Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: income tax appellate tribunal itat chennai Page 10 of about 184 results (0.139 seconds)

Sep 19 2005 (TRI)

Sri Venkatesa Paper and Boards Vs. the Dy. Commissioner of I.T.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chennai

Reported in : (2006)99TTJ(Chennai)450

1. These appeals of the Assessee are directed against the common order of the C.I.T. (Appeals)-II, Coimbatore dated 10.6.2002. The relevant assessment years involved in these appeals are 1995-96 and 1996-97.2. The only common issue in these appeals of the Assessee is as to whether the Assessee is entitled for condonation of delay of 1447 and 1454 days for the assessment years 1995-96 and 1996-97 respectively on the advice of Assessee's Chartered Accountant. The briefly stated facts are that the assessments for the assessment years 1995-96 and 1996-97 were completed under Section 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961 vide orders dated 27.2.98 and 17.3.98 respectively. The assessment orders under Section 143(3) of the Act were received by the Assessee on 12.3.98 and 18.3.1998 for the assessment years 1995-96 and 1996-97 respectively.The Assessee preferred appeals before the C.I.T.(Appeals) against the orders of the Assessing Officer on 28.3.2002 resulting in delay of 1447 and 1454 days for the a...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 06 2005 (TRI)

Tamilnadu Chlorates Vs. the Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chennai

1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the CIT(Appeals) and relates to the assessment year 1996-97.2. Shri S.P. Chidambaram, learned Counsel for the assessee neatly identified the issues as under : 1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case assessee is entitled to claim deduction under Section 80HH and 80-I of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in respect of power generation? 2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case assessee did comply with the conditions contained under Section 80HH and 80-I in relation to the employment of the requisite number of employees? 3. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the provision of Section 80AB was property appreciated in regard to the consideration of income generated during the previous year from the wind mill for quantifying the deduction under Section 80HH and 80-I of the Act? 3. We have heard the rival submissions in the light of material placed before us and precedents relied upon. Assessee cl...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 06 2005 (TRI)

Tamil Nadu Chlorates Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chennai

Reported in : (2006)99TTJ(Chennai)80

1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the CIT(A) and relates to the asst. yr. 1996-97.2. Shri S.P. Chidambaram, learned Counsel for the assessee, neatly identified the issues as under : 1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, assessee is entitled to claim deduction under Sections 80HH and 80-I of the IT Act, 1961, in respect of power generation 2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, assessee did comply with the conditions contained under Sections 80HH and 80-I in relation to the employment of the requisite number of employees 3. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the provision of Section 80AB was properly appreciated in regard to the consideration of income generated during the previous year from the windmill for quantifying the deduction under Sections 80HH and 80-I of the Act 3. We have herd the rival submissions in the light of material placed before us and precedents relied upon. Assessee claimed deduction u...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 02 2005 (TRI)

R.P. Sarathy for Minor M. Pranuthi Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Ta ...

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chennai

Reported in : (2005)97TTJ(Chennai)801

1. These appeals of the assessee are directed against different orders of the CIT(A), Chennai. The relevant assessment years involved in these appeals are 1995-96 to 1999-2000. Since common issues are involved in these appeals, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience.2. The only common issue involved in all these appeals is as to whether the minor's income in view of the provisions of Section 64(1 A) of the IT Act can be clubbed in the hands of grandparents or uncle or aunty in case the parents are not alive. The assessee was born on 14th Dec., 1990 and her parents, father and mother died in a car accident on 28th June, 1993 and 5th July, 1993. At that point of time, the assessee was 2-1/2 years old child. Her grandfather, Sri R.P. Sarathy sent her to school in Bangalore under his guardianship.She inherited movable and immovable properties of the deceased parents and also from her grandmother as per the Hindu Succession...

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 22 2005 (TRI)

Joint Cit, Spl. Range 11 Vs. Tablets (India) Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chennai

Reported in : (2006)8SOT1(Chennai)

The appeal by revenue and cross objection by the assessee relate to assessment year 1993-94 and for the sake of convenience are disposed of by this consolidated order. The assessee is a pharmaceutical manufacturer.In the revenue's appeal the first ground raised relates to deletion of addition of Rs. 58,930 claimed to have been paid by the assessee to various Government officials to procure orders for supply of medicines. The assessing officer disallowed the claim on the ground that sales were made directly to Government as also the claim of commission was not supported by any evidence excepting the vouchers given by the field employees. In other grounds the revenue is aggrieved due deletion of other two additions by learned Commissioner (Appeals) in respect of commission amounting to Rs. 4,10,269 and Rs. 6,91,771 paid to M/s.Rahul Enterprises and M/s. Rahul Steels Industries. The assessing officer disallowed the above commission payments stating that the assessee was not able to produ...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 26 2005 (TRI)

