Advanced Search options
Showing 4201 to 4300 of 166022 Records
4201...1966 (7) TMI 18 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
CHANDRASEKARA BHARATHI WEAV. MILLS Versus ASSTT. COLLR. OF C. EX., SIVAKASI
Partnership - Liability to duty - Manufacturer ......
........... the statement of the Department is that Gopalakrishna and Company and Balaji and Company should be taken to run the sum total of powerlooms possessed by both the companies. In view of the decision of the Supreme Court, this contention cannot be accepted. The two demand notices are not, therefore, according to law, and the consequential order of detention cannot also be supported. 8. In the result, Writ Petition No. 734/64 for the issue of a writ of certiorari is allowed and the order of detention is quashed. In view of the order in Writ Petition 734/64, no orders are necessary in Writ Petition No. 735 of 1964. Writ Petition 3180/65 is allowed. The petitioner in Writ Petition No. 3181/65 is the purchaser of 42 looms from Janakiram Mills Limited, and prays that the Collector may be directed to issue L-4 licence in their favour. The petitioner will apply to the authorities for grant of the licence, and that application will be dealt with according to law. No order as to costs.
4202...1966 (7) TMI 19 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
MAHADEO (PRASAD) SARAF Versus SK. SRIVASTAVA
Natural Justice - Cross-examination ......
........... nd of denial of natural justice to the petitioner. 24.It was also contended before me that the respondent No. 1 was wrong in confiscating the 15 tons of dunnage wood covered by permission along with the excess quantity of goods seized. This point in this form was not taken in the grounds. I do not therefore decide the point. 25.In the view that I take, I made the Rule absolute and quash the impugned order. Let a Writ of Certiorari accordingly issue. Since I quash the order on account of procedural defect, I grant liberty to respondent Customs authorities to proceed afresh from the stage reached after the enquiry held on January 6, 1961. They must call such witnesses as the petitioner desires to examine and also give him facilities to cross-examine such persons, whose statements are intended to be used against him. The petitioner will also be at liberty to take such points as he intends to take before the Customs authorities, including the points I have left open in this case.
4203...1966 (7) TMI 2 - MYSORE High Court
Keshav Laxman Sangoram Versus State Of Mysore.
Notice was issued to the assessee on July 15, 1958, u/s 18(2) after the expiry of the relevant financial year, but the assessee did, however, produce his return before the assessment was made - notice served on the assessee on July 31, 1958, u/s 18(2 ......
4204...1966 (7) TMI 3 - MYSORE High Court
Commissioner of Income-Tax, Mysore Versus Hadige Rangappa Setty.
On Dec. 8, 1958, a partition deed was executed, under which properties were allotted to assessee, his wife and his three sons. One of the properties so allotted was the shop in which assessee conducted his business - assessment of the assessee in the ......
4205...1966 (7) TMI 39 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PP. Looke Versus NJ. Mathew
Penalty for false statements ......
........... se be defeated that mens rea may, by necessary implication, be excluded from a statute. The nature of the mens rea that would be implied in a statute creating an offence depends on the object of the Act and the provisions thereof. The learned judges would observe that even if the legislation in question is one to eradicate the social evil, the foundation of penal responsibility attaching itself to the crime cannot change and the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence is that without mens rea or the guilty mind being proved against the accused, he cannot be visited with a punishment. So also in the present case, the burden was on the complainant to show that the alleged statement in the balance-sheet was made with the dishonest intention of making a wrongful gain or to deceive the public. No such element has evidently been proved in the case. In the circumstances, the accused have rightly been acquitted. The order of acquittal is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed.
4206...1966 (7) TMI 4 - MYSORE High Court
Vijayananda Gajapathi Raju Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax, Mysore.
Refusal to grant registration to the assessee-firm ......
........... ay of the month would be the date of retirement since other difficulties and complications might have arisen if their exit from the partnership was to be on the very day on which a net profit of Rs. 1,00,000 had been earned. However that may be, the fact that under the agreement it was agreed that the five brothers could take a half share in the aggregate profits is itself sufficient consideration for the agreement that the date of their retirement from the partnership should be postponed until the last day of the month. In our opinion, there was a real and legal partnership entered into on April 28, 1960, between the five brothers and Achaiah Chetty and his son, Parthasarathy. Our answer to the question before us should, therefore, be in favour of the assessee and our answer is that the refusal of the registation of the assessee-firm for the assessment year 1961-62 was not justified in law. The assessee will be entitled to the costs of this reference. Advocate s fee Rs. 250.
4207...1966 (7) TMI 40 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Pothen Versus Hindustan Trading Corporation (P.) Ltd.
Directors - Power of ......
........... d his friend were no longer prepared to risk their property in the company. Their property in the company consists of the shares held by them. If the averments in the petition were true, these shares would be worth very little, and, in any event, not more than their face value. Members who were opposed to the winding up offered to buy the shares of both the petitioner and his friend at twice their face value. This offer was rejected by the petitioner who demanded three times the face value, accompanying the demand with a counter offer to buy the shares of the members who were opposed to the winding up at the same price. This winding up petition, it seems fairly obvious, is an abuse of the process of the court, being designed for the purpose of putting pressure, so as to gain control over the affairs of the company. I dismiss the petition with costs. This, of course, means that the injunction granted in application No. 507 of 1965 is no longer in force. Advocate s fee Rs. 250.
4208...1966 (7) TMI 41 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Great Indian Steam Navigation Co. Ltd. Versus State
Accounts – Annual accounts and balance sheet ......
........... of the accounts by the auditors but the question of audit by auditors will come up after the directors have prepared the balance-sheet. Then again the papers up to June, 1957, were seized by the police. It is nobody s case that the business of the company is not being carried on. In any event, the company is still on the register of the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies and, so long as it is there, the duty of placing the balance-sheet and the profit and loss account before the annual general meeting and of filing a copy thereof with the Registrar will be there. It is a finding of the learned Magistrate that the annual general meetings were held during the years 1957 to 1961 and that the annual returns of the company were also filed duly with the Registrar during the concerned years. In these circumstances, I cannot find that there was a good case for giving relief to the directors from their liability in the matter. In the result, all these eighteen rules stand discharged.
4209...1966 (7) TMI 49 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Mica Export Promotion Council Versus GCL. Joneja
Ascertainment of directors retiring by rotation and filling up vacancies ......
........... irmed by Sisir Ranjan Sengupta on the 9th June, 1966, an objection had been taken in paragraph 3 with regard to the maintainability of the action by the company. Mr. A. K. Sen, learned counsel who has appeared on behalf of Sisir Ranjan Sengupta, stated that as no application has been made for striking out the name of the company, he was unable to press the said objection and the said objection was not pressed. In my view there cannot be any dispute with regard to the principle laid down in the case of Walker rsquo s case (supra), but the principle laid down therein and the passage at page 61 of the said report, relied on by the counsel for the petitioners which I have already quoted, have no application to the facts and circumstances of the present case. For reasons hereinbefore stated I am of the opinion that this application has no merits and must be dismissed. I, therefore, dismiss this application with costs and I direct that all ad interim orders made will stand vacated.
4210...1966 (7) TMI 5 - MADRAS High Court
Sri Sadaya Pillai Trust Versus Agricultural Income-Tax Officer, Kumbakonam.
Income from trust property - Charitable Purpose - exemption u/s 4(b) ......
........... particular year and during the management of any turn trustee, there was surplus over expenditure, such surplus might be appropriated for himself by such turn trustee. That provision relating to the surplus does not in any way affect or detract from the entirety of the properties having been endowed and held as trust. As held by the Supreme Court in Dasaratharami Reddi v. Subba Rao, where the dedication is complete, a trust in favour of public religious or charitable purpose is created. The test is the extent of dedication, and for this purpose, the whole deed will have to be read, as was pointed out in Vadivelu v. Rajabadar. Reading the document in its entirety and having regard to the substance and extent of dedication, there is no doubt that this was a case of endowment of the entirety of the properties and the same as a whole being held as trust. The properties, therefore, fall within the first limb of section 4. The petition is allowed with costs. Counsel s fee Rs. 100.
4211...1966 (7) TMI 57 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Madan Gopal Dey Versus State
Officer who is in default – Meaning of, Company – Incorporation of, Accounts – Annual accounts and balance sheet ......
........... y is not wound up, nothing stood in the way of the company and its directors holding a meeting or in preparing blank balance-sheet and profit and loss account and in submitting the annual returns. The fact that the company did not function is, in my view, no excuse, though it might extenuate the offence to some extent. The petitioners in Criminal Revision Cases Nos. 637-640 are the promoters and first directors of the company. It was for them to take the necessary actions, for failure to take which the prosecutions against them were started. Nobody else comes into the. picture regarding these matters. If they were required to to take those actions and if they have defaulted to take the same, certainly they are officers in default , as defined in the Companies Act. In view of this and in view of what I have stated earlier, I am of the view that the petitioners in these seven cases have been rightly convicted. The rules must accordingly be discharged. It is ordered accordingly.
