Court : Chennai
Decided on : Apr-25-2012
..... , after deducting the commission paid for sale as well as the expenses incurred by the petitioner/company to perfect the title of the property.7. the income was assessed under the provisions of the income tax act, the income tax officer, disallowed the cost incurred to perfect the title and the commission paid for sale and raised a demand of rs. 10,77,71,300/- (rupees ..... the constitution of india for the issuance of writ of certiorari, to call for the records, in notice of demand under section 156 of the income tax act in pan no.aakcs7439j/2009-10, dated 31.12.2011, and to quash the same.common o r d e r1. this judgment shall dispose of the following writ petitions ..... dispose of the application dated 12.3.2012, filed by the assessee under section 220 (6) of income tax act, 1961, seeking non enforcement of demand pending disposal of appeal pending before the second respondent.prayer in writ petition no.6609 of 2012:-writ petition filed under article 226 of ..... filed under article 226 of the constitution of india for the issuance of writ of certiorarified mandamus, to call for the records, in notices under section 226(3) of the income tax act in pan no.aakcs7439j/2009-10, dated 06.03.2012,on the file of the first respondent herein and to quash the same and to direct the second respondent to .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Apr-17-2012
..... thus the first appellate authority rejected the claim of the assessee on the aspect of jurisdiction to reopen the assessment under section 147 of the income tax act.6. on the question of the claim of depreciation on ignifluid boiler, the first appellate authority pointed out that the assessee is principally engaged ..... , the hire purchase agreement and lease agreement were entered into.in the circumstances, the assessing authority invoked its jurisdiction under section 147 of the income tax act to reopen the assessment in respect of the completed assessment for the assessment year 1995-96.4. as far as the assessment year 1996-97 ..... assessment year 1995-96 relates to the reopening of assessment under section 147 of the income tax act and the assessment for other two assessment years are under sections 143(1)(a) and 143(3) of the income tax act respectively.3. the facts leading to the grant of depreciation and subsequent withdrawal are as ..... appeal) nos.579 to 581 of 2005 are filed under section 260a of the income tax act, 1961 against the order dated 23.8.2002 made in i.t.a.nos.46 to 48/mds/2001 on the file of the income tax appellate tribunal, madras 'a' bench - assessment years 1995-96 to 1997-98 ..... material, either direct or circumstantial, to show that the transactions were sham documents, it was difficult to accept the view of the commissioner of income tax (appeals) as well as the revenue's contention. thus on the ground that the revenue had failed to prove that the transaction was a .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Apr-09-2012
..... that the said award was not given by government of india or any agency authorised by the government of india as per the provisions of section 10(17a) of the income tax act. consequently, the assessee could not be said to have disclosed fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment.4. as regards reopening of the assessment on the basis of ..... ,29,420/- being an award money for its film "silent valley" "an indian rain forest" and claimed exemption under section 10(17a) of the income tax act. the original assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the income tax act on 7.9.1995 and the loss was determined at rs.38,960/-. admittedly, the receipt of the award money was disclosed in the balance ..... right in setting aside the order of the lower authority and delete the entire addition of rs.2,29,420/- on the ground the reopening under section 147 of the income tax act is not valid on the basis of the factual error pointed out by the audit party? "2. the assessee is a private limited company. the assessee received a sum of ..... the assessment was bad in law. the tribunal, however, pointed out that the audit party had interpreted the provisions of the income tax act and thereafter brought to the notice of the assessing officer with regard to the applicability of the income tax act in respect of the award received by the assessee. thus, the tribunal set aside the order of the lower authority and allowed .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Apr-02-2012
