Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jun-04-2012
..... given to meet the cost of power of the industrial undertaking is liable to be excluded in computing the deduction admissible under section 80ia of the income tax act 1961 ?2. it is seen from the orders of the authorities below that the assessee received operational subsidy from tamil nadu electricity board to an extent ..... prayer: appeal filed under section 260a of the income tax act, 1961 as against the order of the income tax appellate tribunal, chennai bench 'c' dated 13th may 2005 in i.t.a.no.1029/mds/2001.judgment(judgment of the court ..... section 80ia. as far as reference to the decision of the apex court reported in 262 itr 278(sc) (pandican chedmicals ltd., vs. commissioner of income tax) is concerned, the tribunal referred to the said decision for the purpose of considering the relief of interest receipt on the deposit made with the electricity department ..... also placed before this court the decision of the apex court reported in 228 itr 253 (sc) (sahney steel & press works limited vs. commissioner of income tax) to emphasise on the fact that the payments were made after setting up of the industry and commencement of the production, so as to enable the industry ..... this court.3. learned counsel appearing for the assessee placed reliance on the decision of the apex court reported in (2001) 251 itr 427 (commisisoner of income tax vs. rajaram maize products) and pointed out that when the receipt of subsidy was not in the nature of revenue receipt that was given to production, .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jul-20-2012
..... , a further sum of rs.47,79,480/-, which was the share application money, was pending allotment as on 31.3.1997. summons were issued under section 131 of the income tax act and enquiry was conducted as regards those applicants who were stated to be from jaipur, bangalore, thanjavur, coimbatore and chennai. the enquiries conducted at jaipur revealed that most of them ..... of the assessee. he further pointed out that when the business itself had not yet commenced, the question of taking recourse to section 68 of the income tax act to treat the share application money as unexplained income, did not arise. in any event, the assessee had placed materials to discharge his burden to show that there was an application for allotment of shares ..... if the subscribers to the capital were not genuine "under no circumstance could the share capital be regarded as undisclosed income of the company" would not be correct. referring to section 68 of the income tax act, the delhi high court held that the income tax officer had the jurisdiction to make enquiries as regards the nature and source of a sum credited in the books ..... filed under section 260a of the income tax act, 1961, against the order of the income tax appellate tribunal "b" bench, chennai, dated 24.03.2006 passed in i.t.(ss)a.no.41/mds/ 2002.judgment(judgment of the court was delivered by chitra venkataraman,j.)1. the following are the substantial questions of law raised in this tax case appeal filed by the assessee .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Sep-11-2012
..... particular object as mentioned supra. merely because it is open for petitioner no.1 to submit the income tax returns before the concerned income tax authority within one year as per section 139(4) of the income tax act, the respondent no.1 is not expected to wait for one more year by deviating from the ..... financial year 2010-11 is a mere procedural delay, for which specific exception has been provide under the provisions of section-139 of the income tax act, 1961; the delay on the part of the 1st petitioner is neither intentional nor a deliberate breach of fulfillment of the conditions set ..... time before the expiry of one year from the end of the relevant assessment year under section 139(4) of the income tax act. however, according to the petitioners, the 1st respondent intimated the 1st petitioner by an oral communication that the time of file the acknowledged copy ..... 3.3.2012 bringing to the notice of the 1st respondent that as per section 139(4) of the income tax act, the petitioners have got opportunity to submit the returns before the income tex authority at any time before the expiry of one year from the end of the relevant assessment year. ..... terms and conditions stated therein are not strictly adhered to and necessary relaxation is permitted wherever necessary and desired; since the petitioners have filed the income tax returns as required and produced the acknowledgement after submission of the techno-commercial bid within the extended time, 1st respondent ought not to have .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Feb-17-2012
