Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: income tax appellate tribunal itat mumbai Year: 1992 Page 1 of about 7 results (0.040 seconds)

Jul 14 1992 (TRI)

Smt. Shilavati Agarwal Vs. Fifth Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-14-1992

Reported in : (1993)46ITD230(Mum.)

1. this appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the cit(a)-xv, bombay and relates to the assessment year 1981-82.2. the solitary ground taken in this appeal projects the following grievance: on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the cit (a) erred in confirming the addition of rs. 2,07,000 made by the ito by way of long-term capital gains. the cit (a) erred in not accepting the appellant's claim for exemption under secton 54 of the act. the cit (a) should have held that the appellant was not liable for any payment or long-term capital gain after giving exemption to the appellant under secton 54 of the act.3. the assessee is an individual. her accounting year corresponding to the relevant assessment year ended on 30-4-1980. on 30-1-1980, the assessee entered into an agreement to sell 3/4th share of property situated at bharatiya friends housing co-op. society for a consideration of rs. 2,62,500. the capital gains arising out of the sale of the said property claimed to be exempt under secton 54 of the income-tax act, 1961 (hereinafter called the act). the assessee stated to have acquired another flat during the year. this flat bearing no.132 in maker towers was occupied on 10-12-1979. the agreement for purchase of this flat was entered into on 12-3-1974. the purchase consideration was paid under the instalment scheme agreed upon with the builder. all the instalments were paid before occupation of the flat in december 1979.4. the assessing officer .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 30 1992 (TRI)

income-tax Officer Vs. Ramkrishna Bajaj

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-30-1992

Reported in : (1992)41ITD161(Mum.)

1. the assessee and his learned counsel had requested the president of the income-tax appellate tribunal for constituting a special bench to dispose of his appeal as according to them, in the case of jamnalal sons ltd. (ita no. 150 (nag) of 1986, dated june 16, 1988), [1989] 29 itd 164 (bom), the tribunal has not considered in proper perspective the facts obtaining in that case vis-a-vis the decision of the hon'ble supreme court in the case of sunil siddharthbhai [1985] 156 itr 509.further, the tribunal had not considered certain orders in other cases which supported the stand taken by the assessee in that case. the assessee, therefore, had an apprehension that a division bench of the tribunal would not be inclined to differ from the said order of the tribunal even though certain other orders of the tribunal which are in his favour would be placed before the division bench.2. when the matter was placed before the division bench, the members constituting the bench made the following entry in the order sheet on february 26, 1991. "the issue involved in this appeal pertains to the applicability of the decision of the hon'ble supreme court in the case of sunil siddharthbhai [1985] 156 itr 509. in the case of jamnalal sons ltd., [1989] 29 itd 164 (bom) the tribunal has decided the appeal against the assessee. however, a contrary view has been taken by the tribunal in the cases of dr. gaur hari singhania, mahavir prasad taparia, huf., lp, gas transport and bottling co. ltd. and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 18 1992 (TRI)

Dhiraj A. Sharma Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-18-1992

1. by these four appeals, the assessee has challenged the orders of the learned commissioner (appeals) upholding the penalties levied under sections 271(l)(c) and 273(2)(c) in relation to the assessment years 1987-88 and 1988-89.2. the assessee, an individual, was carrying on business as a jeweller in the name of m/s. sangeeta jewellers. the return was filed declaring income at rs. 1,22,506 on september 14, 1987, for the assessment year 1987-88. for the assessment year 1988-89, the return was filed on july 19, 1988, showing income at rs. 1,47,410. during the course of the assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1988-89, it was noticed by the income-tax officer that the assessee had undervalued the closing stock. the income-tax officer required the assessee to furnish the basis and details of valuation of closing stock. compliance was re'quired to be made on september 25, 1989. the assessee, in terms of the letter purporting to be dated september 16, 1989, offered for revaluation of closing stock and, as a necessary consequence, offered an additional income of rs. 3,54,724 for the assessment year 1988-89.the assessee submitted before the income-tax officer that the business had come to him only in the assessment year 1986-87 on account of the sudden death of his father. the assessee had filed the returns as worked out by his employees/accountant. the working of the closing stock was not available with him. he had, therefore, recalculated the value of closing stock .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 03 1992 (TRI)

income-tax Officer Vs. W.D. Estate (P.) Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Decided on : Nov-03-1992

Reported in : (1993)45ITD473(Mum.)

