Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: rationale Court: income tax appellate tribunal itat delhi Year: 1993 Page 1 of about 3 results (0.060 seconds)

Aug 24 1993 (TRI)

Jindal Strips Ltd. Vs. Inspecting Assistant

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Decided on : Aug-24-1993

Reported in : (1993)47ITD349(Delhi)

..... the company, this amount is also not available for exclusions and the amount of income-tax payable by a company in respect of its total income. if this is the rationale behind the exclusions, then the tax deducted at source from the dividends payable to the shareholders is not the income-tax payable by a company on its own under any .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 1993 (TRI)

Srf Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Decided on : Aug-30-1993

Reported in : (1993)47ITD504(Delhi)

1. the assessee, a limited company, has filed this appeal aggrieved by the order of cit (appeals) and has raised as many as nine grounds of appeal, before us. this appeal has two distinct parts, issues raised as grounds 1 & 2 are related to the computation of the book profit under section 115j of the act and issues raised as grounds 3 to 9 relate to the computation of the profit and gains from business or profession within the meaning of sections 28 to 43a of the act. the counsel addressed us initially with reference to grounds numbering 3 to 9, followed by the grounds numbering 1 & 2 and we are dealing with the issues as raised, as argued before us, in that order.2. the assessee, has raised a very strange claim as its grounds of appeal no. 3 and had contended that, the statutory deduction under section 37(2a) of the act, of rs. 5,000 is to be allowed from the profit of each of the business units, treating them to be separate undertakings. the contention was that, the authorities below, were in error in allowing one consolidated statutory deduction of rs. 5,000 on the entertainment allowance, while rs. 5,000 should have been allowed as a deduction from the profits of each of the business units. the plea was that, this claim has the recognition in garden silk wvg. factory v.cit [1991] 189 itr 512 (sc), dr. b.a. rajakrishnan v. ito [1986] 15 itd 33 (coch.), first ito v. yash raj chopra [1984] 10 itd 709 (bom.) and by the special bench in ranbir raj kapoor v. ito [1988] 25 itd .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 26 1993 (TRI)

Smt. Shanti Devi Vs. Assistant Commissioner of

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Decided on : Nov-26-1993

Reported in : (1994)49ITD402(Delhi)

1. these two appeals are filed by the assessee against order dated 17-8-1992 and 23-11-1990 of the learned cit (appeals). both these appeals are, therefore, consolidated and disposed of by this common order.2. first ground of appeal is against initiation of reassessment proceedings under section 147/148 of the it act. the relevant facts are that the assessee is an individual having income from trading in wool, manufacturing and sale of wool tops and yarn. in his case, original assessment was framed under section 143(1) on 31-3-1986 accepting the returned loss of rs. 92.3. action under section 132 was taken against the assessee when his business and residential premises were searched on 29-8-1986 and certain loose papers seized. one such paper (given no. 97 of document no. 5), contain entries aggregating to rs. 8,06,900. for want of satisfactory explanation from assessee regarding the nature of the paper and entries recorded thereon, the assessing officer believed that income chargeable to tax to the tune of rs. 8,06,900 had escaped assessment. on the basis of this paper, the assessment was, therefore, reopened by the assessing officer after recording necessary reasons on 5-1-1990. consequently, a notice under section 148 was served on 8-1-1990 on the legal heir of the assessee who had in the meanwhile expired on 10-8-1988. the assessee filed his return again returning a loss of rs. 92. in the order of reassessment, assessee's income stands computed at rs. 10,55,270. the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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