4212...1966 (7) TMI 58 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
PK. Haji Gulam Mohideen Sahib Versus Commercial Tax Officer, Salem and Others
........... ll the powers a civil court has under the Code. The decision of the Supreme Court does not affect the correctness of the view of the Bombay High Court on the interpretation of section 13 of the Bombay City Land Revenue Act of 1876 corresponding to section 48 of the Madras Revenue Recovery Act (11 of 1864). Thus the Commercial Tax Officer has no jurisdiction to invoke the powers of arrest under section 48 of the Revenue Recovery Act before satisfying the condition precedent that the arrears of tax demanded from the petitioner cannot be liquidated by the sale of his property. It is no doubt open to the Commercial Tax Officer to exercise the powers of arrest conferred under section 48 of the Revenue Recovery Act after exhausting his remedies against the properties of the petitioner. For the foregoing reasons, the order of detention of the petitioner in a civil jail is set aside. The writ petition is allowed. We make no order as to costs. His bond is cancelled. Petition allowed.
4213...1966 (7) TMI 59 - MYSORE HIGH COURT
The State of Mysore Versus Gayathri Trading Co. and Another
........... hear it on the ground that the persons who had presented the revision petitions had invoked the suo motu power of the Commissioner. It is clear that under the amended provisions of the Act, the only revisional jurisdiction which is confided to the Commissioner is that created by section 22-A in the exercise of which he could revise orders made by officers subordinate to him only if they are prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. That revisional jurisdiction was unavailable in the cases before us in which the orders far from being prejudicial to the interests of the revenue, promoted that interest. That being so, the retransmission of the records to the Commissioner was beyond the competence of the Appellate Tribunal. We set aside the orders of the Appellate Tribunal by which there was such retransmission and we direct the Appellate Tribunal to hear and dispose of what have now become appeals before it on their merits and according to law. No costs. Ordered accordingly.
4214...1966 (7) TMI 6 - MADRAS High Court
A Kuppiah Mudaliar Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax, Madras.
Partition - entries in the books of account of the family - allotment of the promissory notes to the son, they being a component of the capital - Tribunal is justified in holding that there was no effective partition on July 24, 1954, with reference ......
4215...1966 (7) TMI 60 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Haji JA Kareem Sait Versus Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Mettupalayam
........... . Is this principle offended in this case? In answering this question, we are inclined to think that we should look at the substance and not the form of the matter. Section 16 of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959, substantially re-enacted, as we already mentioned, the provisions under the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1939, relating to assessment of escaped turnover and the period of limitation for exercising that power. This is not, therefore, a case where the law, as re-enacted by the local Legislature, is substantially different from what it was when the Central Legislature enacted by reference to it. The crux of the matter is that the subject-matter of section 16 of the Madras 1959 Act is not something which the Parliament had not applied its mind to when it enacted section 9(3). On that view, we are not persuaded to hold that subsection (3) of section 9 is unconstitutional. The petitions are dismissed with costs one set. Counsel s fees Rs. 250. Petitions dismissed.
4216...1966 (7) TMI 61 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Champalal Versus Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, Eastern Division, Nagpur and 3 Others
........... ing timber in the forest for the cutting of which the contract was given to the petitioner is not goods within the definition of goods contained in section 2(13) of Sales Tax Act which defines goods to mean all kinds of movable property . We are left to refer to the General Clauses Act for finding out the meaning of the words movable property which clearly does not include anything attached to the earth. Standing trees are very much attached to the earth and, therefore, they cannot be regarded as movable property. It is not necessary to elaborate the discussion inasmuch as in Husenali Adamji and Co. v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, M.P. 1956 7 S.T.C. 88. , this Court has expressly decided so. In the result, we allow the application and direct the Sales Tax Authorities to grant the set-off for the amount of tax recovered by the Government at the time of the contract. The petitioner will get his costs from the respondents. The point of penalty is not pressed. Application allowed.
4217...1966 (7) TMI 62 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Hirjee Versus The State of Maharashtra and Another
........... s. This contention, therefore, must necessarily fail. Mr. Thakar then has contended that inasmuch as the maximum penalty that can be imposed under section 10 is 1/4th of the actual tax leviable as the tax is reduced because of the judgment of this Court in the reference, the penalty levied will be reduced accordingly. Now, the judgment of the Sales Tax Officer shows that the penalty that he levied is not 1/4th in every case. The Sales Tax Officer is entitled to charge penalty at the maximum leviable. If, therefore, the amount of tax is reduced, the penalty exceeding 1/4th cannot be charged. Under the circumstances, therefore, we must modify the order regarding penalty and we direct that the penalty shall not be leviable in excess of 1/4th of the amount of the tax leviable in each of the cases. Subject to this modification, the petitions fail substantially and the rule is discharged. The petitioner will pay costs of the respondents in all the three cases. Petitions dismissed.
4218...1966 (7) TMI 63 - KERALA HIGH COURT
VS. Ayyappan Versus The State of Kerala
........... under section 46(1)(f) and affirm his conviction under section 46(2)(c) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, in both the cases. As regards the sentence, it is pertinent to note that under the old Act the punishment for a fraudulent evasion of payment of tax was only a fine which may extend to one thousand rupees . The penalty of imprisonment was for the first time imposed by the new Act. Considering all circumstances, I think that the ends of public justice will be met in the instant cases by the imposition of adequate fines on the petitioner. I therefore quash the sentence of one month s imprisonment imposed on the petitioner and sentence him to a fine of Rs. 500, with two weeks simple imprisonment in default, in S.T. 592 of 1964 which gave rise to Crl. R.P. No. 309 of 1965 and to a fine of Rs. 2,000, with two months simple imprisonment in default, in S.T. 591 of 1964 which gave rise to Crl. R.P. No. 308 of 1965. Time to pay the fines one month. Judgment accordingly.
4219...1966 (7) TMI 64 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Nechupadam Construction Engineering Contractors Versus The Executive Engineer, Pothundi and Another
........... sale could be said to have occasioned the import, it is not necessary that the sale should have taken place anterior to the import and that even if the sale took place and the property in the goods passed during the course of import or even after import, a sale could be a sale in the course of import, provided that the movement of goods was incidental to the contract or was in pursuance of the conditions of the contract. That case can hardly help the petitioner. There was no condition in the alleged contract between Government and the petitioner which occasioned the movement of goods from Pollachi to Pothundi. There is nothing in the contract which prevented Government from diverting the petrol and diesel oil purchased from Pollachi for other purposes. I think the contract between the Government and the petitioner had no immediate causal connection with the movement of the goods across the border. I dismiss the petition but without any order as to costs. Petition dismissed.
4220...1966 (7) TMI 65 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Nenuram Versus The State of Rajasthan and Another
........... ner was assessed to sales tax for the execution of the contract in question, the assessment is invalid and must be quashed. We, therefore, allow this application and quash the assessment order dated the 24th August, 1961, in part, that is, in so far as the petitioner has been assessed to sales tax thereunder for supply and fixture of wooden windows and doors and frames therefor in connection with the construction of the police lines building at Pali during the accounting year 1st April, 1959, to 31st March, 1960. As this assessment order appears to us to have been made with respect to certain other sales also during the accounting period in question, it will be for the Sales Tax Officer to separate the turnover relating to them from that relating to the contract in question, and our judgment shall have no effect on these other sales. Having regard to all the circumstances of the case, we leave the parties to bear their own costs of this writ application. Application allowed.
4221...1966 (7) TMI 66 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Haji M. Kadar Mohammed Rowther and Company Versus State of Kerala
........... at he cannot be. 8.. In the light of the above, we set aside the order of the Tribunal and direct that the following two questions be investigated and findings entered and appropriate orders passed (a) Whether there have been any assessments on the alleged commission agents in relation to the turnover of Rs. 97,052.43 or any part of it (b) If there are no assessments whether there have been any payment of tax In relation to the turnover of Rs. 97,052.43. And if so, the extent of such payments? If there have been assessments to the full extent or part of it, to that extent, there will be no assessments made on the principal, i.e., the petitioner before us. If there have been no assessments made, there can be an assessment to the full extent on the petitioner but he can be made liable only for the tax less, that, if any, that have been paid by the commission agents. 9.. This Tax Revision Case is disposed of as above. There will be no order regarding costs. Ordered accordingly.