..... due date. however, the remittance was made well before the due date for filing the return of income. but the assessing officer disallowed a sum of rs.3,42,30,735/- under section 40(a)(ia) of the income tax act for the delay in remittance of tax deducted at source. the assessing authority, however, rejected the claim on the ground that the deduction had ..... been made beyond the accounting year. aggrieved by this, the assessee filed an appeal before the commissioner of income tax (appeals).4. in considering the claim of the assessee ..... board dated 27.3.2009, particularly with reference to the amendment brought under the finance act, 2008 with retrospective effect from 1.4.2005, the commissioner of income tax (appeals) held that since tax deducted at source had been paid well before the due date for filing the return of income, the assessee was entitled to have the deduction.5. as against the substantive portion ..... for the assessment year 2007-08, the commissioner of income tax (appeals) referred to the contention taken by the assessee as regards the amendment brought forth with effect from 1.4.2005 under the finance act, 2008, mitigating the rigour of section 40(a)(ia) and the circular dated 27.3.2009 that the amendment .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jun-29-2012
..... . the assessee herein admittedly made cash payment exceeding rs.10,000/- in respect of certain business expenditure incurred by him. on the proposal to apply section 40a(3) of the income tax act, the assessee furnished the details which are extracted in the assessment order itself. the assessee contended that the payee was having regular accounts with the assessee as regards the supply ..... cheque clearing operations are suspended or other similar circumstance as aforesaid exists, will not be covered by the provisions of section 40a(3) of the income tax act provided the assessee furnishes evidence to the satisfaction of the income tax officer as to the genuineness of the payment and the identity of the payee. "7. thus, except on those circumstances, narrated under rule 6dd of ..... the income tax rules and as given under 40a(3) of the income tax act, unless there are exceptional and unavoidable circumstances, the payment made in excess of rs.10,000/- by cash would not escape the rigour of section 40a ..... (3) of the income tax act.8. as far as the present case is concerned, none of the circumstances were narrated by the assessee either before the assessing officer or before the appellate authority concerned in .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jun-28-2012
..... herein, to approach the concerned authority for a ruling as to whether there should have been a tds at all either under section 194c or under section 195 of the income tax act. it was submitted that going by the understanding of the terms of the joint venture agreement between the companies and the contract awarded to the joint venture, the assessee entertained ..... assessment years 1998-99, 1999-2000 and 2000-2001. thus, the assessee was treated as one in default and hence, interest was levied under section 201(1)(a) of the income tax act.6. the assessee objected to these proceedings, contending that going by the terms of the joint venture agreement between the companies and the award of contract under the agreement between ..... decision that the status of the joint venture was to be taken in as an aop for deduction at source as per section 194c of the income tax act. even though the assessee was asked to deduct tax at the rate of 7.1%, it should have pursued the matter further before the same authority or before the higher administrative authority seeking clarification as ..... deducted on that basis. the assessing officer, however, rejected the proceedings and confirmed the levy of interest under section 201(1)(a) of the income tax act.7. aggrieved by this, the assessee went on appeal before the commissioner of income tax (appeals), who confirmed the order of the assessing officer. the assessee went on further appeal before the tribunal, which, once again, confirmed the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jun-26-2012
..... order of the assessing officer.13. heard learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the material placed on record.14. section 43 of the income tax act provides the definition of certain terms relevant to the profits and gains of business or profession. section 43(1) provides for definition of "actual cost ..... appeal nos.1311 and 1312 of 2005 is filed under section 260a of the income tax act against the order of the income tax appellate tribunal, 'a' bench, chennai dated 29.03.2005 made in i.t.a.nos.209 and 210( ..... 815/- remained unabsorbed. in the assessment for 1975-76, the assessee amalgamated company claimed depreciation on the written down value of the assets. the income tax officer determined the written down value by reducing from the actual cost, not only the depreciation actually allowed, but also the depreciation carried forward, ..... that we extract explanation 2a and explanation 3 relevant to the assessment years considered in the bombay judgment reported in  187 itr 1 (commissioner of income-tax vs hindustan petroleum corporation ltd. (bom)):" explanation 2a. -where, in a scheme of amalgamation, any capital asset is transferred by the amalgamating company ..... irrespective of the amendment to sub section (2), the decision of the bombay high court reported in  187 itr 1 (commissioner of income-tax vs hindustan petroleum corporation ltd. (bom)) would still have relevance for the purpose of considering whether explanation 3 would have to be read into explanation .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jun-21-2012
