Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: income tax appellate tribunal itat ahmedabad Page 7 of about 1,147 results (0.187 seconds)

Dec 23 2005 (TRI)

The Asst. Commissioner of Vs. Shri Kamlesh R. Agarwal (Huf)

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (2006)282ITR117(Ahd.)

1. In view of the majority opinion, the order of the CIT(A) is upheld and, accordingly, the levy of penalty is deleted.1. On a difference of opinion between the two Members, the following question has been referred by the President, ITAT for my opinion as third member Under-Section 255(4) of the I.T. Act, 1961:- Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Id. CIT(A) was justified in cancelling the penalty levied Under-section 271B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 holding that there, was a "reasonable cause" within the meaning of Section 273B of the Act? 2. The assessee was required to get the accounts audited and obtain a report thereon as per the provisions of Section 44AB on or before the specified date i.e. on or before 31-10-1994, It, however, obtained the report on 27-3-1995. It was thus late by four months and 2.7 days. The return was filed by the assessee on 31-8-1995. Finding no reasonable cause for the delay in obtaining the report, the Assessing Officer treated th...

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 23 2005 (TRI)

Chandravadan Jayantilal Chokshi Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (2006)100TTJ(Ahd.)879

1. Of these three appeals, first two appeals are cross-appeals one by the assessee and the other by the Revenue against the order of CIT(A) dt. 25th Jan., 2003 for the block period 1st April, 1989 to 20th Jan., 2000 and the third appeal is by the assessee against the order of CIT(A) dt. 24th Nov., 2004 for asst. yr. 2001-02.ITA No. 429/Ahd/2003 for block period 1st April, 1989 to 20th Jan., 2000 (assessee's appeal): 1. The assessment made under Section 158BC r/w Section 158BD dt. 28th Feb., 2002 is ab initio void, illegal and invalid. It is therefore prayed that the same be cancelled. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(A) considering that the assessment proceedings being initiated on the basis of vague notice under Section 158BC and that the notices under Section 142(1) and 143(2) having not been issued within prescribed time under the law, ought to have held the assessment as invalid and therefore ought to have cancelled the same. 3. The learned ...

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 23 2005 (TRI)

The Jt. Commissioner of Vs. Steelco Gujarat Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

1. This is an appeal by the Revenue against the order of Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) for the Asst Year 1992-93. The following ground is raised in this appeal: The ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 25,17,666/- being interest received of pre-operative period taxed under the head Income from other sources and addition of Rs. 7764/-, being other interest receipt taxed under the head income from other sources and in allowing the claim of the assessee to set off these amounts from its pre-operative expenses.2. The Assessing Officer noted that the assessee company has opened foreign currency account with State Bank of India, Tokyo with the approval of Reserve Bank of India in which the contribution from NRI promoters were credited. This amount was utilized strictly as per the approval of RBI and the payments were made for import of major plant and machinery purchased from Japan. The company opened L/C for import of plant and machinery from time...

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 16 2005 (TRI)

Packers (India) Vs. Income Tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (2006)101TTJ(Ahd.)232

1. These two appeals by the assessee are against the orders of CIT(A) for the asst. yrs. 1999-2000 and 2000-01. Since the common dispute is raised in the appeals these are decided by this common order for the sake of convenience.2. The common dispute raised is whether CIT(A) is right in upholding the rectification of intimation/orders of the AO under Section 143(1) by invoking the provisions of Section 154 of the Act. The assessee's industrial undertaking is located in backward area of Daman. It is entitled to deduction under Section 80-IB. The returns of income for the assessment years under consideration were filed in which the deduction under Section 80-IB was claimed on the total income computed without deduction of depreciation, though allowable to the assessee but not claimed. These returns were processed under Section 143(1) and intimations issued/deemed to have been issued on the basis of the returned income. Subsequently, the AO formed an opinion that claim of the assessee un...

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 02 2005 (TRI)

Parjanya Associates Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (2006)100TTJ(Ahd.)736

1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the CIT(A)-II, Surat, for the asst. yr. 2001-02.' 2. The only ground raised in this appeal by the assessee is against the levy of penalty of Rs. 52,505 under Section 271B of the IT Act, 1961.3. At the time of hearing before us, it is submitted by the learned Counsel that the assessee is a contractor who is disclosing its income as per Section 44AD of the IT Act, 1961. For the year under consideration the assessee got its accounts audited on 8th June, 2001.The income as per the audited accounts was Rs. 8,11,036. However, the assessee by applying Section 44AD, disclosed the income at 8 per cent of the total receipt, i.e., Rs. 8,40,090. Since the income was disclosed as per Section 44AD and not as per the audited accounts, the counsel of the assessee omitted to furnish the audited balance sheet and P&L a/c though the account of the assessee was duly audited by that time. That the AO accepted the income disclosed by the a...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 30 2005 (TRI)

Utkarsh Fincap Pvt. Ltd. Vs. the Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (2006)99ITD259(Ahd.)