4222...1966 (7) TMI 67 - PUNJAB HIGH COURT
Hari Mal Dharam Vir and Another Versus RN. Gupta, Sales Tax Officer, Ward No. 11 and Another
........... rder of assessment with respect to the third quarter (1st October, 1956 to 13th December, 1956). The perusal of the assessment order shows that the Sales Tax Officer took recourse to rule 28 of the Delhi Sales Tax Rules, 1951, for determining the taxable turnover. In S.B. Gurbaksh Singh v. Sales Tax OfficerCivil Writ No. 540-D of 1959 decided on 29th April, 1966 1966 18 S.T.C. 500. , I have already declared rule 28 to be ultra vires. On the assumption that that decision is correct, Mr. Shankar, the learned counsel for the respondents, does not seriously dispute that this assessment order will have to be quashed. In the circumstances, I quash the order dated 29th September, 1958, with respect to the third quarter mentioned above. It would, however, be open to the Assessing Authority to make a fresh assessment with respect to this period if, and to the extent, permissible by law. The petition is allowed to the extent indicated above with no order as to costs. Petition allowed.
4223...1966 (7) TMI 68 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Janata Oil Industries, Nagpur Versus Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, Eastern Division, Nagpur and Another
........... sa v. Aurobindo Auto Servica 1963 14 S.T.C. 46. which again construed the provisions of section 23(2) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act in relation to the right of appeal against an order summarily rejecting a first appeal. As we have observed earlier, these decisions also do not touch the present point at issue. In our view, the principles enunciated by this Court in Jagmohandas Gokaldas v. Commissioner of Wealth-tax 1963 50 I.T.R. 578. and Krishna Flour Mills v. Income-tax Commissioner 1965 55 I.T.R. 259 A.I.R. 1965 Mys. 70. are, with respect, the correct principles to be applied in respect of the present provisions. We accordingly hold that summary rejection of the appeal of the petitioner by the Deputy Commissioner does not bar a revision application which the petitioner preferred. We, therefore, quash the order of the Deputy Commissioner, dated 18th March, 1965, and direct that the case be heard on merits. The petitioner will get his costs from the respondents. Order quashed.
4224...1966 (7) TMI 69 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Muhammed Versus The Collector of Palghat
........... court has to ascertain the purposes for which legal fiction has to be resorted to by a reference to section 15(h) of the Madras Act, 1939. The statutory fiction is only for its recovery and not for anything else. The recovery provision is contained in section 386(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code. There is therefore no scope for the application of section 70 of the Indian Penal Code to the instant case. We therefore hold that the execution of warrant issued under section 386(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Code for the recovery of arrears of sales tax, fee or amount so specified is not controlled by section 70 of the Indian Penal Code. If so the contention regarding limitation has to be overruled. It has to be mentioned that the learned Advocate for the appellant had no contention that the execution petitions are barred by limitation on account of any other statute. In the result, the Second Appeals are without substance and they are dismissed with costs. Appeals dismissed.
4225...1966 (7) TMI 7 - KERALA High Court
Commissioner of Income-Tax, Ernakulam Versus Devadasan And Others.
Whether the assessees did constitute an association of persons carrying on business for gain - Held, no - revenue's appeal is dismissed ......
........... rived from the felled trees that were cut to make the land cultivable. It is not possible to spell out any joint venture solely from this operation. All that is said in the power of attorney, which incidentally is the only documentary evidence in this regard and the only material, is that immovable properties must be in the custody and possession of the power-holder. Each of the heirs takes a specific share and the heirs enjoy the property as tenants-in-common is not disputed. The Tribunal has not found that there has been an association of persons formed for a common purpose or for a common object. In fact, the finding is to the contrary and this is reiterated in the statement of the case. There is no material available that would justify upsetting the conclusion reached by the Tribunal. The question referred is answered in the negative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the department. There will be no order as to costs. Question answered in favour of the assessee
4226...1966 (7) TMI 70 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Deputy Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax and Sales Tax Versus Mammu Haji and Others
........... eral Sales Tax Act, 1125. For this purpose, it is essential that the assessee should carry on the business of buying or selling goods. When a person sells the produce from his land whether produced therein by agricultural operations or what grows there spontaneously, there is no element of any business involved. We dismiss these tax revision cases but make no order as to costs. Petitions dismissed.
4227...1966 (7) TMI 71 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Pothen Joseph and Sons Versus State of Kerala
........... cision in regard to the first must necessarily govern this as well, this being an item of deduction provided by rule 7(a) of General Sales Tax Rules, 1950, framed under the General Sales Tax Act, 1125. Counsel on behalf of the department has conceded that the decision in regard to the first point must govern this point also. 7.. The only other point raised in this Tax Revision Case is in relation to the production of the C Forms. The departmental authorities have declined to accept the duplicate of the forms produced before the assessment. Counsel on behalf of the department has conceded before us that the C Forms produced will be sufficient to grant the exemption claimed and that tax could be imposed only at the rate of one per cent. in relation to the turnover covered by the C Forms. We accept this and direct that such modifications as are necessary will be made in this regard. 8.. We dispose of this Tax Revision Case in the above terms. There will be no order as to costs.
4228...1966 (7) TMI 72 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Premchand Jhanji Versus The State of Madhya Pradesh and Another
........... cess of manufacture. The packing material cannot be said to be an article used as an ingredient in the manufacture of boot polish nor can it be described as an article consumed in the process of manufacture of boot polish. These articles are utilised for the purposes of packing for the facility of sale. The words used in the definition of raw material are an article used as an ingredient in any manufactured goods or an article consumed in the process of manufacture. If the interpretation of the petitioner is accepted, the words used would have been in connection with or in relation to manufacture of goods . It is, therefore, plain that the contention of the petitioner that the above-said articles are utilised in the manufacture of the boot polish cannot be sustained. 3.. The petition fails and is dismissed with costs. Hearing fee Rs. 100. The outstanding amount of the security deposit, if any, after deduction of costs, shall be refunded to the petitioner. Petition dismissed.
4229...1966 (7) TMI 8 - KERALA High Court
VK Manseta Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax, Kerala
Firm - registration under s. 26A of the IT Act, 1922 ......
........... on for registration in this case was made on 7th July, 1960, that is, before the close of the accounting period on 31st March, 1961, and all that the application could possibly say was We do hereby certify that the profits (or loss, if any) of the previous year will be divided or credited as shown in Section (B) of the Schedule and that the information given above and in the attached Schedule is correct. It is not disputed that this has been done. We are unable to see anything in the order of the Tribunal which will sustain the refusal of registration. It follows that the question has to be answered in the affirmative, that is, in favour of the assessee and against the department. We do so, but without any order as to costs. A copy of this judgment under the seal of the High Court and the signature of the Registrar will be sent to the Appellate Tribunal as required by sub-section (5) of section 66 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. Question answered in favour of the assessee
4230...1966 (7) TMI 9 - MYSORE High Court
Bhadra Coffee Estate Limited Versus Agricultural Income-Tax Officer, Bangalore.
Whether the assessment should have been made under the new Act (Mysore Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1957) or under the old Act (Mysore Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1955) ......
4231...1966 (8) TMI 1 - ALLAHABAD High Court
Devi Das Madho Prasad Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax, Uttar Pradesh
Amount debited by the assessee to the profit and loss account and credited to the sales tax account is an admissible deduction - assessee is entitled to a deduction during the year in which the liability became ascertained for him irrespective of the ......
4232...1966 (8) TMI 10 - MADRAS High Court
Collector of North Arcot Versus VK Kannan.
Whether for proceedings in pursuance of certificate specifying sum higher than legally due is valid - Held, no ......
........... ertificate. We do not think that this argument does justice to the reasoning on which the decision is based, which we have earlier referred to. We need not now commit ourselves to any opinion on the question, whether a mere clerical error would affect the jurisdiction of the Collector, on the authority of the Bench decision or otherwise. But, where there is a substantial difference between the sum legally due, and the sum for which the certificate has been issued, clearly the Collector is proceeding beyond the ambit of his jurisdiction under the law, and the subsequent proceedings are liable to be vitiated. We see no reason, therefore, for disturbing the state of law as laid down in the Bench decision earlier referred to. There is nothing to prevent the authorities now from issuing a proper certificate and proceeding with their powers of sale under the Revenue Recovery Act for the actual arrears due. With these observations, the writ appeal is dismissed. Writ appeal dismissed
4233...1966 (8) TMI 11 - MADRAS High Court
EA Venkataramier and Sons Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax, Madras.
Firm - assessment was reopened u/s. 34 - undisclosed income - reassessment on the assessee firm is not valid in law ......
........... t be said to be in accordance with law. The Tribunal being the final authority on facts it is necessary and it is the requisite of the law that, in disposing of an appeal, it clearly sets out the facts, the contentions for the assessee as well as the revenue and deals with each of such contentions with reference to the facts, circumstances and relative evidence and records its findings with reasons therefor on each contention. Failure to conform to these minimum requisites in particular circumstances may render the Tribunal s order invalid or not in accordance with the law. In that sense the Tribunal will have to dispose of the appeal, in our view, afresh after considering that question on its merits. Though on the question of jurisdiction, we take a view which is in favour of the revenue, in view of our opinion on the other question, we answer the question referred to us in favour of the assessee with costs. Counsel s fees Rs. 250. Question answered in favour of the assessee
4234...1966 (8) TMI 12 - MYSORE High Court
Commissioner of Income-Tax, Mysore Versus B. Shamiah Setty Brothers.