1. these are appeals by the department and cross appeals by the assessee. for the sake of convenience the appeals are consolidated and disposed of by this common order.there is an appeal by the department and one by the assessee. the appeals relate to assessment year 1982-83.3. assessee is a limited company engaged in construction work. it had secured from the government of maharashtra a plot of land no. 211 at nariman point on lease and had started construction a multi-storeyed building from 1978. initially, the booking rate per square feet was rs. 130. this was raised to rs. 140 and rs. 150 and much later the sale fetched as high an amount as rs. 612 per sq. ft. assessee was following the project completion method of accounting and filed the return for the year under appeal disclosing an income of rs. 35,39,408. it has to be remembered in this connection that there was a raid at the premises of the assessee and in the course of the raid a table diary maintained by one shri r.t. sharma and a file, were seized. shri r.t. sharma was the accountant of the assessee at the relevant time and it was the submission of the assessee before the revenue authorities that shri r.t. sharma was a disgruntled employee who wanted to black-mail the assessee and squeeze some amount out of the assessee. the file seized in the course of the search gave names of the parties to whom sales were made up to middle of the year 1980, the rate at which the sales were effected and also the amount .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 14 1992 (TRI)

J.N. Marshall Engg. (P.) Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-14-1992

Reported in : (1992)43ITD116(Mum.)

1. this appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the cit (appeals) -vii, bombay and pertains to the assessment year 1980-81.2. the assessee is a company. the accounting year for the relevant period ends on 30-6-1979. on 29-11-1975, the assessee-company acquired the property known as "marshall lodge" from a private family trust for a consideration of rs. 4,50,000. an agreement was entered into and the property was transferred in the name of the assessee-company. as per balance sheet of the assessee-company as on 30-6-1978, the total cost of acquisition of the property inclusive of incidental charges amounted to rs. 4,90,510.3. by an indenture dated 1st august, 1978 the assessee-company entered into a partnership with mr. s.j. marshall and jiji marshall investment pvt. ltd. under the name and style of m/s. marshall real estate and investment corporation. (a) the parties of the first part have agreed title and interest in the said property described in the schedule hereunder written by way of capital contribution and for the purpose of taking accounts it has been agreed by and between the parties hereto that the party of the first part shall be credited with an amount of rs. 9,00,000 in the books of accounts of the said partnership as and by way of their capital contribution. the aforesaid amount of rs. 9,00,000 has been ascertained on the basis of the said property being valued at or for the price of rs. 9,00,000 as per architect's valuation report. (b) parties .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 31 1992 (TRI)

S.H. Kelkar and Co. Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-31-1992

Reported in : (1993)44ITD170(Mum.)

1. this is an appeal by the assessee against the order of the cit(a), for the assessment year 1989-90.2. the first dispute in this appeal is against the addition of rs. 58,79,694 in the valuation of the closing stock. the assessee-company is engaged in the manufacture of fragrances and industrial perfumes. it purchases raw material, consumable stores etc. (hereinafter referred to as 'inputs') and uses them in the manufacture of its final products and, in case certain stock of input is left out, it is shown in the closing stock. the method of the valuation of such closing stock as adopted by the assessee is cost. the dispute is with regard to the valuation of this closing stock. the assessee's case is that the cost of input was the price paid by the assessee, as reduced by the right of credit of excise duty paid and included therein (hereinafter referred to as 'modvat credit'). the cost of purchase, according to the assessee, was the net of this right. the modvat credit is directly rela table to the cost of inputs. the case of the revenue, on the other hand, is that the excise duty paid by the assessee on the purchase of the inputs was a part of the cost of purchase, as per the decistions of the supreme court in the case of chowringhee sales bureau (p.) ltd. v.cit[1973] 87 itr 542 and mcdowell & co. ltd. v. cto [1985] 154 itr 148 and, therefore, the closing stock must necessarily include the element of excise duty.3. the assessee has given the following facts and submissions, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 24 1992 (TRI)

JatIn (Alias Rajesh) Khanna Vs. First Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Decided on : Apr-24-1992

Reported in : (1993)45ITD448(Mum.)

1. this is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 22-3-1985 passed by the cit (appeals)-ii, bombay. briefly, the facts in this case are that the assessment was completed by the assessing officer under section 143(3) read with section 144b on 31-3-1984, which has been challenged by the assessee to be barred by limitation. the relevant details of events relating to the submission of return and the final completion of assessment are as under:(i) return due - 31-07-1980(ii) form no. 6 seeking extension filed - 31-07-1980(iii) extension allowed up to - 30-09-1980(iv) form no. 6 filed again - 31-10-1980(v) extension refused - 03-11-1980(vi) notice under section 139(2) issued - 10-12-1980(vii) form no. 6 filed again - 06-01-1981(viii) extension refused - 09-01-1981(ix) return filed - 19-06-1981(x) revised return filed the purpose of assessment - 9-03-1983(xi) draft order issued by assessee on - 30-03-1984(xii) final order of the 2. in grounds of appeal nos. 1 to 9 the assessee has challenged the action of the learned 1st appellate authority in confirming the order of the assessing officer having been passed within the period of limitation specified in the act.3. two alternative contentions have been taken up by shri k. shivram, learned counsel for the assessee in regard to the ground that the assessment has framed by the assessing officer is time barred.4. the first contention is that the return filed on 9-3-1983 was not a revised return under section 139(5) and, .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //