Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna
Reported in : (1998)64ITD118(Pat.)
1. Three disputes are raised by the assessee in this appeal. They are as under :- (a) Confirmation of disallowance of loss in sale of car amounting Rs. 18,093. (b) Confirmation of disallowance of supervisory charges amounting to Rs. 33,000. (c) Confirmation of purchases relating to earlier years amounting to Rs. 5,038.2. The facts in relation to first dispute are like this : The assessee sold Contessa Car for a sum of Rs. 55,000 and claimed a loss of Rs. 18,093 being the difference between WDV of Rs. 73,093 and sale price of Rs. 55,000. The ITO noticed that the Car was only one year old and was purchased for Rs. 91,367. According to the Assessing Officer, it was highly incredible that the Car within a period of year was sold only for a sum of Rs. 55,000 while at the same time admitting that it was difficult to establish that the Car was sold at a higher price. The Assessing Officer, therefore, considered it fair and reasonable to disallow the claim of loss.3. In first appeal it was co...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna
Reported in : (1997)63ITD181(Pat.)
1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee and a cross appeal filed by the Department. Both are being disposed of by a common order for the sake of convenience.2. The dispute relates to an addition of Rs. 1,37,400 made by the Assessing Officer for unexplained investment in construction of a building under section 69 of the Act. The assessee constructed a hotel complex called "M/s. Shanti Complex" and the investment shown during the year was Rs. 95,440. It is mentioned in the assessment order that the total cumulative investment up to the year was shown at Rs. 9,94,522, but this figure has been challenged by the ld. counsel for the assessee as incorrect and the correct figure is stated to be Rs. 5,02,656. The assessee admittedly did not maintain proper books of account for the construction and, therefore, the Assessing Officer referred the question of cost of construction to the Departmental Valuation Cell. According to the Valuer's Report, the estimated cost of construction was Rs. 12...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna
Reported in : (1998)64ITD93(Pat.)
1. This is an appeal, filed by the Department and a Cross Objection (C.O.), filed by the assessee. They are being disposed of by a common order for the sake of convenience.2. The departmental appeal is directed against an order of the CIT(A) deleting the addition of Rs. 1,25,000 as cash under section 68 of the Act, in the names of 12 person, 6 of whom were minors, as listed below :12. Rabindra Kumar Singh Rs. 11,000 ------------ 3. The Assessing Officer (A.O.) observed in the assessment order that the assessee had furnished confirmations of all the creditors who were being assessed to income-tax at Calcutta. However, a perusal showed that the deposits were unaccounted money of the partners. The creditors had given a common address at 10, Ezra Street, Calcutta, which was actually the office address of the Chartered Accountant of the whole group. The parents of the minors were also the creditors and had given their addresses as Maharani Road, Gaya. The Assessing Officer took a view that...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna
Reported in : (1997)63ITD113(Pat.)
1. Being aggrieved with the conclusion of the Appellate Commissioner of Wealth-tax (A/c) in first appeal that the assessee is liable to wealth-tax as per section 40(3)(vi) of the Finance Act, 1983 in respect of the value of the immovable property which are godowns let out to Food Corporation of India (FCI), and TDC the present second appeal to this Tribunal is filed by the assessee-company. To properly understand the case for adjudication, essential factual aspects have to be recorded.2. The assessment years involved are 1984-85 to 1986-87. The assessee owns godowns which have been let out to FCI and TDC since the year 1979-80. The rental income from such godowns is being assessed by the revenue authorities as income from house property whereas the assessee contends that the rental income is assessable as business income and which stand of the assessee has been accepted by this Tribunal in its IT appeals. The matter, we were informed, now rests before the Hon'ble Patna High Court by w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna
1. This is an appeal by the assessee directed against the order of the CIT (Appeals) for the assessment year 1982-83. The only ground of appeal is that the CIT (Appeals) erred in confirming the disallowance of cash payments amounting to Rs. 72,996 under section 40A(3) made to M/s Ashok Tyre agency and M/s Mahabir Grain Stores. The ITO disallowed these payments as the assessee failed to prove that the payment be crossed cheque or crossed Bank drafts were not practicable or would have caused genuine difficulty to the payees.2. We notice that the CIT (Appeals) has confirmed the disallowance of these cash payments on the ground that these payments could have easily been made by crosed bank draft or cheque since Mahabir Grain Agency and Ashok Tyre Agency were local parties and where apparently both the purchaser and seller had the bank account. He has also observed that these payments are not covered by the exceptions in Rule 6DD(j).3. The AR appearing on behalf of the assessee has filed c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna
Reported in : (1998)64ITD37(Pat.)
