Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: income tax appellate tribunal itat mumbai Page 9 of about 2,049 results (0.152 seconds)

Jan 18 2008 (TRI)

Jayram Rajgopal Poduval Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order passed by the CIT(A) dt. 2nd July, 2004 in relation to asst. yr. 2001-02.2. The main grievance projected through the various grounds is against treating the residential status of the assessee as "resident and ordinarily resident" (hereinafter called ROR), which was claimed by him to be "resident but not ordinarily resident" (hereinafter called RNOR).3. Briefly stated the factual matrix of the case is that the assessee received interest on term fixed deposit from bank which was claimed as exempt under Section 10(15)(iv)(fa). The reason for exemption was stated to be the assessee's residential status as RNOR. The interest income accrued on term deposits in dollars deposited in the bank, which investment was at $ 52,250. On being called upon to prove the status as claimed, the assessee furnished a chart showing his stay in India in the preceding years as under:A.Y. 1992 93 15 days (9.12.91 to 11.12.91 & 19.3.92 to 31.3.92)A.Y. 19...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 11 2008 (TRI)

Pransukhlal and Sons Jewellers Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2008)116TTJ(Mum.)197

1. All these appeals belonging to same group have been heard together and are being disposed of by the common order for the sake of convenience.2. All these appeals are against the orders of the CIT(A) confirming the additions made by the AO in the block assessment proceedings. In the grounds of appeal, the assessees had challenged the additions made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A). It is also stated in the grounds that the block assessment orders are bad in law. However, in the course of assessment proceedings, the assessees in the cases of M/s Pransukhlal & Sons Jewellers and M/s Pransukhlal Brothers have raised the additional ground challenging the validity of proceedings initiated under Section 158BD of IT Act, 1961 (the Act). The additional ground being legal one was admitted by us.3. First we take up the additional ground raised by the assessee in the above two appeals. The brief facts relating to this issue are these. A search and seizure action was carried out under ...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 10 2008 (TRI)

The Income Tax Officer Vs. Ellora Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. These are six appeals by the department against the order of the CIT (A) relating to assessment years 1996-97 to 2001-02.2. In appeal for AY 1996-97 to 2000-01, the department is objecting in quashing the notice Under Section 148 for initiating proceedings Under Section 147 holding the reassessment proceedings Under Section 147 and the notice Under Section 148 issued by the Assessing Officer for all these assessment years as invalid and void ab-inito ignoring and without appreciating the evidences on record, the opportunity of being heard given to the assessee and the correct factual and legal position of the case. In appeal for AY 2001-02, the department is objecting in directing the Assessing Officer to assess the income from warehousing activity and handling charges as income from business without appreciating the fact that the assessee is in respect of fixed sum on monthly / annual basis from the parties for the use of go-down and further, the TDS certificates furnished by the ...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 09 2008 (TRI)

irb Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Ito

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2008)304ITR76(Mum.)

1. This is an assessee's appeal directed against the order of learned CIT(A)-VI, Mumbai dated 18.2.2005 for A.Y. 2001-02. 1a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the rejection made by the Assessing Officer of accounting policy in respect of completed contract method for infrastructure project under BOT scheme with Toll rights and thereby further erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,32,19,906/- made by the Assessing Officer to the income of the appellant on account of so called profit arise during the previous year from the said infrastructure project. i) The Assessing Officer has erred in treating the BOT contract with toll rights as building contract. ii) No accounting standard has been prescribed by the ICAI or CBDT Under Section 145. iii) The method of accounting adopted by the Assessing Officer taking toll collection and allowing deduction for amortisation of the value of cost of construction suffers from serious defects in...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 08 2008 (TRI)

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Abg Heavy Industries Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2008)115TTJ(Mum.)369

1. The present appeal was heard by the Bombay Bench of Tribunal on 8th Sept., 2006. The assessee moved a miscellaneous application and vide order dt. 22nd Nov., 2006 the grounds Nos. 1 to 4 had been recalled by the Tribunal to be decided de novo.2. The only issue to be decided by us is relevant to the ground Nos. 1 to 4 raised by the assessee for both the assessment years i.e., asst.yrs. 1997- 98 and 1998-99, which are as under: On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned C1T(A) has erred in: 1. directing the AO to deduct a sum of Rs 9,72,01,578 being deduction under Section 80-IA by holding that the assessee has carried on the business of developing, maintaining and operating any infrastructural facility while calculating the book profits under Section 115JA of the Act; 2. ignoring the statement recorded under Section 132(4) of Shri Saket Agarwal, managing director, wherein he admitted that no operation of infrastructural facility was carried on by the as...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 03 2008 (TRI)