Aggregation of the income - whether two sets of income derived during the same accounting year by firms which purported to be distinct firms, could be added to one another for the purpose of assessment - Held, no ......
4235...1966 (8) TMI 13 - ANDHRA PRADESH High Court
Nagasuri Raghaveswara Rao Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax, AP
Amount received by the assessee under the sub-leases - they are not capital recipt - liable to tax ......
........... s into his stock-in-trade. The payment was neither rent nor royalty, but a lump payment in instalments for acquiring a capital asset of enduring benefit to his trade. The amounts were outgoings on capital account and were not allowable deductions. The facts of this case are also different from the facts of the case with which we are concerned. What was acquired by the lessee was a capital asset and the expenses incurred for acquiring the same could not be an expenditure on capital of enduring character. The result of the above discussion is that having regard to the nature of the transaction which was entered into between the parties as embodied in the sub-leases dated February 21, 1950, and November 20, 1956, the payments made by the sub-lessee in the hands of the lessee-assessee are not capital receipts but income and therefore liable to tax. We answer the second question accordingly. We direct that the assessee shall pay the costs of the department. Advocate s fee Rs. 150.
4236...1966 (8) TMI 14 - ANDHRA PRADESH High Court
BR Patel Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax, Andhra Pradesh.
Assessee transferred a certain sum to another concern in joint loan a/c in his name and in the name of other two persons who were standing surities for the assessee - inclusion of the entire interest credited in the account books of CS Pvt. Ltd. in t ......
4237...1966 (8) TMI 15 - CALCUTTA High Court
Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Company Limited Versus Commissioner Of Income-Tax.
ITO disallowed the amount of sales tax liability claimed by the assessee on the ground that same was under dispute and assessee did not pay the amount - amount which was claimed by the assessee as a deduction on account of sales tax was not deductib ......
4238...1966 (8) TMI 16 - PATNA High Court
Hanumanmal Periwal. Versus Commissioner of Wealth-Tax, Bihar And Orissa.
Whether the assessment to wealth-tax for the asst. yr. 1960-61 had been rightly made on the assessee in the status of an individual - as there was no other coparcener with the assessee on the valuation date, the assessment to wealth-tax was rightly m ......
4239...1966 (8) TMI 17 - PATNA High Court
Maharaj Kumar Kamal Singh Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bihar And Orissa.
Assessee was the holder of an impartible estate, and, by an indenture, granted to his wife two premises for life by way of supplementary khorposh (maintenance) grant - transfer cannot be taken as a transfer by the husband of his assets to his wife - ......
4240...1966 (8) TMI 18 - CALCUTTA High Court
Ganga Metal Refining Company Private Limited Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax, West Bengal.
Whether the assessee-company was at all entitled to set off the loss of Rs. 11,875 suffered by it on a joint venture against its other income - held, no - because assessee-company was not the same as the assessee in the joint venture which was either ......
4241...1966 (8) TMI 19 - KERALA High Court
Commissioner of Income-Tax, Kerala Versus Venugopala Varma Rajah.
Assessee received Rs. 75,000 from lease of forest for ``clear felling`` of trees - should be considered as a revenue income and not as a capital income ......
4242...1966 (8) TMI 2 - ALLAHABAD High Court
Ishwari Khetan Sugar Mills Private Limited Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax, Uttar Pradesh.
Expenditure made by assessee to procure the use of money from the bank in the shape of an overdraft for the purpose of its business - expenditure wholly laid out for the purpose of its business - expenditure incurred by the assessee is an allowable i ......
4243...1966 (8) TMI 20 - KERALA High Court
N Kunhali Haji Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax, Kerala.
Explanation made out by assessee was not accepted by ITO would not necessarily lead to the conclusion that the assessee had furnished wrongful particulars of his income - penalty u/s 28(1)(c) of the Act was not justified ......
4244...1966 (8) TMI 21 - KERALA High Court
Krishna And Brothers Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax, Kerala.
Firm - refusal of registration ......
........... ection (3) of section 30 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932. We do not think that clause 4 in annexure A and clause 11 in annexure B in the two partnership deeds concerned have provided for anything other than what has been done in clause 8 of the partnership deed which we then construed. If there has been no imposition of personal liability on the minors, section 30(3) of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, is not infringed. The refusal of registration cannot be sustained. We answer question No. 1 referred to us in the negative, that is, in favour of the assessee and against the department. In the light of the answer to question No. 1, question No. 2 does not arise for consideration. This income-tax referred case is ordered as above. There will be no order as to costs. A copy of this judgment under the seal of the High Court and the signature of the Registrar will be sent to the Appellate Tribunal as required by sub-section (5) of section 66 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922
4245...1966 (8) TMI 22 - KERALA High Court
P Krishna Warrier Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax, Kerala
Whether the 40 % of the profits of the business of A payable to the two Thavazhies is assessable as `unearned income` in the hands of the trustees u/s 41 of the IT Act, 1922, and subject to the levy of a special surcharge - this case will not fall u/ ......
4246...1966 (8) TMI 23 - MADHYA PRADESH High Court
Gajadhar Prasad Nathu Lal Versus Commissioner of Wealth-Tax, Madhya Pradesh.
Assessee has filed an application for being permitted to withdraw the reference saying that he is no longer interested in 'prosecuting the reference' - High Court is not bound to answer the reference ......
4247...1966 (8) TMI 24 - KERALA High Court
MI Chakkoru Versus Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Kerala
1922 Act, 1961 Act ......
........... ions of the Madras High Court in S. Kuppuswami Mudaliar v. CIT reported in 1964 51 ITR 757 and B. Abdul Quadir v. CIT reported in 1964 52 ITR 364, We do not understand these decisions as laying down a principle that whenever an estimate had been made of income for any particular year the amount added by that estimate as income from the business disclosed and additions to income from undisclosed sources because of unexplained credits must be taken to be available with the assessee for being credited in a subsequent year of account. And that in all such cases it is for the department to establish that that amount was not available with the assessee. If these decisions imply the casting of any such burden on the department, with great respect we are unable to agree with that view. In the light of the above, we answer the question referred to us in the affirmative, that is, in favour of the department and against the assessee. We direct the parties to bear their respective costs.
4248...1966 (8) TMI 3 - ASSAM High Court
Jalannagar South Estate Limited and Others Versus Commissioner of Taxes, Assam
Assessee had made contributions to the J Trust in respect of various amounts and claimed exemption - Board was not justified in holding that only 60 per cent of the amounts actually spent by the assessee for `charitable purposes` from the agricultura ......
4249...1966 (8) TMI 33 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Pioneer Dyeing House Ltd. Versus Dr. Shanker Vishnu Marathe
Compromise and arrangement, Amalgamation ......
........... of the sponsors of the scheme, Gopal Ganesh Ketkar and Achyut Dattatraya Phatak, figure as delinquent directors in those proceedings. The managing director of the company against whom also misfeasance proceedings are taken is the father of Achyut Dattatraya Phatak. It seems to us clear that if the creditors and shareholders were apprised that misfeasance proceedings were taken against the directors of the company, they would not have approved the scheme under which the affairs of the company are once again relegated into the hands of the selfsame directors. For these reasons, we are of the view that the learned District Judge was in error in giving his sanction to the scheme. We accordingly allow the appeal and direct that winding up proceedings will continue. The respondents will pay to the liquidators the costs of this appeal and of the proceedings in the District Court. Receiver will stand discharged. Rule in Civil Application No. 2793 of 1965 stands discharged with costs.
4250...1966 (8) TMI 4 - MADRAS High Court
K Simrathmull (No. 2) Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax, Madras
Inclusion in the chargeable income of a total sum of Rs. 5,853 representing the difference between the purchase and sale prices of two houses - In the absence of a finding by the Tribunal that the purchase and sale of the houses was in the course of ......
4251...1966 (8) TMI 48 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Ganga Metal Refining Co. (P.) Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Income-tax
Company – Incorporation of ......
........... 10 of the Income-tax Act. In this view of the matter, we hold that the assessee is not entitled to set off against its other income the loss of Rs. 11,875 suffered by it in its joint venture with two other limited companies. We accordingly answer the first question in the negative. Having regard to this answer, question No. 2 does not arise for determination and we do not propose to express any opinion thereon. We need only record that the assessee s counsel s statement before the Tribunal that in the assessment of Binani Brothers Private Ltd., and Binani Commercial Company Private Limited, the losses from this joint venture have been allowed as a set-off and which was mentioned by the Tribunal, was a wrong statement by the learned counsel and the original records of assessment of Binani Brothers Private Limited, Calcutta, were produced before the court to show that the statement was wrong. That fact may be recorded. There will be no order as to costs. Laik, J. mdash I agree.
