the year of account as compared to the preceding two years. With a view to verifying the correctness or otherwise of the GP rate disclosed, the AO picked up three sales instances and found that the gross profit in them varied from 11 per cent. to 14.5 per cent. He further found that in three comparable cases, the gross profit disclosed ranged between 10 to 13...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Indore
Reported in : (1998)66ITD32Indore
1. The appeal by the revenue arises out of the order dated 26-2-1993 of the CIT(Appeals)-I, Indore, pertaining to the assessment year 1989-90.2. The assessee is a private limited company engaged in manufacture of PVC pipes. For the assessment year 1989-90, the assessee filed return on 28-12-1989 declaring loss of Rs. 2,35,292. Working of profits under section 115J did not accompany the return. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee filed working of profits under section 115J, according to which, the profit was worked out at Rs. 24,464.44 Ps. Assessing Officer found that the assessee had claimed depreciation at a higher rate than provided in Schedule XIV of the Companies Act. On query, it was submitted that depreciation was recalculated and the chart for the whole period of 21 months was prepared by the assessee after technical evaluation of plant and machinery, electric installations and the rates have been increased in view of the clarificatory Circular No. 2 of 19...
Tag this Judgment!