Sumit Bhattacharya Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1 This is an appeal filed by the assessee and is directed against the order dated 15th December 2004 passed by the (sic)(A) in the matter of assessment under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 254 of the Income Tax Act, (sic) [hereinafter refered to as 'the Act'] for the assessment year 1998-99.The assessee has challenged the impugned order on the following grounds: 1. The learned Commissioner of income Tax (Appeals)- Mumbai XVI ["CIT(A)"] erred in treating the sum of Rs. 4,79,13,851, being the amount received on redemption of 'Stock Appreciation Rights [SARs] by the appellant during the financial year 1997-98 as taxable perquisites under the head 'Salaries'. i. Since the SARs were granted to the appellant by Procter & Gamble Inc USA ("parent company - grantor of SARs") on behalf of and by virtue of his being incumbent of Procter & Gamble India ("employer"), the same were taxable as perquisites, even though there was no employer-employee relationship between the appellant and the grantor o...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 03 2008 (TRI)

Sumit Bhatttacharya Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2008)113CTR(Mum.)633

1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee and is directed against the order dt. 15th Dec, 2004 passed by the CIT(A) in the matter of assessment under Section 143(3) r/w Section 254 of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act') for the asst. yr. 1998-99. The assessee has challenged the impugned order on the following grounds: 1. The learned CIT(A)-Mumbai XVI ["CIT(A)"] erred in treating the sum. Of Rs. 4,79,13,851, being amount received on redemption of 'Stock Appreciation Rights (SARs) by the appellant during the financial year 1997-98 as taxable perquisites under the head 'Salaries'. (i) Since the SARs were granted to the appellant by Procter & Gamble Inc USA ("parent company - grantor of SARs") on behalf of and by virtue of his being incumbent of Procter & Gamble India ("employer"), the same were taxable as perquisites, even though there was no employer-employee relationship between the appellant and the grantor of the SARs. (ii) The grant of SARs and its redemp...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 03 2008 (TRI)

Tata Infomedia Limited Vs. Asst. Commissioner of

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. All these appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by the common order for the sake of convenience.2. The only issue arising in the appeals of the assessee relates to the eligibility of deduction Under Section 80Q of the I.T. Act, 1961 (the Act). Briefly stated the facts are that the assessee was engaged in the business of printing and publication of yellow pages directory. It claimed deduction Under Section 80Q in respect of profits derived from such business. The claim of the assessee was denied by the AO on various grounds. Firstly, it was held by him that Tata Yellow pages directory cannot be said to be book for the reasons given in para 2.2 of his order which is extracted below: 2.2 The assessee's contention have been carefully considered. No doubt, the definition of 'book' is very wide but the 'Yellow pages' will within the definition of 'other Publication' of a similar nature by whatever name called as provided in Section 80-Q on which deduction is not avai...

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 31 2007 (TRI)

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Mds Switchgear Limited [Now

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. These are seven appeals by the department and seven Cross objections by the assessee. The appeals of the department and the assessee are disposed off year wise. We will take first the appeal of the department.2.1. In this appeal the department is objecting in holding by CIT(A) that the assessment being reopened Under Section 147 is on the basis of mere change of opinion and therefore is bad in law thereby quashing the assessment proceedings.2.2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the original assessment was completed on 29/03/93. Thereafter, assessment was reopened by issuing notice Under Section 148 on 29/03/01. Thereafter, assessment was completed Under Section 143(3) read with Section 147/148. The assessee raised legal ground before CIT(A) by which it was contended that since original assessment was completed on 29/03/93, issuance of notice Under Section 148 is bad in law as the assessment had been reopened beyond period of limitation prescribed by the law. A ground was a...

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 28 2007 (TRI)

Skyline Caterers (P.) Ltd. Vs. Ito

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. The only issue arising in this appeal relates to the disallowance of depreciation of Rs. 3,79,688.2. Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are these: The assessee is 100 per cent subsidiary of M/s. Radhakrishna Hospitality Services Ltd. (RHSL). It is engaged in the business of providing catering, house-keeping and allied services to Hindustan Lever Limited (HLL). At this stage, it may be mentioned that such catering business was earlier carried on by Mr. Rui Smith, proprietor of M/s. Skyline Caterers. The agreement was entered into between the assessee and Mr. Rui Smith on 16-8-2000 for taking over the catering contract of M/s. Skyline Caterers with HLL with effect from 1-9-2000 against a consideration of Rs. 27 lakhs. Mr. Rui Smith had been carrying on such business for the last 30 years. The amount so paid by the assessee was reflected in its Balance Sheet as Goodwill, on which depreciation at the rate 25 per cent was claimed treating the same as intangible asset. In the course ...

Tag this Judgment!


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