Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Mar-31-2015
..... rs.12,76,320/-. the case was selected for scrutiny and notice under sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the income tax act along with the detailed questionnaire were issued. that the assessee claimed and shown indirect expenses of rs.56,04,681/- which includes interest on reliance capital bond of rs.27, ..... m.r. shah, j. 1. feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned income tax appellate tribunal, ahmedabad, 'c' bench (hereinafter referred to as the 'tribunal') dated 05.09.2014 passed in ita no.314/ahd/2013 for a.y. 2009-2010 by which, the ..... considered, in detail, and given cogent reasons in paragraph no.5.3. what is weighed with the learned cit(a) is seems to be that the assessee used the said income for the business purpose and, in fact, even paid the tds on the income of interest on reliance capital bond. the aforesaid deletion has been confirmed by the learned tribunal by observing ..... .34 lacs was claimed by the assessee to have been utilized for business of construction. the cit(a) has further recorded that this fund flow has substance to slow clear nexus of utilization of borrowed fund for earning income in the form of interest, rent income and business income of construction, and has paid tds on the interest payment wherever applicable. there being no .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Feb-09-2015
..... , the main assessee had claimed the refund on the basis of forged tds certificates, then, the income tax authorities were competent and well within their jurisdiction to reject his claim of refund and even to impose penalty under the relevant provisions of the income tax act. thereafter, the aggrieved party had a right to file the statutory appeal in this relevant connection. ..... be that as it may, therefore, the respondent-accused, who was an advocate, had just submitted the income tax return on behalf of main assessee, cannot possibly be and indeed could ..... mentioned here-in-below. 13. as indicated here-in-above, the bare perusal of the record would reveal that complainant-ito claimed that the main assessee had submitted the income tax return for the assessment year 1988-89 claiming a refund of rs.3497/- based on false tds certificate through respondent-accused sudesh sharma, advocate. the learned counsel for ..... in detail, in all, according to the complainant, the main assessee has wrongly claimed the refund of rs.3497/- on the basis of wrong tds certificates submitted in his income tax return, through respondent-accused sudesh kumar, advocate. in the background of these allegations, the complainant ito had instituted different complaints, not against the main assessee, but against sudesh sharma .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Sep-09-2015
..... 1. this appeal under section 260-a of the income tax act, 1961 (the act) challenges the order dated 27th february,2013 passed by the income tax appellate tribunal (the tribunal). the assessment year involved is assessment year 2008-09. 2. the revenue ..... malhotra, learned counsel appearing for the revenue filed an affidavit dated 8 september 2015 of shri.ramnath prabhakar murkunde, assistant commissioner of income tax. it inter alia states that no appeal has been filed against the order of the tribunal dated 31 august 2012 passed by the ..... 143(3) of the act it was held that the respondent - assessee was a dealer in shares to the extent it claimed income under the head 'short term capital gains' and was subjected to tax under the head 'business income'. 4. in appeal, the commissioner of income tax (appeals) (cit (a)) on consideration of ..... officer had, in the proceedings under section 143(3) of the act, accepted the stand of the respondent - assessee and taxed the profit earned on purchase and sale of shares as short term capital gains; (i) dividend income earned was over rs.8.50 lakhs; (j) the respondent - ..... urges the following question of law for our consideration: 'whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the tribunal was justified in upholding the commissioner of income tax .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jul-13-2015
..... filed under s.260 a of the income tax act, 1961 praying to set aside the orders passed by the it at in it a 1514 and 1513/bang/2012 on 11.4.2014 confirming the order of the appellate commissioner and confirm the order passed by deputy commissioner of income tax, circle 11 (5), bangalore.) ..... that the said amount was not transferred to the said assessee and hence the same could not be treated as income of the assessee. challenging the order of the commissioner of income tax, revenue filed an appeal before the tribunal which has been dismissed by a detailed, reasoned order on 11.4. ..... the revenue has filed these two appeals challenging the order of the income tax appellate tribunal dated 11.4.2014 passed in itas 1514 and 1513 /bang/ 2012. ita 404 ..... tribunal further held that the liability continued to exist in the assessment year under consideration and as such, the amount could not be treated as income of the assessee. for the assessment year 2004-05, the assessee received a sum of rs.32.9 crores from the eraf which was treated ..... 2014 holding that, treating the amount received from eraf to be income of the assessee would be inconsistent with the actual facts .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-12-2015
..... 1. heard on i.a.no.3860/2012, an application for condonation of delay. 1.1. appeal under section 260a of the income tax act, 1961, filed by the appellant against the order of itat dated 30.4.2011 is barred by 287 days. 2. an application ..... by the chartered accountant. in para 6 of the affidavit he has deposed that whenever any messenger of the department bring notice related to the income tax or commercial tax, he normally redirect him to the chartered accountant to serve the copy on behalf of the department to the chartered accountant. 6. in respect of ..... the notice issued by the income tax department and take necessary steps accordingly. he has further stated that the address of the service of notice as well as order in form 35 was ..... director of the appellant-company mr. sanjay rathi and as per para 4 he has deposed that all the notices which are normally issued by the income tax department are served to the chartered accountant of the company who is regularly appearing before the authorities and most of the time, the chartered accountant receives ..... affidavit of shri sanjay rathi, director of the appellant-company. as per para 2 of the affidavit on 4.1.2012, when the assistant commissioner of income tax served a judgment notice of appellant - company then only he came to know about the order. 4. the department in its reply has stated that the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Feb-03-2015
