Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: income tax appellate tribunal itat ahmedabad Page 9 of about 1,147 results (0.172 seconds)

Sep 30 2005 (TRI)

Essar Steel Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (2005)97TTJ(Ahd.)985

1. These are four appeals two by the assessee and two by the Revenue.One appeal by the assessee is against the order of the CIT and the others including two by the Revenue are against the orders of the CIT(A). They all relate to asst. yr. 1993-94 and are being disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience.2. The assessment was completed on 29th March, 1996. The assessee filed appeal against the assessment order. When the appeal was pending, the CIT on perusal of the record, felt that the order of assessment was erroneous insofar as the same was prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue in respect of certain items. The CIT, therefore, gave a notice to the assessee under Section 263 and set aside the assessment on various issues with certain directions. The appeal in ITA No.949/Ahd/1998, is against the revision order of the CIT, Central-II, Chennai. The appeal filed by the assessee against the assessment order was disposed of by the CIT(A) on 24th March, 1999. Two cross...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 30 2005 (TRI)

Essar Steel Ltd. Vs. Deputy Cit

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (2005)97ITD125(Ahd.)

These are four appeals two by the assessee and two by the revenue. One appeal by the assessee is against the order of the CIT and the others including two by the revenue are against the orders of the CIT(A). They all relate to assessment year 1993-94 and are being disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience.The assessment was completed on 29-3-1996. The assessee filed appeal against the assessment order. When the appeal was pending, the CIT on perusal of the record, felt that the order of assessment was erroneous insofar as the same was prejudicial to the interests of the revenue in respect of certain items. The CIT, therefore, gave a notice to the assessee under section 263 and set aside the assessment on various issues with certain directions. The appeal in ITA No. 949/Ahd/1998, is against the revision order of the CIT, Central-II, Chennai. The appeal filed by the assessee against the assessment order was disposed of by the CIT(A) on 24-3-1999. Two cross-appeals (IT...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 30 2005 (TRI)

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Vs. Anar Chemicals (P) Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

1. This appeal is filed by the revenue against the order of Commissioner (Appeals)-V, Ahmedabad dated 9-9-1998 for the assessment year 1994-95.2. The first ground raised by the revenue in its appeal is pertaining to deletion of the disallowance of electric bill of residence of directors. The disallowance made by the assessing officer has been delete by the Commissioner (Appeals) with the observation that the perquisite value of free supply of electricity to the residence of the Director has been shown by him in his return of income.3. We have heard the learned representatives of the parties and perused the record. After considering the facts and the above observation of the Commissioner (Appeals), we are of the view that when the perquisite value of free supply of electricity has already considered in the hands of the Director, therefore, the disallowance in case of company i.e.employer is not justifiable. We find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has correctly deleted the impugned addi...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 30 2005 (TRI)

Keystone India (P) Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (2006)99TTJ(Ahd.)386

1. These cross-appeals by the assessee and Revenue respectively and cross-objection by the assessee are against the order of CIT(A) for the asst. yr. 1995-96. For the sake of convenience, they are being disposed of by this common order.2. We first take up the appeal of the assessee. The first ground against confirmation of addition of Rs. 1,40,755 made by the AO on account of agency commission is not pressed. The same is accordingly, rejected.3. The next dispute is with regard to confirming the disallowance of Rs. 66,190 on account of vehicle expenses and Rs. 66,440 on account of vehicle depreciation. These disallowances were made by the AO on account of personal use by the directors and their family members. The CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance. This issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Sayaji Iron & Engg. Co. v. CIT wherein it is held that in case of a private limited company there cannot be any personal use ...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 29 2005 (TRI)

Jt. Cit Special Range 9 Vs. Viral Laminates (P) Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (2006)5SOT160(Ahd.)

This is an appeal by the revenue, directed against the order of Commissioner of Appeals, XIII, Ahmedabad (Commissioner (Appeals) hereinafter referred to as) dated 14-12-1998.None appeared on behalf of the assessee and the appeal was heard ex parte.The only issue in the appeal as projected per the first ground of appeal is the levy of penalty under section 221(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act hereinafter) at Rs. 10,00,000 as under :- "I. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in law and facts in deleting the penalty of Rs. 10,00,000 levied under section 221 (1) of the Act." The facts in brief are that the return in the instant case was furnished under section 158BC of the Act on 11-3-1996 declaring an undisclosed income of Rs. 2,84,28,437 resultingin self-assessment tax of Rs. 1,96,15,621, which stood unpaid. Block assessment was completed on 30-11-1996 at an undisclosed income of Rs. 3,28,48,900. Notice under section 221 (1) of the Act was issued on 12-7-1996 requiring the as...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 27 2005 (TRI)

Lincoln Pharmaceuticals Vs. Dy. Cit

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (2006)5SOT599(Ahd.)

