Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: income tax appellate tribunal itat delhi Page 8 of about 2,071 results (0.134 seconds)

Jan 31 2008 (TRI)

income Tax Officer Vs. Shree Vallabh Smarak Bhojanalaya

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in : (2008)114TTJ(Delhi)683

1. This miscellaneous application (MA) has been filed by the Revenue against the Order passed by the Tribunal on 22nd Sept., 2006 rendered in ITA No. 5301/Del/2003.Shri Sandeep Bhandhu, senior Departmental Representative represented for the Revenue (appellant) and Shri M.K. Madaan, Authorised Representative represented for the assessee (respondent).2. At the outset, we want to point out the certain facts leading to this MA as under: This Department filed this M.A. on 1st March, 2007. In the note of Authorised Representative, dt. 9th May, 2007 it was intimated that so many Departmental M.As including present MA are pending before Tribunal for want of record of appeal files. On this note, the Hon'ble Vice President directed that all the MAs filed by the Department be fixed for hearing within 30 days of filing. This MA was therefore fixed for hearing although the appeal file record was not available.3. Hence the facts as found from the copies of the Order of Tribunal rendered in the appe...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 31 2008 (TRI)

Cpr Capital Services Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in : (2008)115TTJ(Delhi)528

1. This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A) passed in Appeal No. DEL/CIT-A2/2002-03/161 dt. 7th March, 2003 on as many as 16 grounds.2. Ground Nos. 1 and 17 are general in nature hence no adjudication is required from our side.3. Ground Nos. 2 to 6 relating to various legal issues as stated in the grounds of appeal filed by the assessee were not pressed by the learned Authorised Representative for the assessee before us; accordingly, the same are rejected as not pressed.4. Ground No. 10 relates to confirmation of addition of Rs. 93,546 on account of commission earned by the assessee and ground No. 1 relates to confirmation of addition of Rs. 25,45.575 by the CIT(A) out of the total addition of Rs. 28,28,902 made by the AO as undisclosed income under Section 68 of the IT Act, 1961. Ground No. 12 relates to upholding of the addition of Rs. 9,75,000 by the CIT(A) relating to share application money and ground No. 13 pertains to confirmation of addition of Rs...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 31 2008 (TRI)

Vacuum Instruments Co. Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in : (2008)114TTJ(Delhi)930

1. This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the learned CIT(A)-XX New Delhi dt. 18th Aug., 2004 for the asst. yr.2001-02.2. Shri Madhu Sudan Sahni, advocate, chartered accountant appeared for the assessee whereas Dr. Devender Singh, Departmental Representative represented the Revenue. The learned CIT(A) was not justified to uphold the disallowance of PF and ESIC amounting to Rs. 3,66,842 and Rs. 72,015 respectively. The disallowance of PF and ESIC at Rs. 3,66,842 and Rs. 72,015 respectively is unfounded and uncalled for and extremely exorbitant.4. The assessee had claimed deductions in respect of payments of PF and ESIC. The AO has examined the details furnished by the assessee and found that following payments were made beyond the date and even after the grace period of 5 days allowed by the PF Department:-------------------------------------------------------------------------- Month Total amount of Due date of Date of employees as well payments payments as of...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 25 2008 (TRI)

National Agricultural Vs. J.C.i.T. S.R. and Acit

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in : (2008)304ITR303(Delhi)

1. All these three appeals are by the assessee. ITA 1915/Del/2002 is an appeal by the assessee against the Order dt. 28.3.2002 of CIT(A)-XXVI, New Delhi relating to the A.Y. 1996-97. ITA 1916/Del/2002 is an appeal by the assessee against the order dt. 28.3.2002 of CIT(A)-26, New Delhi relating to A.Y. 1997-98. ITA 2876/Del/03 is an appeal by the assessee against the order dt. 31.3.2003 of CIT(A)-26, New Delhi relating to the A.Y. 1998-99.2. Ground Nos. 1 to 5 in all the three appeals relate to the claim of deduction Under Section 80 P(2)(a)(iii) of the Act. These grounds were not pressed by the ld. counsel for the assessee and consequently the same are dismissed as not pressed.3. Ground Nos. 6 and 7 in ITA 1915/Del/02 and 1916/Del/02 and ground Nos. 6 to 9 in ITA 2876/Del/03 is with regard to the claim for deduction Under Section 80 HHC of the Act. At the time of hearing these grounds were not pressed by the ld. counsel by the assessee and consequently these grounds are dismissed as n...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 25 2008 (TRI)

Dcit, Spl. Range-i Vs. Jindal Photo Films Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