1. this appeal by revenue under section 260a of the income tax act,1961 (the act) assails the order dated 30.4.2012 passed by the income tax appellate tribunal (the tribunal). the assessment year involved is a.y. 2007- 08. 2. the appellant-revenue proposes the following questions for our consideration: ?? "(a) whether on the facts and ..... , the assessing officer by an assessment order dated 19.9.2011 charged interest of rs. 1.76 crores on the above account as a part of the respondent-assessee's income. 5. being aggrieved, the respondent - assessee preferred an appeal to the tribunal. the tribunal by the impugned order held : (a) that the interest free loan extended by a company to ..... . thus partly allowed the respondent-assessee's appeal by applying the decision of the tribunal in the case of "vvf ltd. v. dcit [ita no.673/mum/06]" and "dy. cit v. tech mahindra ltd.  46 sot 141(mum.)(uro)" by holding that the loan advanced to an associate enterprise situated abroad, the rate of interest to be applied is ..... the impugned order of the tribunal inter alia has followed the decisions of the bombay bench of the tribunal in cases of vvf ltd. v. dy. cit [it appeal no. 673 (mum.) of 2006] and dy. cit v. tech mahindra ltd.  12 taxmann.com 132/46 sot 141 (mum.) (uro) to reach the conclusion that alp in the case of loans .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-19-2015
..... 1. this appeal by the revenue under section 260-a of the income tax act, 1961 (the act), challenges the order dated 5th october, 2011 passed by the income tax appellate tribunal (the tribunal). 2. the following question of law has been raised for our consideration: ?? "whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, ..... support be filed indicating the reasons. in the absence of the above, we will be compelled to impose heavy/exemplary costs to be personally paid by the jurisdictional - commissioner of income tax under whose jurisdiction, the appeal is being filed and pressed in spite of the issue being settled by this court and the same having been accepted by the revenue. 8 ..... should at all be pressed in view of the revenue having accepted the jurisdictional high court's order on an identical issue and take necessary instructions from the commissioner of income tax to withdraw and/or not press the appeal. alternatively, in case a conscious decision is taken to press the appeal, then an averment to the effect that either the case ..... will also be done in case of new appeals under section 260a of the act before filing them. 9. with the above observations/directions, appeal is dismissed. no order as to costs. 10. a copy of this order be communicated by the office and the counsel for the revenue to the chief commissioner of income tax, mumbai and the central board of direct .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-07-2015
..... were really unnecessary. they are made so as to emphasize the object and purpose of inserting a provision like section 271(1)(c) in the income tax act, 1961. we do not agree with mr. shah that audit reports and minutes of meeting were important or brushed aside by the tribunal. the ..... been sustained to this figure. 6. mr. shah has relied upon section 271(1)(c) of the income tax act, 1961. he has relied upon the judgment of the hon'ble supreme court in the case of cit v. reliance petroproducts (p.) ltd.  322 itr 158/189 taxman 322. mr. shah has ..... of the claim itself was in issue and in our opinion the tribunal while upholding the order of commissioner of income tax (appeals) and that of the assessing officer partially did not act perversely nor committed an error of law apparent on the face of the record. its order refers to all ..... termed as capital expenditure and, therefore, incurred in relation to the research and development wing, hence sustained, but the assessing officer, the commissioner of income tax (appeals) and the tribunal in quantum proceeding as also in penalty proceeding concurrently found that there were 9 items of revenue expenditure. in relation ..... the opportunities that were extended and given by the assessing officer during quantum proceedings and penalty proceeding. equally the findings of the commissioner of income tax (appeals) that before .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Decided on : Nov-19-2015
vibhu bakhru, j. 1. this is an appeal filed by the revenue under section 260a of the income tax act, 1961 (hereafter 'act') impugning an order dated 12th january, 2001 passed by the income tax appellate tribunal (hereafter 'itat') in ita no. 5425(del)/94. the said appeal (ita 5425(del)/94) was preferred by the assessee against an order dated 18th july, ..... 1994 passed by commissioner of income tax (appeals) [hereafter 'cit(a)'] whereby the assessee's appeal against an assessment order dated 22nd ..... that the sale consideration received by the assessee by transfer of shares and sale of right entitlement of partly convertible debentures (pcd) is income from capital gains and not income from business? 2. whether the income tax appellate tribunal was right in holding that the assessee had incurred loss on sale of its entitlement to acquire partly convertible debentures and the ..... assessee creates a colourable device or enters into a sham transaction to evade the tax, which is otherwise payable by him. 42. in commissioner of income tax v. sakarlal balabhai:  69 itr 186 (guj), the gujarat court explained the meaning of tax avoidance and observed that "tax avoidance postulates that the assessee is in receipt of amount which is really and .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Oct-27-2015
..... 15 crores relating to a.y.2005-06. the above addition u/s 68 and 69a is deemed income of the assessee and does not come under any heads of income specified in chapter iv of the income-tax act, 1961 and hence brought forward business loss and depreciation cannot be set off against this as per ..... is found that the reopening of assessment is contrary to law, the question of directing the appellant to the alternative remedy of appeal before the commissioner of income tax does not arise, especially when the case is obviously one of change of opinion. 50. in the result, the writ appeals are allowed, the common ..... the company for the relevant previous year did not show any land having been disposed of and since the depreciation statement of the assessee prepared for income tax purposes also showed a particular value at the beginning and at the end of the relevant year, the assessing officer concluded in para 5 of ..... will be permitted entry through this outer gate only if he satisfies three criteria namely (i) the existence of a reason to believe that an income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment (ii) the recording of reasons under section 148(2) and (iii) the issuing of notice under section 148(1). once the ..... expiry of 4 years from the end of the relevant assessment year. the only exception to this rule of limitation is that if any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment by reason of the failure on the part of the assessee to make a return under section 139 or in response to .....Tag this Judgment!