4252...1966 (8) TMI 49 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Nandlal More Versus R. Mirchandani
Directors - Right of person other than retiring director to stand for directorship and Manging agent ......
........... e plaintiff s favour. That judgment, in our opinion, does not cover all the points canvassed in this appeal, nor does that judgment directly deal with section 261(1). It is only by way of analogy that Mr. Nathwani relied upon the same. That, in our opinion, is not sufficient justification for us to depart from the normal rule. As regards the third defendant, we however feel that there was no justification why the third defendant should have appeared separately from the second defendant. The third defendant was sued in his representative capacity and it has been so specifically stated at the very inception when the plaint was filed that the third defendant was being sued for himself and all other shareholders of the first defendant-company supporting the second defendant. We, therefore, order that the plaintiff shall pay the costs of the second defendant and the first defendant-company all throughout and that the third defendant shall bear and pay his own costs all throughout.
4253...1966 (8) TMI 5 - MADRAS High Court
VE. V. Sivagami Achi Versus VR. VE. VR. Ramanathan Chettiar And Others
This revision arises out of an application made by the plaintiff in a suit for the production by the Income-tax Officer of certain assessment proceedings relating to the first defendant in the suit - held that section 6(c) of the General Clauses Act, ......
4254...1966 (8) TMI 50 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
PS. Subramaniam Chettiar & Sons Versus Joint Commercial Tax Officer III, Dindigul
........... ncorrect returns in relation to the procedure for assessment with the provision for assessment of escaped turnover and came to the conclusion that in view of the difference in the phraseology employed by the relative sections, it was reasonable to conclude that the power under sub-section (4) of section 14 was limited to assessment of turnover which was definitely established. With respect we find ourselves in agreement with that view. We also derive support for our view from the legislative history of the sales tax provisions in this State. We hold that section 16(1) of the 1959 Act does not include the power to assess by best judgment. Inasmuch as the Assessing Authority proceeded in these cases on the basis that it had power to assess by best judgment, its orders are quashed. The writ appeals are allowed with costs, one set counsel s fees Rs. 250. The Assessing Authority will be at liberty to proceed further under section 16 in the light of this judgment. Appeals allowed.
4255...1966 (8) TMI 51 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Public Prosecutor Versus K. Ramachandra Chettiar
........... nce to the actual accounts of the dealer-whether they are capable of being produced or not-would establish that the return submitted was untrue. These questions have got to be investigated after the accused appears in court. But they cannot be ruled out on a preliminary finding that section 16 and rule 26(16) automatically bar a prosecution under section 45(2)(a), if the discovery of the data which led to the criminal prosecution, happens to be subsequent to the expiry of the five year period. I may add that in this case the discovery of the additional data was on 1st June, 1963, while the five year period for the assessment of 1957-58 ended on 31st March, 1963. I am of opinion that the acquittal of the accused on the preliminary ground in this case is unjustified in the circumstances stated above. The appeals are allowed and the acquittals are set aside. The learned Magistrate is directed to restore the cases to his file and deal with them according to law. Appeals allowed.
4256...1966 (8) TMI 52 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Devi Das Madho Prasad Versus Commissioner of Income-tax, UP.
........... itself into a problem which is very different from the question whether the liability of the assessee upon the law, as it stands, has to be regarded as ascertained or contingent after taking into account the assessee s own actions with regard to the statutory liability. There is no duty cast upon an assessee to question the validity of a law. He is entitled to act on the assumption that the law imposing the liability is valid. The manner in which the assessee has acted must be considered by the income-tax authorities in determining whether a liability has to be treated as ascertained or contingent. In the case before us, the assessee has acted in a way that leaves no doubt that he himself treated the statutory liability as ascertained and fixed by the statute automatically. Therefore, he was entitled to a deduction during the year in which the liability became ascertained for him irrespective of the time at which the actual payment of the sales tax was made by the assessee.
4257...1966 (8) TMI 53 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
KMS Lakshmanier & Sons (P.) Ltd. Versus The Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad and Two Others
........... decision to the facts of the case the crucial date is 15th March, 1957, when the law in force was the Madras General Sales Tax Act. As already stated, section 12-A of that Act did not make it incumbent on an assessee to pay the tax before his appeal could be entertained. That onerous condition was imposed only by the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957. As per the decision of the Supreme Court, that Act has no application on the crucial date. I, therefore, hold that the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, acted beyond its jurisdiction in calling upon the petitioner (assessee) to pay the tax before his appeals could be entertained. The writ petitions are, therefore, allowed, and the writs will issue as prayed for. Since the contention on which the petitioner now succeeds is one which was not raised in the petition but raised only now, I do not think it just to grant him costs. I, therefore, make no order as to costs in both these writ petitions. Petitions allowed.
4258...1966 (8) TMI 54 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Commissioner of Sales Tax, Madhya Pradesh Versus Daulatram Dulichand, Ratlam
........... ion of sales tax on bullion turnover for a particular year is only up to the value of the turnover stated in the certificate granted to the assessee in Form V at the commencement of the year. In the present case, the assessee obtained an exemption certificate for 1958-59 in accordance with rules 11 and 13. That being so, he was not liable to pay sales tax on the excess turnover of Rs. 61,000 for the year. On that amount the assessee was liable to pay only a fee at the rate of four annas per cent. 5.. For these reasons, our answer to the question referred is that an exemption certificate issued for a particular year under rule 11(c) of the Rules is valid not only for the quantum of turnover mentioned therein but also for any actual excess turnover in that year and on the excess turnover the assessee is liable to pay only a fee at the rate of four annas per cent. The assessee shall have costs of this reference. Counsel s fee is fixed at Rs. 100. Reference answered accordingly.
4259...1966 (8) TMI 55 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Public Prosecutor (AP.) Versus Mukha Singh Chanda and Others
........... were a firm who were reassessed for escaped turnover, it was stated, without proper notice being served. The partners of the firm were also prosecuted. In the prosecution, the contention of the accused was that the reassessment is illegal inasmuch as no notice was served on them and non-service of notice absolves them of the liability to be reassessed. The question was where the reassessment has been made and is final, could a contention that the assessment is bad be raised in a criminal prosecution on the basis that the assessment is valid. The Bench has answered the question in the affirmative, that is to say, that non-service of notice could none the less be pleaded as a defence as it affects the assessment order because of non-compliance with the fundamental provisions of the statute. In this view, the prosecution fails inasmuch as the Court has held that no notice has in fact been served upon the assessee. The criminal appeal is accordingly dismissed. Appeal dismissed.
4260...1966 (8) TMI 56 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
KS. Varadaraja Iyengar Versus Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Mettupalayam
........... ng is to be read in, nothing is to be implied. One can only look fairly at the language used. On the facts now disclosed and on a review of the case law on the subject, I am of opinion that when the arecanuts are plucked, dried and dehusked they do not undergo physical or any other process making the article thereby alter its character as agricultural produce. The process of dehusking is the minimum process absolutely necessary for making the produce marketable and fit for consumption. The petitioner is, therefore, not liable to tax in respect of the proceeds of sale of arecanuts grown on his land, in the circumstances mentioned above. In this view, it is not necessary to consider whether explanation (1) to section 2(r) of the Act offends Article 14, Article 19(1)(f) and (g) and Article 31 of the Constitution. In the result, the writ petition is allowed and the rule nisi is made absolute. There will be no order as to costs, in the circumstances of the case. Petition allowed.
4261...1966 (8) TMI 57 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
State of West Bengal Versus Indian Steel and Wire Products Ltd. and Another
........... as to how the provisions of the Indian Iron and Steel Control Order were carried out or complied with. I cannot help observing that these documents were deliberately suppressed from the Court and the affidavits used, instead of helping the Court to ascertain the truth of the facts, were merely affirmed to put before the Court the view of the petitioner on the question of law involved. In my opinion, the learned trial Judge fell into an error in deciding the case in the way he did and the appeal must be allowed and the rule be discharged. With regard to the question of costs I see no reason why the first respondent who has not helped the Court at all in ascertaining the facts should not be made to bear the costs throughout. The order for costs made by the learned judge is therefore set aside and the first respondent is directed to pay the costs of the appellant both of the trial court and of the hearing before us. Certified for two counsel. MASUD, J.-I agree. Appeal allowed.