1. These six appeals by the assessee are against the orders of Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) for the Asst. Years 1998-99 to 2000-01 arising out of assessment orders and penalties levied by the Assessing Officer. For the sake of convenience, . they are being disposed of by this common order.2. The dispute in all these appeals is as to whether the income from interest on inter corporate deposits was chargeable to tax under Interest Tax Act or not and their consequent assessment entails penalty Under Section 13 of the said Act. In assessments, the Assessing Officer has observed as under: Since the assessee company's activity is to give intercorporate deposits and making investments in shares of other companies, the assessee company is covered by Sub-section (ii) and (iv) of the Section 2(5B) of the Interest Tax Act, 1974.3. The CIT(A) agreed with the assessments by observing in paragraph 2.3 of his order as under: 2.3 I have carefully considered the observation made by the A.O. in...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 29 2005 (TRI)

Choice Aquaculture (P.) Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer 1(4)

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (2006)100ITD143(Ahd.)

1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee and is directed against the order of CIT(A) dated 11-2-2005 for assessment year 2002-03. 1.1 The Id. CIT(A) has erred in law and/or on facts in holding that there was no mistake apparent from records of adopting WDV of the asset. 1.2 That in the facts and circumstances of case, the Id. CIT(A) ought not to have upheld the order passed by Assessing Officer under Section 154 of rejecting the WDV as per the revised computation in earlier years. 2.1 The Id. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that in view of decision of Maharana Mills and Mahendra Mills, there was the mistake apparent from record in WDV for the purpose of depreciation which could be modified in view of change in WDV of earlier years. 2.2 The Id. CIT(A) has erred in confirming that the total income cannot get reduced than the returned income unless revised return is filed.3. Return of income for the present year was filed at Rs. 14,60,240.The same was processed under the provisions of ...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 28 2005 (TRI)

Rajesh P. Soni Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (2006)100TTJ(Ahd.)892

1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)-II, Ahmedabad, dt. 17th Feb., 1999, for the asst. yr. 1995-96.2. The first ground is pertaining to Rs. 2,49,261-unexplained cash/undisclosed income. The facts of the case and observations of AO are as under : It is mentioned here that the appellant is trading in gold. A survey operation was conducted at the business premises of the appellant on 9th Dec, 1994. At that time excess stock of 500 gms. of gold was found. The appellant agreed to disclose the excess stock found during the survey in the return of income. Subsequently, the appellant filed the return of income in which amount of Rs. 2,35,000 was disclosed on this account. During the course of survey, total cash of Rs. 2,70,000 was found and after allowing credit for the cash as per the books of the appellant and as per the books of another sister-concern, cash of Rs. 2,49,261 was held to be excess of cash for which the appellant was asked to furnish the explanat...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 24 2005 (TRI)

Kiran Corpn. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (2006)98ITD119(Ahd.)

1. These two appeals have been filed by the assessee against the consolidated order of the CIT(A) dated 11-1-1995 for assessment year 1990-91 whereby part relief has been allowed in the quantum appeal and adjustment made under Section 143(1)(a) has been upheld. Since both the appeals relating to the same assessment year have been heard together, these are being disposed of by a single order.2. First we take up ITA No. 698/Ahd./1995 relating to upholding of adjustment made by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(1)(a). The assessee filed a return of income on 20-12-1990 showing total income of Rs. 3,52,306. The Assessing Officer, while processing the return under Section 143(1)(a) made an addition of Rs. 1,30,815 on account of bad debts debited to P&L Account and corresponding credit made to bad debt reserve account. The Assessing Officer also charged additional tax under Section 143(1A). The assessee filed an application under Section 154 which has been rejected by the Assessin...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 24 2005 (TRI)

Kiran Corporation Vs. the Asstt. C.i.T.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (2006)102TTJ(Ahd.)375

1. On account of difference between the Hon'ble Members of Ahmedabad.Bench., the following questions have been referred to me for an appropriate action Under Section 255(4) of the Income-tax Act: 1. Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Accountant Member is justified in deleting the additional tax levied Under Section 143(1 A) relying. upon the ' Supreme Court decision in the case of CIT v. HEG 243 ITR 48 or whether the Judicial Member is justified in upholding the levy of additional tax relying upon the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Addl. CIT v. J.K. Synthetics 251 ITR 200 and decision of the Tribunal in the case of Mamta Machinery P. Ltd. v. DCIT (ITA No. 326/A/95); and 2. Whether the Judicial Member is justified in taking the view that deletion of Addl. Tax Under Section 143(1 A) would be in direct conflict with the earlier decision of the Tribunal in Mamta Machinery P. Ltd. v. DCIT wherein the Tribunal had upheld the adjustment Under Section 143(la).2...

Tag this Judgment!


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