..... the same, it is for the assessee to substantiate its claim by furnishing the relevant records before the respondent, pursuant to the impugned notices issued, under section 148 of the income tax act, 1961.25. it is a well settled position in law that, when an efficacious alternative remedy is available under a statute, this court would not exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction, ..... the parties concerned, and on considering the decisions cited supra, this court is of the considered view that the impugned notices issued by the respondent, under section 148 of the income tax act, 1961, cannot be quashed, at this stage, based on the grounds raised by the petitioner in the above writ petitions. from the available records, it is noted that the ..... court had held that the provision made for warranty, in respect of the good in question would be entitled to deduction on the gross deductions, under section 37 of the income tax act, 1961, and that it would depend on the data systematically maintained by the assessee.15. a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent, denying the averments ..... and that it had been accepted by the assessing authorities concerned, the respondent took a decision stating that the provision for warranty and guarantee claims is not allowable, under the income tax act, 1961. the assessing authority had also proposed to reopen the assessment for the earlier year, where such provisions had been considered and allowed by the assessing authorities concerned. the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Apr-26-2012
..... in the business of the assessee by hiring it out, the assessee was entitled to the grant of depreciation under section 32 of the income tax act. the claim of the assessee was, however, rejected. confirming the view of the assessing officer, the first appellate authority pointed out that as ..... of the income tax act against the order dated 09.03.2005 in i.t.a.no.1433/mds/1998 on the file of the income tax appellate tribunal, madras "a" bench, for the assessment year 1994-95.judgment(judgment of the court was delivered by chitra venkataraman,j.)1. this tax case ( ..... in the hands of the purchaser. thus the assessee's appeal was rejected. aggrieved by this, the assessee preferred a further appeal before the income tax appellate tribunal, which also rejected the case of the assessee. the tribunal pointed out that the various persons to whom the vehicles were hired ..... on hired assets. the claim of the assessee was rejected. aggrieved by the same, the assessee went on appeal before the commissioner of income tax (appeals). the assessee placed reliance on the beneficial board circular no.9 dated 23.3.1943 and submitted that since the assets were used ..... the following circular has been issued by the board for allowing depreciation in the case of assets owned under hire-purchase agreements:allowances in assessing business income -- depreciation allowance -- plant and machinery acquired in hire-purchase agreement. -- the following instructions are issued for dealing with cases in which an asset .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Apr-19-2012
..... the tribunal is very bright and further it is stated that the assessing officer as well as the first appellate authority wrongly denied the benefit of section 80hhc of the income-tax act. the passing of garnishee order is wrong, illegal, without any basis and justification.4. learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 contended that the revenue has ..... claiming deduction under section 80hhc and 80i of rs.1,76,116 and rs.1,44,463/- respectively. the said assessment was processed under section 143(1)(a) of the income-tax act. subsequently, the assessing officer issued a notice under section 148 on 18.2.2000 for reopening the assessment. objecting the same, the petitioner also filed a letter dated 9 ..... order of assessment. aggrieved by that, the assessee filed an appeal before the income-tax appellate tribunal and the same is still pending. when the commissioner of income-tax (appeals) dismissed the appeal, the revenue initiated recovery proceedings by way of issuing garnishee order under section 226(3) of the income-tax act. aggrieved by that, the petitioner/assessee filed present writ petition challenging the garnishee ..... already paid a sum of rs.52,33,773/- towards the tax and credit was also given by the revenue. against the levy of interest under section 220 of the income-tax act, the petitioner can also file waiver petition before the concerned commissioner of income-tax under section 220(2) of the act.7. taking into consideration of the above facts and circumstances, the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jun-21-2012
..... recorded in the last panchnama alone would be taken into consideration.17. with the above view on explanation 2 to sub-clause (1) to section 158 be of the income tax act, the dates pertaining to search, which are admitted by the parties herein, needs to be noted.18. admittedly, as far as the first of the search is concerned ..... the legal representative of the deceased pandian.8. as far as revenue's appeal on limitation issue is concerned, sub-clause (1)(b) to section 158 be of the income tax act, is the relevant provision, which reads as under:"158 be. (1) the order under section 158 bc shall be passed -(a) within one year from the end ..... under chapter xiv-b is well within the period of limitation, as provided for under section 158be (1)(b) of the income tax act.21. in the above circumstances, we have no hesitation in allowing the tax case filed by the revenue in respect of first question of law.22. as far as the second question of law is concerned ..... ). the karnataka high court elaborately dealt with the object and introduction of explanation 2 to sub-clause (1) to section 158be of the income tax act. as is evident from the reading of the provisions under section 158 be read with explanation 2, the period of two years limitation in respect of ..... appeals under section 260a of the income tax act against the order dated 06.10.2004 in i.t.(ss) a.no.72/mds/2001 on the file of the income tax appellate tribunal madras 'b' bench for the block period 1988-89 to 1997-98.c o m m o n j u d g m e .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jun-19-2012