4262...1966 (8) TMI 58 - KERALA HIGH COURT
M Kutty Hassan Kutty Versus Sales Tax Officer, Ponnani
........... ill depend upon the nature of contract. For instance, when the contract is to purchase goods-oil in barrels-an implied contract to purchase the packing material can readily be inferred. In such cases cost of packing materials cannot be termed as cost of delivery or services. (The Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, by R.V. Patel, Second Edition, page 131). 8.. Against the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissionerexhibit P-3-the appellant had a remedy by way of appeal to the Appellate Tribunal under section 39 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, and then by way of revision to this Court under section 41 of the said enactment. The appellant has not chosen to resort to those remedies and on that ground also the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution should be considered as unsustainable. 9.. In the light of what is stated above the appeal must fail and has to be dismissed. We do so but in the circumstances of the case without any order as to costs. Appeal dismissed.
4263...1966 (8) TMI 59 - PUNJAB HIGH COURT
BK. Bajaj and Another Versus State of Punjab and Another
........... overnment or the statutory authority against whom the consequential relief is prayed for raises a prima facie triable issue as regards the availability of such relief on the merits on the grounds like limitation the Court should ordinarily refuse to issue the writ of mandamus for such payment. In both these kinds of cases it will be sound use of discretion to leave the party to seek his remedy by the ordinary mode of action in a civil court and to refuse to exercise in his favour the extraordinary remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution. The above Supreme Court case also tends to enunciate that where facts are disputed as in the present case about the exact amount alleged to have been unlawfully recovered from the petitioners as State sales tax and Central sales tax a writ of mandamus for refund of taxes should not be allowed. The writ petition fails on this short ground and is hereby dismissed. The parties, however, are left to bear their own costs. Petition dismissed.
4264...1966 (8) TMI 6 - MADRAS High Court
K Simrathmull Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax, Madras.
Whether the entire income of the assessee`s wife or any portion thereof from money-lending business and coffee estates was correctly added to the assessee`s income - Held, yes - money lending business carried on in the name of his wife belonged to th ......
4265...1966 (8) TMI 60 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Smt. Shanti Bai Versus State and Others
........... dissolved as alleged, then the assessment order should not have been passed against Suganchand alone but against the firm itself. The question whether firm was or was not dissolved as alleged by the petitioners before us is, however, a question of fact, and it is not within our province to go into it. And in any case that is a question which seems to us to go to the root of the assessment in the case. In this state of circumstances learned counsel for both parties agree that the assessment order dated 28th February, 1961, be quashed and the case sent back to the Sales Tax Officer concerned with a direction that he shall examine the case set up by the petitioner that the assessee-firm was dissolved on 15th April, 1958, after recording such evidence as may be necessary and then pass a fresh order in accordance with law. We order accordingly. Having regard to all the circumstances of the case we leave both the parties to bear their own costs in this Court. Ordered accordingly.
4266...1966 (8) TMI 7 - MADHYA PRADESH High Court
Kishanlal Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax, MP
Whether Tribunal acted rightly in upholding the application of section 297(2)(g) read with sections 271(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the delay in the submission of returns - If, yes, whether on the facts here, and on a proper interpretation ......
4267...1966 (8) TMI 8 - MYSORE High Court
SC Magavi, Haveri Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax, Mysore.
Whether assuming that there was no reasonable cause for the failures of the assessee as referred to in section 271(1)(a) and 271(1)(b), the ITO was right in applying the provisions of and imposing penalty under s. 271 of the IT Act, 1961 - Held, no ......
4268...1966 (8) TMI 9 - RAJASTHAN High Court
Rajasthan Financial Corporation Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax, New Delhi.
Loss suffered by the corporation on the sale of securities - not a capital loss ......
........... hough in trying to advance loans to the industries it would certainly earn interest. This is an important activity that the State has undertaken to help industrial growth in the State and, therefore, we cannot impute such motives to it as animate a private financier or a money-lender. Functions envisaged under section 25 of the Act are nothing but the activities of a Welfare State and, therefore, the corporation could not put off the question of disbursing sanctioned loans by waiting for the investment in securities to mature. In this context we are satisfied that the sale of the securities was closely linked up with the business of the corporation, so that, according to the principles laid down by the Privy Council and the Supreme Court, loss suffered on account of such a sale of securities was a trading loss. In view of what we have observed above, our answer to the question is in the negative. We leave the parties to bear their own costs. Question answered in the negative.
4269...1966 (9) TMI 1 - MYSORE High Court
KT Appanna Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax, Mysore
Amount realised by the assessee by the sale of plots - not revenue profits chargeable to income-tax ......
........... s because of a wrong understanding of the law. From that circumstance again no firm conclusion can be drawn that the sale in question was effected in the course of business. On the material before us, we are unable to come to the conclusion that the sales in question were effected in the course of the assessee s business. In this connection reference may be usefully made to the decision of the Madras High Court in O. M. S. PL. A. Alagappa Chettiar v. Commissioner of Income-tax. We answer the question referred to us in favour of the assessee. In other words, our answer is On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sums of Rs. 5,114, Rs. 7,889 and Rs. 3,000 realised by the assessee by the sale of plots in the previous years ending on 30th June, 1958, 30th June, 1959, and 30th June, 1960, were not revenue profits chargeable to income-tax. The assessee is entitled to the costs of this proceeding. The advocate s fee Rs. 250. Question answered in favour of the assessee.
4270...1966 (9) TMI 10 - ALLAHABAD High Court
KP Bhargava Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax, Uttar Pradesh.
Deemed income - section 10(2)(vii) - surplus of Rs. 37,385 arising from the sale of plant and machinery of an ice factory ......
........... ncome-tax v. Ajax Products Ltd., where it has been laid down that, notwithstanding the second proviso to section 10(2)(vii) as amended in 1949, the profit from the sale of the assets could not be taxed because the proviso did not warrant the assumption of the legal fiction that during the calendar year when the sale took place the company should be deemed to be carrying on business. The question is, accordingly, answered in the negative and against the department. The department will pay the costs of this reference, which we assess at Rs. 200. Counsel s fee is also assessed at Rs. 200. Question answered in the negative
4271...1966 (9) TMI 102 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
The State of Gujarat Versus Sakarwala Brothers
Whether under section 52(1)(e) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 any tax was payable in respect of the sales of "patasa", "sakar ", "bura sugar", "harda" and "alchidana"?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. To be groundnut oil two conditions had ......
4272...1966 (9) TMI 108 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
The State of Mysore Versus Guduthur Thimmappa and Son and Another
Whether for purposes of section 5(2) of the Act read with rule 4-A(iv)(b) of the Madras General Sales Tax (Turnover and Assessment) Rules, 1939 the respondents were the dealers who bought the cotton in the State and were the last dealers not exempt f ......
4273...1966 (9) TMI 11 - ALLAHABAD High Court
Dr. Onkar Dutt Sharma Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax, Uttar Pradesh.
Assessment u/s. 34 of Indian Income Tax Act, 1922- validity ......
........... ction 34, it will not matter whether such an assessment is completed within the period of four years or within the additional period of one year provided under section 34 of the Act. The Supreme Court in Y. Narayana Chetty v. Income-tax Officer, Nellore, held that If no notice is issued or if the notice issued is shown to be invalid then the validity of the proceedings taken by the Income-tax Officer without a notice or in pursuance of an invalid notice would be illegal and void. The notice under section 34 was undoubtedly an illegal notice as a voluntary return was already in existence. The subsequent proceedings under that section and culminating in the assessment cannot be anything else but illegal and void. For the reasons given above, we would answer the question referred in the negative and against the department. The department will pay the costs to the assessee which we assess at Rs. 200. The counsel s fee is also assessed at Rs. 200. Question answered in the negative
4274...1966 (9) TMI 116 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Presidency Motors Versus Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Madras
The State Legislature has no power to legislate for recovering tax improperly collected from a person who under the State legislation relating to sales tax is not liable to pay tax - Appeal allowed. The order passed by the High Court must, therefore, ......
4275...1966 (9) TMI 117 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Ratanlal HukumChand Versus Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax, Madhya Pradesh, Indore and Another
........... hing to do with the question of the liability having been incurred. We are of the view that the case falls within the first part of the proviso and the fact that the assessment was completed in 1961, that is, after the Madhya Bharat Act was repealed and the penalty was actually imposed thereafter, is of no consequence. In this view of the matter, we are of the opinion that the Sales Tax Authorities were right in not only assessing the petitioner under the Madhya Bharat Sales Tax Act but also in imposing the penalty under that Act. The fact that there is no provision in the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act corresponding to section 14(1)(e) of the Madhya Bharat Sales Tax Act is of no consequence so far as this petition is concerned. 7.. No other ground was urged before us. 8.. The petition fails and is dismissed with costs. Hearing fee Rs. 150. The outstanding amount of the security deposit, after deduction of costs, shall be refunded to the petitioner. Petition dismissed.
