Saturday, December 3, 2011

ITR (TRIB) Volume 12 : Part 6 (Issue dated : 05-12-2011) SUBJECT INDEX TO CASES REPORTED IN THIS PART


ITR'S TRIBUNAL TAX REPORTS (ITR (TRIB))

Volume 12 : Part 6 (Issue dated : 05-12-2011)

SUBJECT INDEX TO CASES REPORTED IN THIS PART

-->> Advance tax :- Levy of interest--Direction to allow consequential relief to assessee--Section 234D applicable from assessment year 2004-05--Not applicable to assessment year 2002-03--Income-tax Act, 1961, ss. 234B, 234C, 234D-- Sunit S. Shah v. Asst. CIT (Ahmedabad) . . . 596

-->> Business expenditure :- Disallowance--Expenditure on travelling and conveyance, telephone and mobile, vehicle maintenance, etc.--Disallowance at 25 per cent. for personal element --Assessee not making any effort to show such expenses excessive or not reasonable--Disallowance justified--Income-tax Act, 1961-- K. J. Prabhakar v. Asst. CIT (Chennai) . . . 603

-->> Depreciation :- Office premises--Wholly and exclusively for business purposes--Depreciation allowed in previous year--Direction to verify past records and allow depreciation--Income-tax Act, 1961-- Sunit S. Shah v. Asst. CIT (Ahmedabad) . . . 596

-->> Income :- Exemption--Gift from Hindu undivided family to its member--Hindu undivided family is a group of relatives--Section 56(2) applicable--Amount not assessable--Amount also exempt under section 10(2)--Income-tax Act, 1961, ss. 10(2), 56(2)-- Vineetkumar Raghavjibhai Bhalodia v. ITO (Rajkot) . . . 616

-->> Professional receipt:- Direction to allow enough time to furnish details--Matter remanded--Income-tax Act, 1961-- Sunit S. Shah v. Asst. CIT (Ahmedabad) . . . 596

-->> Penalty :- Assessee offering additional income during survey--No clear finding in penalty order whether addition on account of concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income--Not a case for imposition of penalty--Income-tax Act, 1961, s. 271(1)(c)-- Asst. CIT v. RMP Infotech P. Ltd. (Chennai) . . . 581

-->> Concealment of income:- Charitable purpose--Exemption--Equipment of trust being used by private hospital run by its trustees--Assessee not entitled to exemption under section 11--Levy of penalty justified--Income-tax Act, 1961, ss. 11, 13, 271(1)(c)-- Chinnammal ENT Medical Education and Research Foundation v. Asst. CIT (Exemption) (Chennai) . . . 589

-->> Rectification of mistake :- Mistake apparent from record--Reimbursement of excise duty--Amount neither debited in profit and loss account nor in computation of income --Disallowance of reimbursement of excise duty--Amounts to mistake apparent from record--Income-tax Act, 1961, ss. 143(3), 154-- Deputy CIT v. SIEL Ltd . (Delhi) . . . 577

-->> Revision :- Powers of Commissioner--Assessee providing services of storing blood stem cells for period of 21 years--Lump sum collection in nature of advance and not income against services--Assessing Officer following one of possible views--Assessment order just and proper--Revision not sustainable--Income-tax Act, 1961, s. 263-- Lifecell International P. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT (Chennai) . . . 611

-->> Search and seizure :- Block assessment--Undisclosed income--Meaning of--Income that would not have been disclosed--Additions permissible only on basis of evidence found in search--Disclosures made to Department in course of statement recorded under section 131 prior to search--Information as to bank accounts available with Department before search--Moneys in account cannot be treated as undisclosed income for assessment under Chapter XIV-B--Income-tax Act, 1961, ss. 144, 158B(b), 158BB(1), 158BC, 158BD-- Shibu Soren v. Asst. CIT (Delhi) . . . 540

-->> Unexplained investment :- Assessee claiming gift from father--No evidence to establish source of income of father--Addition proper--Income-tax Act, 1961, s. 69-- K. J. Prabhakar v. Asst. CIT (Chennai) . . . 603

-->> Words and phrases :- ”Relatives”-- Vineetkumar Raghavjibhai Bhalodia v. ITO (Rajkot) . . . 616



SECTIONWISE INDEX TO CASES REPORTED IN THIS PART

Income-tax Act, 1961 :

-->> S. 10(2) :- Income--Exemption--Gift from Hindu undivided family to its member--Hindu undivided family is a group of relatives--Section 56(2) applicable--Amount not assessable--Amount also exempt under section 10(2)-- Vineetkumar Raghavjibhai Bhalodia v. ITO (Rajkot) . . . 616

-->> S. 11 :- Penalty--Concealment of income--Charitable purpose--Exemption--Equipment of trust being used by private hospital run by its trustees--Assessee not entitled to exemption under section 11--Levy of penalty justified-- Chinnammal ENT Medical Education and Research Foundation v. Asst. CIT (Exemption) (Chennai) . . . 589

-->> S. 13 :- Penalty--Concealment of income--Charitable purpose--Exemption--Equipment of trust being used by private hospital run by its trustees--Assessee not entitled to exemption under section 11--Levy of penalty justified-- Chinnammal ENT Medical Education and Research Foundation v. Asst. CIT (Exemption) (Chennai) . . . 589

-->> S. 56(2) :- Income--Exemption--Gift from Hindu undivided family to its member--Hindu undivided family is a group of relatives--Section 56(2) applicable--Amount not assessable--Amount also exempt under section 10(2)-- Vineetkumar Raghavjibhai Bhalodia v. ITO (Rajkot) . . . 616

-->> S. 69 :- Unexplained investment--Assessee claiming gift from father--No evidence to establish source of income of father--Addition proper-- K. J. Prabhakar v. Asst. CIT (Chennai) . . . 603

-->> S. 143(3) :- Rectification of mistake--Mistake apparent from record--Reimbursement of excise duty--Amount neither debited in profit and loss account nor in computation of income--Disallowance of reimbursement of excise duty--Amounts to mistake apparent from record-- Deputy CIT v. SIEL Ltd. (Delhi) . . . 577

-->> S. 144 :- Search and seizure--Block assessment--Undisclosed income--Meaning of--Income that would not have been disclosed--Additions permissible only on basis of evidence found in search--Disclosures made to Department in course of statement recorded under section 131 prior to search--Information as to bank accounts available with Department before search--Moneys in account cannot be treated as undisclosed income for assessment under Chapter XIV-B-- Shibu Soren v. Asst. CIT (Delhi) . . . 540

-->> S. 154 :- Rectification of mistake--Mistake apparent from record--Reimbursement of excise duty--Amount neither debited in profit and loss account nor in computation of income--Disallowance of reimbursement of excise duty--Amounts to mistake apparent from record-- Deputy CIT v. SIEL Ltd. (Delhi) . . . 577

-->> S. 158B(b) :- Search and seizure--Block assessment--Undisclosed income--Meaning of--Income that would not have been disclosed--Additions permissible only on basis of evidence found in search--Disclosures made to Department in course of statement recorded under section 131 prior to search--Information as to bank accounts available with Department before search--Moneys in account cannot be treated as undisclosed income for assessment under Chapter XIV-B-- Shibu Soren v. Asst. CIT (Delhi) . . . 540

-->> S. 158BB(1) :- Search and seizure--Block assessment--Undisclosed income--Meaning of--Income that would not have been disclosed--Additions permissible only on basis of evidence found in search--Disclosures made to Department in course of statement recorded under section 131 prior to search--Information as to bank accounts available with Department before search--Moneys in account cannot be treated as undisclosed income for assessment under Chapter XIV-B-- Shibu Soren v. Asst. CIT (Delhi) . . . 540

-->> S. 158BC :- Search and seizure--Block assessment--Undisclosed income--Meaning of--Income that would not have been disclosed--Additions permissible only on basis of evidence found in search--Disclosures made to Department in course of statement recorded under section 131 prior to search--Information as to bank accounts available with Department before search--Moneys in account cannot be treated as undisclosed income for assessment under Chapter XIV-B-- Shibu Soren v. Asst. CIT (Delhi) . . . 540

-->> S. 158BD :- Search and seizure--Block assessment--Undisclosed income--Meaning of--Income that would not have been disclosed--Additions permissible only on basis of evidence found in search--Disclosures made to Department in course of statement recorded under section 131 prior to search--Information as to bank accounts available with Department before search--Moneys in account cannot be treated as undisclosed income for assessment under Chapter XIV-B-- Shibu Soren v. Asst. CIT (Delhi) . . . 540

-->> S. 234B :- Advance tax--Levy of interest--Direction to allow consequential relief to assessee--Section 234D applicable from assessment year 2004-05--Not applicable to assessment year 2002-03-- Sunit S. Shah v. Asst. CIT (Ahmedabad) . . . 596

-->> S. 234C :- Advance tax--Levy of interest--Direction to allow consequential relief to assessee--Section 234D applicable from assessment year 2004-05--Not applicable to assessment year 2002-03-- Sunit S. Shah v. Asst. CIT (Ahmedabad) . . . 596

-->> S. 234D :- Advance tax--Levy of interest--Direction to allow consequential relief to assessee--Section 234D applicable from assessment year 2004-05--Not applicable to assessment year 2002-03-- Sunit S. Shah v. Asst. CIT (Ahmedabad) . . . 596

-->> S. 263 :- Revision--Powers of Commissioner--Assessee providing services of storing blood stem cells for period of 21 years--Lump sum collection in nature of advance and not income against services--Assessing Officer following one of possible views--Assessment order just and proper--Revision not sustainable-- Lifecell International P. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT (Chennai) . . . 611

-->> S. 271(1)(c) :- Penalty--Assessee offering additional income during survey--No clear finding in penalty order whether addition on account of concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income--Not a case for imposition of penalty--Asst. CIT v. RMP Infotech P. Ltd. (Chennai) . . . 581

-->> Penalty:- Concealment of income--Charitable purpose--Exemption--Equipment of trust being used by private hospital run by its trustees--Assessee not entitled to exemption under section 11--Levy of penalty justified-- Chinnammal ENT Medical Education and Research Foundation v. Asst. CIT (Exemption) (Chennai) . . . 589

No comments:

Post a Comment