Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal allows appeal, dismisses profit estimation, directs AO on partner salary issue.</h1> <h3>Deokaran Das Rambilash Versus ITO, Ward – 4 Rourkela</h3> Deokaran Das Rambilash Versus ITO, Ward – 4 Rourkela - TMI Issues Involved:1. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal.2. Estimation of profit percentage.3. Allowance of interest on partner's capital, remuneration to partners, and depreciation.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Condonation of Delay in Filing the Appeal:The appeal was time-barred by 359 days. The assessee filed a condonation petition supported by an affidavit citing health issues and the COVID-19 lockdown as reasons for the delay. The Tribunal considered the petition and rival submissions, referring to the Supreme Court judgment in Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji (1987) 167 ITR 471, which states that there should be no presumption of deliberateness or negligence in case of delay. The Tribunal found the reasons sufficient and condoned the delay, admitting the appeal for hearing.2. Estimation of Profit Percentage:The assessee did not press Ground No. 1 of the appeal, which contested the CIT(A)'s direction to estimate profit at 3% instead of the 4% estimated by the AO. Consequently, this ground was dismissed as not pressed.3. Allowance of Interest on Partner's Capital, Remuneration to Partners, and Depreciation:The assessee firm was engaged in trading and had filed its return of income. The AO completed the assessment under section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, rejecting the books of account under section 145(3) and estimating net profit at 4% of the turnover. The AO also disallowed Rs. 1,20,000/- on account of remuneration to partners. The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal, reducing the net profit estimate to 3% but confirming the disallowance of salary to partners.The assessee contended that the salary paid to partners should be allowed as per law, citing similar cases where the Tribunal allowed such deductions. The Tribunal examined the provisions of Section 184(5), which disallows deductions for interest, salary, etc., to partners if the assessment is made under section 144 due to specific failures by the assessee. However, the Tribunal noted that the assessee had filed the return of income and partially complied with notices under sections 142(1) and 143(2).The Tribunal referred to its earlier decisions and concluded that disallowance under Section 184(5) should not apply in every case of assessment under section 144 but only where there is a complete failure as specified. The Tribunal found that the AO had not justified the invocation of Section 184(5) as there was partial compliance by the assessee. Therefore, the Tribunal directed the AO to allow the salary paid to partners, following the precedent set in similar cases.Conclusion:The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, dismissed the ground regarding the estimation of profit percentage as not pressed, and directed the AO to allow the salary paid to partners, thereby partly allowing the appeal. The decision was pronounced on 14/06/2021.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found