4276...1966 (9) TMI 118 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Plastic Products Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Sales Tax, UP., Lucknow
........... , we have applied what is called the golden rule of interpretation thus stated by Lord Wensleydale in Grey v. Pearson(1) In construing wills, and indeed statutes and all written instruments, the grammatical and ordinary sense of the words is to be adhered to, unless that would lead to some absurdity, or some repugnancy or inconsistency with the rest of the instrument, in which case the grammatical and ordinary sense of the words may be modified so as to avoid that absurdity and inconsistency, but no further. The literal rule of interpretation is enough to meet cases of interpretation where no complexities are present. But, in a case where the situation is complicated by features which make it impossible to apply the literal rule reasonably, other rules of interpretation which may be applicable have to be used. What is known as the golden rule generally involves an application of several rules of interpretation in order to get the final result. Reference answered accordingly.
4277...1966 (9) TMI 119 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
KM Chopra and Company Versus The Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax, Madhya Pradesh, Indore and Others
........... admittedly the petitioner did not produce before the Sales Tax Officer the declarations which it should have produced for claiming the benefit of the rate of tax laid down in section 8(1) of the Act. The production of the declarations before the Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax was of no avail and the Additional Commissioner was right in not taking any notice of the C Form declarations produced before him. If he had given effect to those declarations, he would have acted contrary to the provisions of sub-section (4) of section 8 requiring that the declarations must be furnished before the taxing authority and before the assessment. 8.. For these reasons, the assessment order made against the petitioner-firm must be upheld. The result is that this application is dismissed with costs of the respondents. Counsel s fee is fixed at Rs. 150. The outstanding amount of security deposit, if any, after deduction of costs, shall be refunded to the petitioner. Application dismissed.
4278...1966 (9) TMI 12 - ANDHRA PRADESH High Court
A Hanumantha Rao Versus Commissioner of Wealth-Tax, Andhra Pradesh
Whether the assessee could impress the character of a joint family property on the property separately owned by him only for the benefit of himself and his sons constituting a separate HUF to the exclusion of his father notwithstanding the fact that ......
4279...1966 (9) TMI 120 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Sales Tax Commissioner, UP. Versus Ram Kumar Agarwal
........... ey . The words deferred payment or other valuable consideration used in section 2(h) of the Act, merely enlarge the ambit of the consideration beyond cash , but they do not, in my opinion, carry it outside the scope of the term money . The words other valuable consideration are general as compared with the two preceding more specific terms cash and deferred payment . Cash and deferred payment are also considerations. Hence, all the conditions for the applicability of the ejusdem generis rule are satisfied and the expression other valuable consideration can and must be interpreted restrictively here. It seems intended to cover cheques and promissory notes or negotiable instruments which serve the purpose of money in modern commercial practice and usage and which can be included in the concept of money . For the reasons given above, I concur with the interpretation of the definition of sale in section 2(h) of the Act given by my learned brother. Reference answered accordingly.
4280...1966 (9) TMI 121 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Sri Ramachandra Ginning and Oil Mills and Others Versus The State of Andhra Pradesh
........... ncome-tax Act, 1922, giving the assessee also a right to move the Commissioner to exercise revisional powers. The decision of the Supreme Court in Dwarka Nath v. Income-tax Officer 1965 57 I.T.R. 349. is on section 33-A and could therefore afford little assistance. The unreported decision of the Supreme Court, to which we have referred, as well as the observations of their Lordships of the Privy Council, though no doubt on provisions in different Acts which are pari materia, sets at rest even a lurking doubt as to the ambit of the powers conferred under section 20 of the Act. It is unnecessary in this view to decide the other questions namely whether the assessee has a right to have personal hearing. In the view we have taken, the revisions before the Board are not maintainable and the appeals are also not maintainable and are accordingly dismissed with costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 25 in each case except Special Appeal 1 of 1963 in which no costs are allowed. Appeals dismissed.
4281...1966 (9) TMI 122 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
KJ. Lingan and Others Versus Joint Commercial Tax Officer, Mount Road Division, Madras and Others
........... act, sub-section (3) of the amended section 46 is to the effect that where the prescribed authority passes an order refusing to allow composition, it should record in writing the reasons therefor. I am, therefore, of the opinion that even under the old section 46, a dealer will have right of revision, as composition can only be held to be a proceeding recorded under the Act. It therefore follows that a revision will lie to the Deputy Commissioner under section 33 and to the Board of Revenue under section 35 of the Act. My view is strengthened on account of the fact that, under rule 53 of the Rules, the prescribed authority exercises the powers specified in section 46 of the Act subject to the control and direction of the Deputy Commissioner and the Board of Revenue. Such control and direction can effectively be done only in revisions to them. In the result, the writ petitions are allowed. Rule nisi will be made absolute. There will be no order as to costs. Petitions allowed.
4282...1966 (9) TMI 123 - KERALA HIGH COURT
K. Moideenkutty Versus Sales Tax Officer, Tirur
........... rmises. The conjectures in this case are that, though the goods were carried only on two days in the year, i.e., on 12th September, 1964, and 9th February, 1965, similar goods have been carried during every week of the year. There is no material whatever for thinking that similar goods have been carried on any other day during the year of assessment. Notwithstanding the non-availability of material the assessing authority has assumed that every week of the year similar quantities have been carried by him through the check post. This assumption is without any basis. I therefore think that I should interfere under Article 226 of the Constitution and I quash exhibit P-1 order and allow this writ application. This of course will not preclude the assessing authority from requantifying the turnover and making any fresh assessment on the petitioner in the light of what is stated above and in accordance with law. There will be no order as to costs in this petition. Petition allowed.
4283...1966 (9) TMI 124 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
SR. Swamy, In re
........... g properties or even disposal of properties with a view to make such properties unavailable for realisation of arrears of tax may amount to fraudulent evasion of tax. Fraudulent evasion has to be inferred from the facts and circumstances of each case. A person who may have the intention to pay tax may not be able to pay it due to loss in business or similar other circumstances. It cannot be said that non-payment of tax under those circumstances is fraudulent evasion. In this case though the petitioner had not paid the tax in spite of notice for a long time, there is no evidence to infer that he evaded payment fraudulently. On the other hand, there is evidence to show that he disputed the validity of the assessment. The prosecution has not made out the offence under section 45(2)(b) of the Act against the petitioner in all these cases. These revisions are allowed. The convictions and sentences in each case are set aside. The fine, if paid, will be refunded. Petitions allowed.
4284...1966 (9) TMI 125 - MYSORE HIGH COURT
S. Subba Rao Versus Commissioner of Commercial Taxes in Mysore, Bangalore
........... hinks fit are three independent powers and all those powers should be exercised within the time fixed in section 21(3). They are all facets of one single power, namely, the power to revise and that power is exercisable within the time mentioned in section 21(3). We are also unable to agree with Mr. Srinivasan that the power to call for records under section 21(2) is not a part of the quasijudicial power of the Commissioner to revise the orders of his subordinates. The power to call for records is a part of the revisional power of the Commissioner. The expression shall be exercisable found in section 21(3) refers to the commencement of the exercise of the power referred to, and not the completion of the exercise of that power. Like all periods of limitation, section 21(3) also refers to initiation of the proceedings and not its completion. For the reasons mentioned above, these appeals fail and they are dismissed with costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 100, one set. Appeals dismissed.
4285...1966 (9) TMI 126 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Murali Trading Co. Versus Joint Commercial Tax Officer, Mannady, West Madras
........... to be struck down. Those assessments are for 1962-63 in W.P. No. 1160 of 1965 with penalty thereon (W.P. No. 1161 of 1965), for 1963-64 in W.P. No. 1122 of 1965 and a provisional assessment for 1964-65 in W.P. No. 1159 of 1965. All these are linked in a chain as consequential assessments on the basic assessment, and everyone of them will have to be investigated in the light of the detailed explanations sought to be furnished by the assessee. We, therefore, direct that the writs would issue striking down the assessments and that the detailed explanations of the assessee now supplemented by further detailed statements, should be taken up and considered, and the assessment carried through again in due compliance with the requirements of law, and the principles of natural justice. The concerned assessee is directed to withdraw the appeals pending before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, in view of the allowance of the writs. Parties will bear their own costs. Petitions allowed.
4286...1966 (9) TMI 127 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Phipson & Co. Ltd. Ernakulam Versus Sales Tax Officer, Special Circle, Erunakulam
........... ate of Orissa v. Tulloch and Co. Ltd. 1964 15 S.T.C. 641.). And it is submitted that from the invoices and the bills issued by McDowell and Co., Ltd., to the petitioner it would be clear that tax has been paid in respect of the transactions by McDowell and Co., Ltd., Shertallai, and that if the point had been taken by the respondent at the time of hearing before him, the petitioner would have adduced unimpeachable evidence to show that the tax has been paid by McDowell and Co., on the basis that sales effected by it to the petitioner are the first sales. I therefore overrule this contention. I quash exhibits P-3 and P-4 the orders of assessment so far as they relate to the turnover of the sales of beer for the years in question as specified in the writ petition. The petition is allowed to this extent only. In other respects, it is dismissed. The respondent will compute the tax on this basis and issue fresh demands. There will be no order as to costs. Petition partly allowed.
