Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: income tax appellate tribunal itat mumbai Page 199 of about 2,049 results (0.131 seconds)

Jul 31 1982 (TRI)

First Income-tax Officer Vs. A.N. Mafatlal (Huf)

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1982)2ITD631(Mum.)

1. For the assessment year 1974-75 the assessment was completed in this case on 27-3-1975. The assessee had returned income of Rs. 3,67,187 as long-term capital gains relating to an immovable property. The ITO accepted this figure as returned and this formed part of the assessed income for the year. The assessment order and demand notice relating to the above assessment was served on the assessee on 18-8-1975 and apparently, the assessee accepted the assessment order and there was no appeal filed. On 3-10-1980 the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) with a request for condonation of the delay in filing the appeal and claiming to exclude the long-term capital gains originally included in the assessment. The request to condone the delay in filing the appeal was based, according to the assessee, on a news item in the Economic Times dated 19-3-1980 which reported a decision of the Bombay High Court decided on a writ petition in the case of Manutbhai A. Sheth v. N.D....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 27 1982 (TRI)

S.M. Muzumdar Vs. Ninth Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1983)3ITD33(Mum.)

1. This appeal by the assessee relates to the assessment year 1977-78, for which the relevant previous year ended on 31-3-1977.2. The only ground raised in the appeal is that the AAC erred in bringing to tax a sum of Rs. 15,000 as income from profession.3. The assessee was carrying on the profession of consulting engineer for over 40 years. Due to advancing age and also indifferent health, the assessee, on 1-4-1976, assigned his profession along with goodwill for Rs. 85,000 to one Shri A.D. Savardekar, who had been working with the assessee for some time. Out of the consideration of Rs. 85,000, Rs. 1,000 was in respect of furniture, fixtures and other articles. The balance amount of Rs. 84,000 was described as the price for the goodwill and name of the said business or profession, outstandings and other intangible rights in connection with the said business'. During the course of the assessment, the ITO bifurcated the sum of Rs. 84,000.He estimated the outstanding fees at Rs. 25,000 a...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 24 1982 (TRI)

Master Sameer S. Somaiya Vs. First Wealth-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1984)8ITD332(Mum.)

1. The assessee owns certain shares of Nirmal Commercial Ltd. through the Sameer S. Somaiya Trust. The assessee had valued the shares of this company at Rs. 5 starting with a value of fixed assets at Rs. 91,84,875 and deducting liabilities of Rs. 83,51,205 due to the shareholders against premises allotted. Under the break-up method, the break-up value of the share was computed at Rs. 8.65 and since there was no dividend declared on equity shares for six years and more, the market value was worked out at Rs. 6.50 being 75 per cent of the break-up value. Rounding it off, the assessee valued the assets at Rs. 5. The WTO revalued these assets. In so doing he did not accept the assessee's contention that a sum of Rs. 83,51,205 deposits from shareholders were refundable to them. The WTO worked out the break-up value at Rs. 475.20 and having regard to the non-declaration of dividends for six years fixed the market value of the shares at Rs. 356.40. The assessee, who is the owner of 270 share...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 20 1982 (TRI)

Pfizer Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1983)3ITD67(Mum.)

1. An original assessment was made in this case (sic), subsequently the ITO received some information from the Internal Audit section of the department leading to a belief that the income has escaped assessment.He, therefore, reopened the surtax assessment made for the year under appeal, under Section 8(b) of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 ('the Act'). The assessment was made under Section 6(2) of the Act, wherein the ITO reduced for the purposes of capital computation a proportionate amount under Rule 4 of the Second Schedule to the Surtax Act. He also reduced the capital by the amount paid out of the general reserve for the year.2. The assessee's appeal against the reassessment was both on the validity thereof and the validity of the notice served. The Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the assessee's claim. It is thus that the matter is in appeal before the Tribunal.3. The learned counsel for the assessee has pointed out at least three palpable defects in the reassessment : ...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 14 1982 (TRI)

Premier Tyres Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1984)8ITD693(Mum.)

1. This is an appeal by the assessee, a limited company, who has been treated as the agent of a non-resident company by name Uniroyal inc., USA. There is no dispute that the assessee is the agent. The point at despute is that the amount remitted by the Indian agent, Premier Tyres Ltd., to Uniroyal Inc. is not income accruing or arising in India. It is also not income which could be deemed to accrue or arise in India.Therefore, nothing is taxable.2. Premier Tyres Ltd., the Indian company, had entered into an agreement with the American company for technical services. There was an agreement subsisting between these two companies, dated 23-2-1962, but that agreement was terminated 10 years later. A new agreement was made out on 1-4-1974 between them which governs the assessment year we are concerned with. Article II 2-1 provides for the technical assistance to be given by the American company and it reads as follows: UNIROYAL will furnish or cause to be furnished to PREMIER detailed info...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 03 1982 (TRI)

Indian Card Clothing Co. Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1983)3ITD170(Mum.)