1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee and the sole grievance relates to an order of the CIT (Appeals) confirming an addition of Rs. 78,000 to the assessee's income.2. The assessee is an individual and had income from salary as well as house property. In the course of assessment proceedings, it was found that the assessee had made an investment of Rs. 3,15,000 in the purchase and construction of a house property in the financial year relevant to the assessment year 1989-90. The source of investment was stated to be, inter alia, loan from the assessee's wife, Smt. Swapna Mishra. She filed an affidavit confirming the advance of loan and stated that it was given by cheque. According to the assessment order, the source of income was stated to be salary Rs. 1,500 per month from teaching in Nursery School since 1985 and accumulation of Rs. 20,000 out of past home savings and tuition fees. The school was closed in the year 1988 and by that time she had accumulated Rs. 80,000. A copy of t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna
Reported in : (1998)64ITD1(Pat.)
1. The appeal is disposed of ex parte in the absence of any representation from the assessee.2. The appeal is against the order under section 263 of the Act whereby the CIT has set aside the assessment for making a fresh assessment after considering the issue whether in the case of estimate of net profit a further deduction on account of royalty and cess can be given and whether the interest earned by the assessee should be brought to tax or not. Even before the CIT there was no representation from the assessee. Since the CIT has only set aside the assessment for de novo consideration of the aforesaid items, we do not find any merit in the grievance of the assessee.1. I wish to record my respectful dissent, as I disagree with the conclusive decision reached by my learned brother. The assessee has raised the following grounds :- "1. For that the learned CIT has erred in passing ex parte order under section 263 of I.T. Act, 1961. The appellant does not receive show-cause notice from the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna
1. This is an appeal filed by the Department against an order of the CIT(Appeals) deleting an addition of Rs. 1,38,000 as "Income from other sources".2. The Assessing Officer (A. O.) found that the assessee was intercepted by customs authorities while he was en-route to Patna and on personal search, gold bars of foreign origin weighing 599.200 grams, valued at Rs. 1,38,000, were found from his possession. The same was seized by the customs authorities and the assessee was arrested. The case was pending with the customs authorities. The assessee was asked to explain the source of investment in the purchase of the gold, when he stated that it was known to his father whereas his father stated that it was known to his son. According to the Assessing Officer, both - father and son - did not deny the ownership of the gold, although in the written explanation from the assessee's counsel it was stated that the gold did not belong to the assessee. It was also submitted that if it was held to b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna
1. The Revenue, through Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (ACIT), has filed this appeal challenging the order of the Appellate Commissioner (A/C) dated 22-3-1990 for the assessment year 1974-75 cancelling penalty of Rs. 28,934 imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. One Shri Nageshwar Prasad, who was a leading Advocate of patna died on 16-7-1977, filed a return on 30-10-1974 declaring an income of Rs. 1,27,325. As there were some mistakes in the original return a revised return was filed by him on 16-8-1976 disclosing taxable income of Rs. 1,53,991. The revised return contained bank interest and capital gain. During the pendency of the assessment proceedings the assessee i.e. Shri Nageshwar Prasad died on 16-7-1977 and his son and legal heir Shri Birendra Prasad come on record and responded to various notices of the A.O. The assessment was completed on Shri Birendra Prasad as legal heir of late Shri Nageshwar Prasad somewhere in the month of March 1984 (date is not mentioned in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna
Reported in : (1998)64ITD7(Pat.)
1. This is an appeal, filed by the assessee, against an order of the CIT (Appeals) confirming estimate of income from profession at Rs. 3,55,968.2. The assessee is an Individual and a reputed Surgeon of P.M.C.H., Patna. He had net salary income of Rs. 34,820 about which there is no dispute. He was also examining and operating patients in a private nursing home, Jeewak Salya Nilium Nursing Home, the partners of which were his wife and two sons. According to the assessment order, the assessee visited the nursing home every day and examined and operated patients there. He was collecting his own charges for consultancy and operation whereas the nursing home collected charges for nursing and room rent separately from the patients. The dispute before us relates to income from profession in the above manner at the private nursing home.3. The learned counsel for the assessee showed a total income of Rs. 58,580, particulars thereof have not been made available but apparently it consisted of th...
Tag this Judgment!