Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: income tax appellate tribunal itat mumbai Page 11 of about 2,049 results (0.168 seconds)

Nov 16 2007 (TRI)

Voltas Ltd. Vs. Asst. Cwt

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2008)301ITR217(Mum.)

1. In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 255 of the IT Act, the Hon'ble President has constituted this Special Bench to decide upon the following issues.: 1. Whether the value of the immovable asset owned by an assessee is includible in the net wealth of the owner/assessee or the lessee in terms of Section 4(8)(b) of the Wealth Tax Act read with Section 269UA(f) of the IT Act where the term of the lease is (i) exceeding 12 months but less than 12 years; and/ or (ii) exceeding 12 years. 2. Whether the words in parenthesis in Section 4(8)(b) of the W.T. Act "(excluding any rights by way of lease from month to month or for a period not exceeding one year)" in fact relate to the nature of the lease agreement, which will not qualify for applying the provisions of Section 4(8)(b) of the W.T. Act. 3. Whether lease agreement for a period for less than one year with an extension clause which is normally an agreement of Leave and Licence, Will not be covered by Section 4(8)(b) of the W...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 16 2007 (TRI)

Mustang Mouldings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. Since common issues involved in all these appeals, the same are being disposed off by the common order for the sake of convenience. The only issue arising from these appeals for our consideration relates to the disallowance of director's training expenses pertaining to the years under consideration. At this stage, it may be stated that in appeals pertaining to assessment years 1999-2000 and 2000-01, the assessee has also raised ground challenging the reopening of the assessment Under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act), but no arguments have been advanced in respect of such ground. Therefore, we shall deal with the sole ground relating to disallowance of director's training expenses.2. The assessee is a private limited company promoted by the family members headed by Shri Kanshi Sitaram Deora. In the assessment year 2001-02 the assessee had debited an amount of Rs. 24,13,356/- under the head director's training expenses. In the course of assessment proceedings, the as...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 14 2007 (TRI)

First Global Stockbroking (P) Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2008)115TTJ(Mum.)173

1. The assessee and Revenue are in cross appeals against the order of learned CIT(A), Central-II, Mumbai dt. 30th March, 2004 passed for the block period starting from 1st April, 1990 and ending on 23rd March, 2001. According to the assessee the assessment in this case is a classic example of fatuous exercise of unbridled power at the hand of executives to tame the media and its supporters, who otherwise have been insulated under the Constitution from interfering in their freedom at the hands of the executives. It was pointed out that assessment in this case is result of sting operation carried out by Tehalka.com of whom the assessee and other sister concerns were having shares at the relevant time, exhibiting irregularities in Defence Arms Deal. Before taking cognizance of the specific grievance and arguments of both the sides in seriatim let us take note of the brief facts.2. Both the learned Revenue authorities have narrated the facts in detail as their orders are running into 264 ...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 07 2007 (TRI)

ito Vs. Mahyco Vegetable Seeds Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. The Department has filed the present appeal against the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) on 07.06.2004 on the following grounds: On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing the claim of 'unabsorbed loss on capital expenditure on Scientific research & development of the demerged company and treating the same as accumulated loss/depreciation loss as per provisions of Section 32(2) and hence to be treated at par for the purpose as contemplated Under Section 71A(4) of the I-T Act 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that M/s. Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds Co. Ltd. (de-merged company) had a Vegetable Seeds Division, which was separated by way of de-merger duly approved by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court vide its order dated 20.09.2000 w.e.f.01.04.2000. As a result of the aforesaid de-merger, the resulting company, i.e., M/s. Mahyco Vegetable Seeds Ltd. (assessee) was created.Before de-merger, there was unabsorbed depreciation amo...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 31 2007 (TRI)

Bombay Gymkhana Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2008)115TTJ(Mum.)639

1. This is an assessee's appeal directed against the order of the learned CIT(A)-I, Mumbai, dt. 21st Nov., 2006 for the asst. yr.2003-04. The following grounds/sub-grounds of appeal are independent of and without prejudice to one another: 1. The CIT(A) erred in confirming that the long-term and short-term capital gains aggregating Rs. 3,23,83,744 on the sale of units of debt-oriented mutual funds are taxable under the head 'Business income', as against the appellant's contention that indexed long-term gains of Rs. 1,04,97,182 (Rs. 2,08,50,215 less brought forward capital loss of Rs. 1,03,53,033) arc taxable under the head 'Long-term capital gains' and gains of Rs. 2,20,201 taxable under the head 'Short-term capital gain'. 1.1 The CIT(A) further erred in holding that above referred capital gains are taxable as business income because concept of mutuality is not applicable, having failed to appreciate that appellants have offered such gains to tax on the ground that such gains are not c...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 25 2007 (TRI)