1. This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 6-2-1981 of the Commissioner (Appeals) relating to the assessment year 1977-78, the previous year of which ended 31-3-1977.3. The only other ground in this appeal relates to the disallowance of a sum of Rs. 6,000, The assessee is a limited company. During the year under consideration, it spent a sum of Rs. 39,629 as legal and professional charges paid to seven parties. The ITO allowed a sum of Rs. 33,029 relating to five parties as admissible deduction. He did not allow the remaining two items, namely, Rs. 1,000 paid to the Controller of Capital Issues for approval of the bonus share issue and Rs. 5,600 paid to the auditors for examining the application to the Controller of Capital Issues, in connection with the aforesaid bonus shares. The sum of these two items comes to Rs. 6,600 but the ITO disallowed a sum of Rs. 6,000 only, apparently due to inadvertence. The reason given by the ITO for the disallowance is that ...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 01 1982 (TRI)

income-tax Officer Vs. Mahalakshmi Glass Works (P.) Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1982)2ITD646(Mum.)

1. The revenue has appealed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) holding that the net sale proceeds of Rs. 1,41,218 on the import entitlements was not taxable in the assessment of the assessee.2. The assessee is a manufacturer and exporter of glassware. For the year under consideration, it received cash assistance of Rs. 1,00,848, customs drawback of Rs. 34,123 and Rs. 1,41,218 by way of sale of import entitlements, in respect of the export of glassware carried on by it. The ITO in the income-tax proceedings has taxed the amount of Rs. 1,34,971, being the aggregate of cash assistance and the customs drawback. About this there is no dispute. Even the sale proceeds of import entitlements of Rs. 1,41,218 were initially offered by the assessee for the assessment as taxable profits and they were taxed accordingly. Only during the pendency of the appeal by the assessee before the Commissioner (Appeals), the assessee objected to the taxing of this amount. For the reasons recorded ...

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 30 1982 (TRI)

income-tax Officer Vs. Major Manohar R. Hemmadi

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1983)3ITD244(Mum.)

1. The appeal and the cross-objection arises from the order of the AAC in his Appeal No. THn. 7/79-80 dated 5-3-1980, disposing of an appeal filed by the assessee, for the assessment year 1979-80. The assessee is an individual. He was employed in National Machinery Manufacturers Ltd. He left that company on 1-1-1979. He received from the superannuation fund Rs. 25,823. The ITO brought this amount to tax. On appeal, the AAC deleted the addition. He, however, held that the amount received should be taxed under the Fourth Schedule, Part B, at the rates specified in Rule 6 therein, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act').2. Against this finding, both the assessee and the department are on appeal before us. In order to understand the issues involved in this appeal, we would give a few facts.3. The assessee joined the company sometimes in 1969. As per the service agreement, the assessee would be entitled to participate in the company's provident fund and gratuity schemes. The standard emplo...

Tag this Judgment!

May 27 1982 (TRI)

Albright and Wilson Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1984)8ITD57(Mum.)

1. These two appeals, one each by the assessee and the ITO, relate to the assessee's assessment for the assessment year 1967-68. The assessee is a non-resident company. It filed its returns of income for the first time for the assessment year 1971-72, inter alia, disclosing a loss of Rs. 7,272. The assessment was completed on 1-7-1975 determining the total income at Rs. 33,120. Return for the assessment year 1972-73 was filed on 10-2-1976 disclosing dividend income on 21,000 equity shares held by it in an Indian company by the name Albright Morarji & Pandit Ltd. During the course of proceedings for the assessment year 1972-73, the ITO came to learn that the assessee-company has sold its technical know-how relating to its designs, drawings, specifications, etc., and also certain patents to the Indian company under an agreement dated 10-2-1966 and that in consideration thereof the Indian company had allotted 21,000 equity shares of Rs. 50 each out of its initial issue of shares to t...

Tag this Judgment!

May 25 1982 (TRI)

Sir Hirji Cawasji Jehangir Vs. First Gift-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1983)3ITD132(Mum.)

1. This appeal is by the assessee. It is against the order of the Commissioner dated 12-1-1981 passed under Section 24(2) of the Gift-tax Act, 1958 ('the Act'). By his impugned order, the Commissioner has cancelled the order of the assessment made by the GTO on 20-3-1979 under Section 15(1) of the Act. The said assessment was completed by the GTO, after accepting the assessee's return filed on 14-5-1970 for the assessment year 1970-71, disclosing a gift of Rs. 40,000 which the assessee had given to one Sri J.M. Malhotra on 24-12-1969.2. In this connection, the GTO came to know that the assessee had sold his two-third interest (one-third each to two trusts) in an immovable property 'Ready Money House', Bombay, on 20-3-1969 for Rs. 7,00,000 and that actual value of his aforesaid interest was much more. Taking the view that the assessee was liable to be taxed on the basis of a 'deemed gift' in respect of the said sale, the GTO issued a notice under Section 16(1) of the Act on 29-9-1974, ...

Tag this Judgment!


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