..... aforesaid non-compete fee of rs.98,22,000/- as a capital receipt. the return was processed under section 143(1) of the income tax act on 20.1.2003. after issuance of statutory notice and discussion, the assessing officer vide order dated 29.3.2004, held that the ..... received by the assessee is nothing but the "goodwill" and brought to tax under section 45 read with section 55(2)(a) of the income tax act, 1961. the matter was taken in appeal by the assessee before the commissioner of income tax, who, by order dated 22.03.2005, by observing that the assessee ..... of the income tax act, 1961 against the orders of the income tax appellate tribunal madras 'b' bench, dated 19.1.2007 in ita.no.1561/mds/2005 for the assessment year 2001-2002.elipe dharma rao, j1. the revenue has come forward with the present tax case appeal against the order passed by the income tax appellate tribunal ..... relying on various decisions of the supreme court, including the latest decision of the supreme court in guffic chem (p) ltd., v. commissioner of income-tax (2011) 198 taxman 78 (sc) contended that the law is well settled that the receipt of compensation attributable to the restrictive covenant is a capital ..... 1.4.2003 vide the finance act, 2002 would indicate that it is the intention of the legislature to tax such receipts irrespective of the assessment year. learned counsel by placing reliance upon the decision of the supreme court in lachminarayan madan lal v. commissioner of income-tax (1972) 086 itr 0439 .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jun-20-2012
..... .12,29,523/- and the legal fee of rs.9,55,000/-, the other expenses qualified for deduction under section 35d of the income tax act. the commissioner of income tax (appeals) also agreed with the assessee that it was entitled to deduction on the expansion undertaken by it. aggrieved by this, the revenue ..... 997/99 for the assessment year 1995-96.t.c.(a) nos.1256 of 2005 is filed under section 260a of the income tax act against the order of the income tax appellate tribunal dated 04.02.2005 made in ita no.888 & 997/99 for the assessment year 1995-96.judgment(judgment of ..... expansion programme as well as for modernisation programme, which was in the form of capital expansion.14. a perusal of section 35d of the income tax act shows that the amortisation relief is granted in respect of certain preliminary expenses incurred by an assessee company, being an indian company or a person ..... went on appeal before the tribunal.7. as far as the eligibility of the assessee for claiming deduction under section 35d of the income tax act was concerned, the tribunal held that the expenditure were incurred for expansion of the industrial undertaking and hence, the same qualified for deduction. as ..... appeals relate to the disallowance of euro issue expenditure on the right of the assessee to come within the provisions of section 35d of the income tax act. on the question of the assessee's entitlement for amortisation under section 35-d, the tribunal held that as the expenditure was for extension .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jun-04-2012
..... by it in its industrial activity has to necessarily get into the computation of the profits and gains derived by the industrial undertaking as given under section 80ab of the income tax act. a comparative reading of sections 32ab and 80ab, particularly with section 80hh, shows that for the purpose of section 32ab, it is the profits and gains of business or ..... profits and gains of the industrial undertaking and would not be deducted from the profits and gains of the industrial undertaking in computing the deduction under section 80hh of the income tax act.3. we have perused the unreported judgment of this court and reposted the case for hearing. accordingly, learned counsel for the assessee as well as learned standing counsel for ..... there could be no deduction under section 32ab while computing the eligible profits and gains for the purpose of working out the deduction under section 80hh and 80i of the income tax act. the assessee further contended that the relief under section 32ab in respect of machinery installed in the units have nothing to do with the eligible business falling for consideration ..... is no dispute over the fact that the assessee company is eligible for deduction under section 80hh and 80i as well as investment deposit allowance under section 32ab of the income tax act. while computing the deduction under sections 80hh and 80i, the assessing authority reduced the profits of the newly formed industrial undertakings by making deduction under section 32ab and rejected .....Tag this Judgment!