Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jabalpur
Reported in : (1986)19ITD199Jab
1. All the appeals are by the revenue and the following common grounds for all the assessment years involved have been raised before us : 1 The learned AAC erred in law and on facts in deleting the income earned in the name of U.P. Engines and Machines from the income of the assessee firm. 2. The order of the AAC being erroneous in law and on facts be set aside and ITO's order restored.2. The assessment years involved are 1971-72, 1974-75, 1975-76, 1976-77, 1977-78 and 1978-79 with respective accounting periods having ended on 31-3-1971, 31-3-1974, 31-3-1975, 31-3-1976, 31-3-1977 and 31-3-1978. The respondent-assessee has been assessed, for all the years, in the status of resident-registered firm.3. The speaking order of the learned first appellate authority is for the assessment year 1971-72 and for all the other years the same has been followed, as such, we are disposing of all the appeals at our level by this common order as of necessity and for the sake of convenience. It is also ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jabalpur
Reported in : (1986)16ITD599Jab
1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 31-10-1985 relating to the assessment year 1981-82. There are diverse grounds, which we, after hearing the parties, and on perusal of the orders of the authorities below decide as under.2. The first ground relates to the addition of Rs. 1,05,600 made by the ITO to the total income declared by the assessee on account of value of drums. In order to appreciate the contentions of the rival parties, a factual background relevant to this issue has to be kept in focus and that background is as under.3. The assessee is a company and manufactures plasticiser, which is supplied to Bata Shoe Co. The assessee also manufactures garments for exports. The raw material for the manufacture of platiciser comes in tin containers or in gunny bags. From the first year of assessment, till the assessment year 1980-81, the assessee has been maintaining books of account on mercantile system of accounting. The asse...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jabalpur
Reported in : (1986)16ITD298Jab
1. This is an assessee's appeal relating to the assessment year 1979-80.2. The first ground of appeal relates to the addition of Rs. 5,954 made by the ITO in respect of expenditure incurred for advertisements in souvenirs. The assessee had claimed deduction of Rs. 59,538 on account of advertisements in small newspapers under Section 37(3A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'). The ITO had disallowed the claim to the extent of Rs. 5,954 which represents the amount paid in connection with the advertisements in souvenirs. It was held by him that the souvenirs do not fall within the definition of a small newspaper. The assessee's contention that souvenirs are also small newspapers having circulation of less than 15,000 did not find favour with the Commissioner (Appeals) as well. As such, the assessee is in appeal before us.3. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the departmental representative, we are unable to accept the contention advanced on behalf of the assessee....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jabalpur
Reported in : (1986)16ITD397Jab
1. The aforesaid appeals arise out of and are directed against the order dated 2-2-1985 passed by the competent authority, i.e., the IAC, directing the acquisition of a property, namely, 7-Court Road, Delhi under Section 269F of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'). The first appeal (Acquisition Appeal No. 2 of 1985) is by the group of purchasers of the said property and the other two are by the transferors.2. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned departmental representative who was assisted by the learned Valuation Officer and have perused the material before us.3. Property No. 7-Court Road, has been purchased by the aforesaid appellants in Acquisition Appeal No. 2 of 1985 through a sale deed executed on 1-11-1975 by Late Shri Hari Singh Mehra for self and in his capacity as karta of an HUF known as Hari Singh Mehra & Sons, Smt.Kamlawati wife of the said Shri Hari Singh Mehra and Shri R.C. Mehra, Shri B.C. Mehra, Shri D.C. Mehra and Shri R.C. Mehra ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jabalpur
Reported in : (1986)16ITD175Jab
1. This is an appeal by the department pertaining to the assessment year 1979-80. The assessee is a registered firm. The facts of the case in brief are that the assessee is a partnership firm consisting of two partners, namely, Mr. T.K. Kapoor and Dr. Man Mohan Nath. Mr. T.K.Kapoor is assessed in New Delhi with District VIII(9) and his permanent account No. was GIR No. K/175/DLI/VIII(9). As regards the other partner, Dr. Man Mohan Nath, he is assessed at Ambala. The business of the assessee is to act as an export house for export of garments. It books orders from buyers and gets these goods fabricated from the manufacturers. In initial stages it was getting the fabrications of the garments done only from Omar Khayyam, a firm situated at Delhi and is also assessed in New Delhi. The firm is regularly assessed. Assessments up to 1979-80 have been completed. This firm has been held to be genuine by the department all along.2. The assessee-firm, Indo Gulf, had originally entered into an ag...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jabalpur
