Friday, July 1, 2011

recent - Case Laws

Income Tax - 2009 - TMI - 34176 - HC

Concept of Mutuality – Taxability of Income received from its members – Co-operative Housing Society - High Court held that concept of mutuality can be tested considering the followings (1) Is there any commerciality involved. (2) From the moneys received are the services offered in the nature of profit sharing or privileges, advantages and conveniences. (3) Are the participants and contributors identifiable and belong to the same class in the case of cooperative housing society. (4) Do the members have the right to share in the surplus and do they have a right to deal with its surpluses. - Once these tests are satisfied, there can be no doubt that the principle of mutuality will apply to a cooperative Housing Society which has its predominant activity, the maintenance of the property of the society which includes its building or buildings and as long as there is no taint of commerciality, trade or business – Transfer fee received from its members it not taxable.

Income Tax - 2009 - TMI - 34175 - HC

Recognition as Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (SIRO) - The aims and objects of the society inter alia includes research in planetary science, astronomy – astrophysics, solar physics and allied subjects. Apart from that other objects are to popularize science among the general public of our country, to conduct short courses on science, astronomy, geography for students and teachers in schools, colleges and universities, to Publish news letters/magazines etc. - The Ministry of Science and Technology, accorded to the Petitioner, recognition as Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (SIRO) – But CBDT refused to recognize u/s 35(1)(ii) – HC after setting aside the order of CBDT ordered the Board to reconsider the matter afresh.

Central Excise - 2009 - TMI - 34174 - HC

Order of the Settlement Commission – request to pay in installments – Extra ordinary jurisdiction of High Court - it is clear that as the order of settlement commission is final and mode of recovery is also set out therein - can a writ court exercising extra ordinary jurisdiction, when the settlement commission has thought it fit not to grant any installment, grant installments assuming that under section 32F(8) there is an implied power to grant installments. This court ordinarily, ought not to interfere in the exercise of its extra ordinary jurisdiction with the order passed by the Settlement Commission - the language of section 32F(10) as it earlier stood read with section 32(7) provided for installments. That is not the case now. - the legislature has expressly done away with the power to make payment by installments. – HC refused to grant relief to pay in installments.

Income Tax - 2009 - TMI - 34173 - HC

PSU – approval of COD before filing an appeal before tribunal - ITAT refused to admit the appeal as no COD approval was obtained – In the present case, the impugned order reveals that the Tribunal has assumed powers which it does not have, for determining whether the appeal is to be admitted or not. The Tribunal has lost sight of the fact that, both the assessee and the Revenue, are statutorily vested with a right under the Act by virtue of section 253(1), 253(2) and 253(4) of the Act to file an appeal or cross-objections. Such right granted by the statute cannot be divested by the Tribunal on an erroneous assumption of powers arrogated to itself under a mistaken belief of law - The appeals filed by the assessee and the Revenue before the Tribunal stand restored to the file of the Tribunal for being heard and decided afresh on the merits in accordance with law.

Income Tax - 2009 - TMI - 34172 - HC

Rate of Depreciation – 100% depreciation on certain goods - The table includes energy saving device in the context and for the purpose of encouraging industries to adopt energy saving measures - While it was possible, in the context of encouraging industrial activity, to bring within the net of exemption, manufacture of products which may even be remotely considered as "paper" – but the same reasoning can not be adopted here - since the table indicates its intention to afford depreciation at the rates mentioned only to the specifically listed equipments - It is not even proved that a drier of the kind mentioned herein is an energy saving device – tribunal is not correct to allow 100% depreciation on fluid bed drier.

Income Tax - 2009 - TMI - 34171 - HC

How to calculate ten years for claiming exemption u/s 80HH – tribunal allowed deduction u/s 80HH for the 11th year on the ground that for the first year there was no specific previous year – held that tribunal is incorrect in allowing deduction for the 11th year – sales tax does not form part of total turnover for the purpose of calculation of deduction under section 80HHC - interest accrued but had not become due in the present assessment year is not assessable to tax for the assessee following the mercantile system of accounting

Income Tax - 2009 - TMI - 34170 - HC

Industrial Undertaking - The expression "manufacture" or "production" are different expressions and the word "production" has a wider meaning - the word "production" under section 10B considering similar expression in section 80IB will have to be given this wider meaning, considering that the expressions are not defined in the Act but the expressions are used in the same Act. The only difference between section 80-IB and section 10B is that section 10B applicable to a 100 per cent. export oriented unit, whereas section 80-IB can be in respect of any unit – held that the cutting, polishing and sizing granites amounted to either manufacturing or processing and accordingly, the assessee was entitled for deduction under section 10B of the Income-tax Act.

No comments:

Post a Comment