The appeal [ITA No. 2525/Ahd./98] by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) for assessment year 1995-96, At the time of hearing before us, the learned counsel for the assessee stated that the assessee has settled the dispute involved in this appeal under section 90(2) read with section 91 of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998 in respect of Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998 and prayed for permission to withdraw the appeal. Copy of certificate issued by the department in this respect has been placed on record. In view of above, we dismiss this appeal as withdrawn."The learned Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts and on circumstances of the case in directing to reduce the fair market value of the shares from Rs. 40 per share to Rs. 10 per share and thereby reducing the fair market value of the consideration received by the assessee-firm from Rs. 4,65,00,000 to Rs. 1,16,25,000." The facts of the case are that the assessee-a partnership firm was engaged in...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 08 2005 (TRI)

Rakshak Chemicals (P) Ltd., Vapi Vs. Ito, Tds, Valsad

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (2005)97TTJ(Ahd.)135

These 30 appeals are by six assessees arising out of the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) for assessment years 1995-96 to 1999-2000 confirming the levy of penalty under section 201 read with section 221 of the Income Tax Act for the failure of the assessees in not deducting tax at source as required under section 194A of the Act from the interest provided and claimed deduction in its profit and loss account.The facts giving rise to these appeals are that all these assessees negotiated with and took short term loan of Rs. 44,98,25,000 from Fairgrowth Financial Services Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as FFSL) somewhere in March/April, 1992. All these loans were secured and pledged of 3,50,000 shares of United Phosphorous Ltd. As per the terms of the loan, 20 per cent of the amount was to be repaid within 60 days and the balance within a period of 180 days. The security by way of pledging of these shares were not to be redeemed in the market and, the shares were not to be transferred ...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 06 2005 (TRI)

Bio Pharma Vs. Ito, Ward-2(3), Baroda

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (2006)5SOT478(Ahd.)

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) for assessment year 1996-97. The first three grounds of the assessee's appeal read as under: 1. The Commissioner (Appeals) erred in upholding the decision of the assessing officer to tax the short-term capital gain of Rs. 2,03,50,292 in the hands of the assessee.2. The Commissioner (Appeals) erred in holding that the assessing officer was justified in not accepting the order of the Civil Court cancelling the transaction of transfer of an industrial undertaking from the assessee to Century Pharmaceuticals Ltd. 3. The Commissioner (Appeals) erred in rejecting the alternative contention of the assessee that even if the court decree is to be disregarded since there was a transfer of the entire industrial undertaking by the assessee to Century Pharmaceuticals Ltd. even then the point would be covered in favour of the assessee by another Ahmedabad Tribunal decision in Industrial Machinery Associates v. C...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 05 2005 (TRI)

Jt. Cit, Spl. Range 7 Vs. Sirhind Steel Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (2005)279ITR128(Ahd.)

1. This is an appeal filed by the revenue and is directed against the order of CIT(A) dated 29^th January, 1999 for Asstt. Year 1996-97. 1. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 3,71,067/- made Under Section 35D.3. The assessee being a company is entitled to amortization of certain preliminary expenses as per the provisions of Section 35D of IT Act, 1961 (Act). It issued a public issue during the year under consideration of 11,40,000 shares and incurred expenditure of Rs. 47,12,438/- thereon and thus 1/10^th of such expenditure were claimed to be allowable under the provisions of Section 35D of the Act. Thus an expenditure of Rs. 4,71,244/- was claimed. According to the AO, assessee could claim such expenditure under Section 35D subject to upper limit of 1/10^th of 2 1/2% of capital employed or cost of project whatever is higher as per the provisions of Section 35D(3) of the Act.He further found that capital employed is defined in Explanation (b) of...

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 31 2005 (TRI)

Shree Chalthan Vibhag Khand Udyog Vs. Income Tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (2006)104TTJ(Ahd.)654

1. In this appeal, the assessee has objected to the order of the CIT(A)-V, Surat dt. 6th Oct., 2004 passed for asst. yr. 2003-04 wherein the assessee has listed 10 grounds of appeal. But at the time of hearing, the learned Counsel for the assessee, was fair enough to admit that these grounds are argumentative and, therefore, his arguments will be only with respect to the issue involved in this appeal and the issue, as was admitted by both the parties, was justification of raising of demand against the assessee by virtue of order under Sections 201 and 201(1A) of the Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "Act").3. The brief facts, as have been revealed from the records and are relevant for disposal of this appeal are as under: 3.1 The appellant is a co-operative society and carried out the business of manufacturing sugar from crushing sugarcane purchased from its member farmers.3.2 After the scrutiny of TDS return as filed by the appellant, the AO noticed that the society was not deduc...

Tag this Judgment!


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