Kay Arr Enterprises Vs. Joint Cit, Special Range Ii

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chennai

Reported in : (2005)97ITD291(Chennai)

These appeals are filed by different assessees. Since common issue is involved in these appeals and the assessees are of the same group, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. In these three appeals of the assessees, the relevant assessment year involved is 1996-97 pertaining to the financial year 1995-96.The only common issue in these appeals is that as to whether, in view of family arrangement as arrived at by the assessees to rearrange their shareholdings to avoid possible litigation among themselves will attract capital gain or not and whether it is a transfer or not.The briefly stated facts are that the assessees, along with their family members in the previous year ended 31-3-1996, had transferred shares owned by the assessees and family members in M/s. Lakshmi Mills Ltd. and Lakshmi Card Clothing Co. Ltd. to the family members of Shri G.K. Sundaram. The assessees in regard to these transfers had submitted as un...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 26 2005 (TRI)

Kay Arr Enterprises Vs. the Jt. Commissioner of I.T.,

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chennai

Reported in : (2005)279ITR163(Chennai)

1. These appeals are filed by different assessees. Since common issue is involved in these appeals and the assessees are of the same group, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. In these three appeals of the assessees, the relevant assessment year involved is 1996-96 pertaining to the financial year 1995-96.2. The only common issue in these appeals is that as to whether, in view of family arrangement as arrived at by the assessees to rearrange their share holdings to avoid possible litigation among themselves will attract capital gain or not and whether it is a transfer or not.3. The briefly stated facts are that the assessees, along with their family members in the previous year ended 31.3.1996 had transferred shares owned by the assessees and family members in M/s. Lakshmi Mills Ltd. and Lakshmi Card Clothing Co. Ltd. to the family members of Shri G.K. Sundaram. The assessees in regard to these transfers had submit...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 19 2005 (TRI)

Orchid Chemicals and Vs. the Jt. Commissioner of I.T.,

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chennai

Reported in : (2005)98TTJ(Chennai)32

1. The appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of the C.I.T.(Appeals)-IV, Chennai dated 8.9.2000. The relevant assessment year involved in this appeal is 1997-98.2. Before us, the assessee has raised 12 grounds in this appeal which are argumentative in nature and each of the grounds will be discussed in this order. The only issue raised before us for consideration in this appeal is as to whether the interest earned by the assessee in consequence of letters of credit for import of raw materials, margin money deposit set apart and earmarked by the Bankers from the overdraft account is essential part of the business activity or not. The briefly stated facts are that the assessee company engaged in the business of manufacture and export of Pharmaceuticals. The assessee claimed its business income as exempt under Section 10B of the I.T. Act, 1961. The assessment was completed under Section 143(3) of the Act by the Assessing Officer. The assessee claimed the interest income ear...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 13 2005 (TRI)

Dy. Cit, Special Range Ii Vs. Sundaram Finance Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chennai

Reported in : (2006)7SOT309(Chennai)

I.T.A. No. 1341/97 is filed by the revenue for the assessment year 1994-95 and I.T.A. Nos. 278/(Mad.)/95, 1257 and 2165 (Mad.)/96 and 804 (Mad.)/97 are filed by the assessee for the assessment years 1988-89, 1992-93, 1993-94 and 1994-95 respectively. Since common issue arises for consideration in all the appeals, we heard the same together and disposing of the same by this common order.Let us first take the assessee's appeal for the assessment year 1988-89 in I.T.A. No. 278 1 (Mad.)/95. The first issue is regarding deduction under section 32AB of the Income Tax Act. Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessing officer set off the carried forward unabsorbed investment allowance and thereafter rejected the claim of the assessee on the ground that there was no positive profit for grant of deduction under section 32AB.According to the learned counsel, deduction under section 32AB should be computed before setting off of carried forward unabsorbe...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 13 2005 (TRI)

Shri T.T. Narasimhan (Deceased) Vs. the Asst. Commissioner of Wealth

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chennai

Reported in : (2006)280ITR65(Chennai)

1. This appeal of the assessee relates to Assessment Year 1985-86.During the pendancy of this appeal, the assessee expired. The legal representatives of the deceased assessee filed an application to bring them on record and permit them to continue the appeal proceeding before this Tribunal. After hearing both the representatives of the assessee and the Revenue, we bring the legal representatives on record.2. The only issue arises for consideration is regarding reopening of the assessment after expiry of four years from the end of the Assessment Year merely for adopting another method for valuation of shares.3. Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that as per the direction of this Tribunal and CWT(Appeals), the shares were valued on yield basis adopting the value of per share at Rs. 230/-. However, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment and repeated the very same addition made in the order of assessment on the ground that a Reference Application ...

Tag this Judgment!


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