1. As there is a difference of opinion, the matter is being referred to the Hon'ble President of the I.T.A.T with a request that the following question may be referred to a Third Member or pass such order as the Hon'bie President may kindiy decide: Whether on me facts and circumstances of the case, the product (photographic apparatus and goods) being manufactured by the assessee did not come under 11th Scheduie of the Act and therefore, the assessee was eligible for deduction Under/Section 801/801A of the Act.1. The appeal has been directed by the revenue against the order of the CIT(A) dated 28.11.97 pertaining to assessment year 94-95.In the sole ground, the revenue has challenged the direction of the CIT(A) to allow deduction Under Section 80-1 of the Act despite the fact that the product being manufactured by the assessee came under the XI^th Schedule of the Act.2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the assessee company is engaged in the production and manufacture of photo co...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 25 2008 (TRI)

Jai UshIn Ltd. Vs. Dy. Cit

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in : (2008)117TTJ(Delhi)330

1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of learned Commissioner -III, New Delhi dated 24th Aug., 2006.2. In ground No. 1, the assessee has challenged the action of the learned CITtA) in confirming the action of the assessing officer in making adjustment of brought forward unabsorbed depreciation for assessment year 1999-2000 against income from house property and in not allowing the same to be carried forward to the subsequent years.3. The assessee in this case is a public limited company which is engaged in the business of manufacturing and sale of auto components. A return of income for the year under consideration was filed by it on 27-11- 2003 declaring a total income of Rs. 22,03,740. In the computation of total income filed along with the said return, income from business and income from house property was shown at Rs. 1,41,43,875 and Rs. 22,03,740 respectively and after adjusting carried forward business loss and unabsorbed depreciation relating to assessme...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 25 2008 (TRI)

Central Warehousing Corporation Vs. Cit-i

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order-dated 29.3.2005 of CIT-I, New Delhi for the Assessment year 2000-01. Though the assessee has raised several grounds of appeal, the only effective issue is whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, CIT was justified in setting aside the assessment made by the A.O., Under Section 263.2. The facts of the case in brief are that the assessee which was originally set up for warehousing activities diversified its activities in 1984 and started new lines of business of running of container freight station (CFS) and inland container depot (ICD). During the assessment proceedings, the A.O. noted that the assessee had treated the entire income arising from all the activities as exempt under Section 10(29) though under the provisions of said section, only the income derived from letting of godowns or warehousing for storage, processing or facilitating marketing of agricultural products, seeds, manure, fertilizer, agricu...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 22 2008 (TRI)

Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. Vs. Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in : (2008)299ITR175(Delhi)

1. This appeal by the taxpayer for the AY 2004-05 is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income-tax (CIT) partially setting aside assessment under Section 263 of IT. Act made vide order dated 30 March, 2005 with directions to the Assessing Officer for the fresh determination of Arm's Length Price of international transaction with AEs in the light of his directions.2. The facts of the case are that the taxpayer is a multinational company carrying on the business of manufacture and sale of pharmaceutical products as one of the leading concerns in India. It submitted its return disclosing income of Rs. 3,30,64,05,014 for Asstt.Year 2004-05 (F.A. 2003-04). The taxpayer admittedly carried international transactions worth Rs. 1435,03,46,825 to which provision of transfer pricing was attracted in the relevant year. This figure was disclosed in the audit report filed in Form 3CEB along with the Return.A copy of said report is available at page 1-14 of the paper book of the taxpayer ...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 18 2008 (TRI)

ito Vs. Shri R.K. Gupta

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

1. These two cross appeals and the cross objection by the assessee relate to the assessment year 1995-96. The assessee in these cases is an individual - resident. The appeals and the cross objection arise out of the assessment order passed under Section 147 read with 143(3) of the Income-tax Act (date note mentioned in the order).2. We may take up the cross objection filed by the assessee first since it goes to the root of the matter. The first ground therein is as under: The assessment made, without issue and service of notice under Section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is without jurisdiction and therefore the same is null and void ab initio and deserves to be annulled.3. The brief facts in relation to the aforesaid ground may be recorded.An assessment was originally made on the assessee under Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act by order passed on 26.3.1998. In this order, the total income of the assessee was determined at Rs. 2,64,815/-. On 22.3.2000, a notice was served on ...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 18 2008 (TRI)

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Khanna and Anndhanam

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in : (2008)115TTJ(Delhi)663

1. This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of the learned CIT(A)-XX, New Delhi, dt. 9th May, 2001.2. The only dispute in this appeal is whether the amount of Rs. 1,15,70,000 received by the assessee is a capital receipt or a revenue receipt chargeable to tax.3. The assessee herein is a firm of chartered accountants carrying on profession as such. During the year the assessee has shown a sum of Rs. 1,15,70,000 in the capital account of the partners. This payment is stated to be received from Deloitte Touche Tohmatu International (DTTI). It was stated that the receipt is not taxable in its hand as it is capital receipt. The AO held the same as revenue receipt.4. Facts of this case are that Deloittee Touche Tohmatsu International (DTTI) is said to be one of the leading accounting firms in the world established under Swiss Verein engaged in the practice of public accountancy in various countries. The Verein consists of members that are professional firms and are engaged i...

Tag this Judgment!


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