Shah Originals Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2007)112CTR(Mum.)754

1. These appeals are filed by the assessee for the asst. yrs. 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04 and 2004-05. The Department has also filed appeal for the asst. yr. 2001-02. These appeals arise out of the respective orders of the CIT(A) for those years. Since common issues are involved in all these appeals, the same have been consolidated and are being disposed of by this order.2. The assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of manufacture and export of readymade garments. The manufacturing activity of the garments is carried on at the industrial undertaking of the assessee at Malvia Nagar, Jaipur, and the export of the same is done from the head-office at Jogeshwari, Mumbai. The issues under appeal may broadly be divided into two categories viz. those related to allowance of deduction under Section 80HH (sic-Section 80HHC) of the Act and the others in respect of allowance of deduction under Section 80-IB.3. The disallowance under Section 80HHC of the Act may again be su...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 19 2007 (TRI)

income Tax Officer Vs. Panchvati Developers

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2008)115TTJ(Mum.)139

1. This is a Revenue's appeal directed against the order of learned CIT(A)-XV, Mumbai dt. 31st July, 2003 for asst. yr. 2001-02.2. The Revenue has raised only one effective ground, which reads as under: 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, learned CIT(A) erred in directing the advertisement expenditure without appreciating that the same was incurred in respect of ongoing projects and are not relatable to the completed projects. 1b. While doing so, learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the said expenditure was required to be capitalized and could not be allowed as a deduction even going by the assessee's method of accounting.3. Briefly stated, the facts are that the assessee is a builder and developer. The assessee firm has shown income of Rs. 16.08 lakhs from its completed project of Panchavati Gardens. It is noted by the AO from the P&L a/c of the assessee that an amount of Rs. 14,27,377 has been debited to the P&L a/c towards advertisement and exhibit...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 17 2007 (TRI)

Assistant Commissioner of Income Vs. Cannon Steels (P) Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2007)110TTJ(Mum.)942

1. This is an appeal by the Department against the order of the CIT(A) relating to asst. yr. 1989-90. 1. (i) The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in cancelling the assessment holding it to be barred by limitation. (ii) The learned CIT(A) has erroneously adjudicated on the fate of the return which was not the subject-matter of appeal. The appeal pertains to the assessment completed under Section 147 on the return filed on 1st May, 1992. (iii) Having not invalidated the reopening proceedings, the assessment framed under Section 147 could not have been cancelled. (iv) Consequent to the return being held as non est, the proceedings emanating from that return do not subsist and the concept of limitation under Section 153(1) in respect of such non est return will not apply. (v) The learned CIT(A) ignored the documents on record particularly the AO's letter dt. 2nd March, 1992 and the assessee's reply dt. 16th March, 1992 filed along with the return stating clearly that the impug...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 11 2007 (TRI)

The Cotton Textiles Export Vs. the Ito (Exemptions), Range 1(1)

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. These are the cross appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue, pertaining to assessment year 2001-02. Both the appeals have been heard together and are being disposed off by the common order for the sake of convenience.2. The first and main issue arising from the appeal of the assessee is whether the Assessing Officer was justified in denying the claim of the assessee for accumulation of its income Under Section 11(2) of Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act).3. Briefly stated, the facts are that the assessee is a body established as a non-profit making organisation for the promotion and regulation of export of cotton textiles and incorporated as a company Under Section 25 of the Companies Act. The activities of the assessee, admittedly, are entitled to the benefit of Section 11 of the Act. It filed its income-tax return for the year under consideration on 24^th October, 2001, declaring nil income after claiming exemption Under Section 11 of the Act. The return was accompanied b...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 11 2007 (TRI)

Harsha Achyut Bhogle Vs. Income Tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2008)114TTJ(Mum.)266

1. The present bunch of appeals has been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the CIT(A) for asst. yrs. 1996-97, 1998-99, 1999-2000 and 2001-02. Major issues involved in all the appeals are common. We therefore find it convenient to dispose of the present bunch of appeals by a consolidated order.Ground Nos. 1 to 3 taken in the appeals for asst. yrs. 1996-97 and 1998-99 are identical except for the difference in figures. In other two appeals, namely appeals for asst. yrs. 1999-2000 and 2001-02, identical issue has been raised in first two grounds of appeal. Ground Nos. 1 to 3 taken by the assessee in his appeal for asst. yrs. 1996-97 read as under: 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned ITO erred in concluding that the appellant is not an actor within the meaning of Section 80RR of the IT Act and hence not entitled to deduction claimed under Section 80RR of Rs. 6,87,198 by the appellant and learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the same. 2. The lear...

Tag this Judgment!


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