4287...1966 (9) TMI 128 - MYSORE HIGH COURT
NV. Giriyappa Setty & Sons Versus State of Mysore
........... venue. It appears that it was conceded in that case that no notice of assessment had been served on the assessee. Whether that admission is correct or not, is not relevant for our present purpose. Suffice it to say that this Court decided that case on the basis of an admission. Therein this Court further observed In this case it is unnecessary to decide what exactly is meant by notice of assessment . That question can be decided in an appropriate case if and when necessary. It has now become necessary to decide as to what is meant by the expression notice of assessment . For the reasons already mentioned by us, we are of the opinion that service of a notice in Form No. 6 is a service of a notice of assessment and the assessee having been served with that notice nearly 5 years prior to his filing the appeal before the Deputy Commissioner, his appeal was clearly barred by time. In the result, this revision petition fails and the same is dismissed. No costs. Petition dismissed.
4288...1966 (9) TMI 129 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
PV. Subrahmanyam & Co. Versus The Board of Revenue (C. T.), Andhra Pradesh
........... not exceed Rs. 5,000 and (iii) all such purchases relate to the same assessment year. It is indisputable that the two forms of declaration do not conform with these conditions. In the circumstances, even if any one of the conditions prescribed under rule 9-A is not satisfied, the seller will not be entitled to a concessional rate. Mr. Rama Rao, however, cited a decision of the Madras High Court in R. Nandalal and Co. v. Government of Madras 1965 16 S.T.C. 1. The Madras High Court, in our view, was not considering rule 9-A, but rule 10, which as framed by that Government is different, and, therefore, the ratio of that decision, even if it supports the contention of the learned counsel, which prima facie we do not think it does, is inapplicable to the facts of the instant case. We have no hesitation in holding that the Board of Revenue was right in disallowing the concession. In this view, this appeal fails and is dismissed with costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 100. Appeal dismissed.
4289...1966 (9) TMI 13 - MYSORE High Court
Hanuman Motor Service Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax, Mysore.
Current repairs - cost of installation of diesel engines in the place of petrol engines of the existing buses - allowable deduction u/s 10(2)(v)as revenue expenditure ......
4290...1966 (9) TMI 130 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Lakshmi Ganesh Rice Mill Versus Board of Revenue (C. T.), Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad
........... eme Court. In that case, viz., Shree Bajarang Jute Mills Ltd., Guntur v. The State of Andhra Pradesh(1), their Lordships of the Supreme Court held that as the goods were sent under railway receipts to places outside the State of Andhra, and actually delivered for the purpose of consumption in those States, the State of Andhra had no authority to levy tax in respect of those sale transactions. In view of this decision of the Supreme Court, the decision of the Board of Revenue on the facts as found has to be set aside. It is not disputed by the learned Government Pleader that the actual delivery took place outside the State, which is the criterion held to be necessary to bring the transactions within the ambit of the definition of sale. The appeal is, therefore, allowed, the decision of the Board of Revenue is set aside, and the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Guntur, is restored. There will be no order as to costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 100. Appeal allowed.
4291...1966 (9) TMI 131 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Ramchandra Rampratap Versus Commissioner of Sales Tax, Madhya Pradesh, Indore
........... from the State to places outside was as a direct result of any covenant or incident of the contract of sale. On the contrary, the contract of sale with the Nagpur buyer had been completely carried out within the State of Madhya Pradesh itself, wherein the price was received by sending the documents of title to the buyer. The subsequent movement of the goods to places outside the State, being on the despatch instructions of the buyer, must be regarded as having been effected by the Nagpur buyer, after property in the goods had passed to him, so that the sales were not sales in the course of any inter-State trade or commerce but were intra-State sales. 7.. In that view, the answer to the question referred must be that the sales amounting to Rs. 2,74,965.77 were intra-State sales, liable to be taxed under section 18(4) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958. The Commissioner shall have the costs of this reference. Hearing fee Rs. 100. Reference answered accordingly.
4292...1966 (9) TMI 14 - ALLAHABAD High Court
Om Prakash Agarwal Versus Income-Tax Officer,
Whether assessee is in default or is deemed to be in default in making payment of tax - some steps are necessary to be taken by ITO before the ITO can come to the decision that the assessee is in default and a penalty should be imposed upon him ......
4293...1966 (9) TMI 15 - MYSORE High Court
Commissioner of Income-Tax, Mysore Versus MM Thimmaiah.
Tribunal was right in holding that the ITO, while passing the order u/s 155 of the Act, was not justified in treating the share income of profit from the partnership firms as unearned ......
4294...1966 (9) TMI 16 - ALLAHABAD High Court
Ganesh Prasad Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax, UP
Cash credits - income from undisclosed source - taxability ......
........... of the Supreme Court decision in Govindarajulu Mudaliar s case. The legal inference therefore could have legitimately been drawn by the Tribunal, from the assessee s failure to satisfactorily prove the source, nature and character of the sum of Rs. 18,005, that it was income from an undisclosed source and as such assessable in the relevant assessment year 1947-48. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, it is not possible to say that such an inference could not have been drawn by any person duly instructed in the law. It was a possible inference and the Tribunal not having misdirected itself, it cannot be said that the Tribunal acted illegally in treating the sum as liable to tax for the assessment year 1947-48. For the reasons given above, the question is answered in the affirmative and against the assessee. The assessee will pay the costs of the reference which we assess at Rs. 200. Counsel s fee is also assessed at Rs. 200. Question answered in the affirmative.
4295...1966 (9) TMI 17 - PATNA High Court
Rohtas Industries Limited Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bihar And Orissa.
Assessee produced vanaspati vegetable oil. Their directors and principal officers were prosecuted - held that sum incurred in defending the criminal proceedings against the company and its officers was a permissible deduction for the purpose of compu ......
4296...1966 (9) TMI 18 - CALCUTTA High Court
Commissioner of Income-Tax (Central), Calcutta Versus Karamchand Thapar And Brothers Private Limited
Payment was made to compensate a person for cancellation of a contract - not affect the trading structure of the assessee`s business - termination of the contract was normal incident of the business and that such cancellation left the assessee free t ......
4297...1966 (9) TMI 19 - PATNA High Court
Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bihar And Orissa Versus Bharat Collieries Limited.
Assessee entered into a contract for supply of coal to Japan - commission paid - There was nothing by way of advantage of any enduring benefit in that transaction; neither the assessee obtained any monopoly rights nor any abnormal concessions in rega ......
4298...1966 (9) TMI 2 - ANDHRA PRADESH High Court
Kasamsetty Radhakrishnaiah Chetty Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax, AP
Baddebt - assesse's appeal allowed ......
........... r. It is sufficient to state that we cannot accept the view of the Tribunal that in no event can a partner who advances moneys to a firm of which he is a partner occupy the position of a creditor or be said to carry on the business of money-lending. Having arrived at the above conclusion, the next question to be considered is whether, in the circumstances of the case, the moneys advanced by the assessee do not merely represent the capital he was bound to contribute, but constitute money-lending business. But, for answering this, there is no evidence on record. The first question referred to us, viz., whether or not the advances made by a person to a firm of which he is a partner constitute money-lending business is, therefore, answered in favour of the assessee and against the department. The Tribunal will dispose of the case in the light of this answer. In the circumstances of the case, the parties will bear their own costs. First question answered in favour of the assessee.
4299...1966 (9) TMI 20 - MYSORE High Court
US Nayak Versus Commissioner of Wealth-Tax, Mysore.
Net wealth - House Property - fair market value ......
........... has to pay wealth-tax in respect of the same. Mr. Bhat, the learned counsel for the assessee, wanted us to direct the Wealth-tax Officer to keep the assessment proceedings in abeyance. He did not invite our attention to any provision in the Act which permits such a course. The fact that such a course is possible to be adopted by the Wealth-tax Officer is no ground for us to direct him to do so. All that we are concerned in this case is whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the inclusion of the property s fair market value in the net wealth of the assessee was justified or, in other words, was in accordance with law. We are of the opinion that the inclusion of the market value of the property in question is in accordance with law and, therefore, it is justified. In the result, our answer to the question referred to us is against the assessee. The assessee to pay the costs of the department. Advocate s fee Rs. 250. Question answered against the assessee.
4300...1966 (9) TMI 21 - PATNA High Court
Commissioner of Income-Tax, Patna Versus Rohtas Industries Limited.
Tribunal was right in holding that the sum spent in the litigation over alleged infringement of patent rights was an expenditure allowable under s. 10(2)(xv) of the IT Act. ......
.. ........ ..