..... which was not denied by the assessee and the owners had filed an eviction suit against srvs.5. as far as the initiation of proceedings under section 263 of the income tax act was concerned, the tribunal pointed out that the entire order proceeded on the premise that the tenancy rights of the assessee was personal in nature, which could not be transferred ..... compensation for the surrender of the tenancy rights could not be assessed. in exercise of the jurisdiction under section 263 of the income tax act, the commissioner of income tax (appeals) sought to revise the order, placing reliance on the decision of the income tax appellate tribunal, special bench, mumbai reported in  217 itr itat reports 51 (cadell weaving mill co. pvt. ltd. vs. assistant commissioner ..... right in not entertaining the fresh grounds raised by the department based on material evidences, which was not placed before the commissioner in his proceedings under section 263 of the income tax act?2. whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the appellate tribunal being the highest facts finding authority, having satisfied through the lease deed dated 25.08.1978 that ..... holding the question of whether the assessee was in fact a tenant at the relevant point in time was a ground extraneous to the proceedings under section 263 of the income tax act?3. whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the tribunal was right in not considering the applicability of the amendment to section 55(2) of the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jun-14-2012
..... line of reasoning of the tribunal. one cannot read any such choice available to the assessee for claiming deduction either under section 80-o or under section 80hhe of the income tax act. in the face of the finding of the officer as to the nature of technical services rendered as in connection with the development of production of computer software as spoken ..... 1991 with effect from 01.04.1991, there was no specific head under which technical or professional services would qualify for deduction other than under section 80-o of the income tax act. it may be noted that even for section 80-o, section 85-c was the fore-runner, in substitution of which alone, section 80c was inserted under finance (no.2 ..... years 1993-94 and 1994-95 was completed by the assessing officer under section 143(3), granting relief under section 80-o. thus, the commissioner of income tax exercised his jurisdiction under section 263 of the income tax act, taking the view that the assessing officer had not considered the question as to the eligibility of the assessee to have the deduction granted under section ..... assessment year 1995-96, the appeal of the assessee stood allowed, directing the officer to grant relief under section 80-o of the income tax act.6. it is seen from the records placed before this court that the commissioner of income tax (appeals) issued notice to the assessee under section 263, to revise the order of assessment, taking the view that the assessment orders .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jun-14-2012
..... assessee that the non mentioning of the block period would defeat the very assessment. quite apart from this, the assessee participated in the enquiry conducted under section 131 of the income tax act and had also made a statement confirming the purchase of the land. subsequent thereto, the assessee had participated in the enquiry and on 15.5.2002, in response to the ..... ,75,000/-. enquiry proceedings were initiated against the assessee. the assessee participated in the enquiry proceedings and had given sworn statement on 5.8.1999 under section 131 of the income tax act. in answering the enquiry, the assessee is stated to have made the following statements, which, as recorded in the order of assessment and appeal, is the translation of the statement ..... to the appellant?b) whether the respondent could have issued a notice under section 158bd of the income tax act, 1961 without following the procedure prescribed under section 158bc of the income tax act, 1961 and without conducting a search on the appellant under section 132 of the income tax act, 1961?"3. it is seen from the facts narrated that the search was conducted in residential and business ..... and section 164 cr.p.c. need not be followed while recording a confessional statement under sec.131 of the income tax act 1961 is sustainable in law, in view of the specific language of sec.131(1) and sec.132(4) of the income tax act, 1961?d) whether an order of assessment could be passed merely upon a statement u/s 131 without any .....Tag this Judgment!