Reported in : (1985)14ITD101Jab
1. These appeals, by the revenue, and cross-objections by the assessee, pertains to the consolidated order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 7-5-1983, relating to the assessment years 1972-73 and 1973-74. In the appeals of the revenue, common grievance projected before us is that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in allowing relief on account of interest charged under Section 220(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') when there is no provision under the Act for waiver of interest charged under Section 220(2).2. The parties have been heard. The appeals, which were determined by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) by the impugned order, were filed before him against the orders, claimed to be made to give effect to the appellate orders. There were diverse grounds before the Commissioner (Appeals), pertaining to charging of interest under various sections.But the issue that has travelled before us, as projected (supra), relates only to the interest charged under under Section...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jabalpur
Reported in : (1985)13ITD454Jab
1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the AAC dated 3-3-1983, relating to the assessment year 1972-73. By this order, the AAC confirmed the penalty of Rs. 24,258 levied by the ITO under Section 271(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') by his order dated 30-6-1982. The facts that arc relevant for consideration in determining the issue before us, make an interesting reading and are as under.2. The assessee is a registered firm. For the assessment year 1972-73, under the provision of law, the return was due on or before 31-7-1972.It was filed on 14-9-1972. On the basis of this return, the ITO proceeded with the process of assessment in accordance with law and finalised the assessment on 18-3-1974 under Section 143(3) of the Act on a total income of Rs. 58,000. Since the return, filed on 14-9-1972, was late by a complete month, the ITO levied penalty of Rs. 455 under Section 271(1)(a) on 1-8-1974, which was confirmed in appeal by the AAC by his order dat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jabalpur
Reported in : (1985)11ITD378Jab
1. This appeal by the revenue is directed against the order of the Appellate Controller, dated 23-4-1981, relating to the assessment of the estate of deceased Smt. Tamkori Devi, Tibrewala, Jabalpur.2. The issue before us that whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Controller erred in holding that the deceased had no coparcenary interest in the property of the HUF of which she was a member and, as such, her interest in the coparcenary property is not includible under the Estate Duty Act, 1953 ('the Act'), after passing of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.3. The parties have been heard at length. Before we come to the legal aspects of the issue, it would be necessary to bring into focus factual background of the case which is as under. The husband of late Smt.Tamkori Devi died long ago prior to coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act. After the death of her husband, the family consisted of Smt. Tamkori Devi widow, her son, Shambhuprashad, and three...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jabalpur
Reported in : (1986)17ITD454Jab
Per Shri S. K. Chander, Accountant Member - This appeal by the revenue is directed against the order of the AAC dated 25-9-1982 relating to assessment year 1975-76.2. The assesse, Smt. L. Bernard, had a plot of land admeasuring 11,700 sq. ft. at village Karondi, Jabalpur. She gifted this piece of land on 29-3-1975 to her son who was studying in B. Com. by a registered deed, which itself incorporated a provisions that the gift is for the education of the donee. The son studied B. Com. Part III, LL. B. Parts I and II and cost accountancy. The value of the gifted property was declared at Rs. 20,000. The said plot was sold by the donee on 6-10-1975 for a consideration of Rs. 50,000. Out of the sale proceeds of the land he utilized Rs. 8,882 for payment of income-tax. He also advanced to the donor a sum of Rs. 23,95 for business purposes.3. The return of gift-tax filed on 12-10-1975 declaring nil gift. The GTO on the facts stated above estimated the value of the gifted land on the date of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jabalpur
Reported in : (1985)11ITD35Jab
1. These appeals of the assessee are directed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and are relevant for the assessment years 1972-73 and 1974-75.2. The assessee is a registered firm earning its income from manufacturing and sale of bidis. For the assessment year 1972-73, the assessee filed its return on 31-7-1972 while as per Circular No. 88 [F.No. 142/12/72-TPL], dated 19-6-1972 [Taxmann's Direct Taxes Circulars, Vol. 1, 1980 edn., p. 550] of the CBDT, the last date for filing of the return was 31-7-1972. The assessee also filed a revised return on 12-3-1975. At the time of the assessment, the addition proposed by the ITO, being more than Rs. 1,00,000, a draft order under Section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), was prepared and served on the assessee on 11-3-1976. The draft assessment order was forwarded to the IAC along with the objections and the IAC issued his direction to the ITO vide his letter dated 14-7-1976 which was received by the ITO on 21-7-1976. ...
Tag this Judgment!