Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 61 to 78 of 78 Records
-
1968 (11) TMI 18 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Mysore Agricultural Income Tax Act - order of Commissioner - validity of the order on ground of limitation prescribed under section 35(2)(b)
-
1968 (11) TMI 17 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Proceedings under section 34 to assess the firm - notice under section 34 was issued after the expiry of the time limit - validity
-
1968 (11) TMI 16 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Assessee executed a settlement by which the settled in favour of his father, his house property - income from the property - assessee continues to be the owner of the property and the transfer of income is not by overriding title the income from the said property is taxable in the hands of the assessee
-
1968 (11) TMI 15 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Estate Duty Act, 1953 - assessee, a businessman setted immovable properties in favour of a trust by executing a conveyance in favour of the trustees - in case of settlement and in case of gifting, the assessee had complete control over the properties and hence the properties had not passed to the trustees - therefore, properties are includible in the estate of the deceased
-
1968 (11) TMI 14 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Transfer of case - Can the orders transferring the cases be treated as invalid as the petitioners were not afforded an oral hearing before the orders were made - Held, no
-
1968 (11) TMI 13 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Estate Duty Act, 1953 - scope and effect of section 10 ... ... ... ... ..... the wife, the inference must follow that the property passed on the death of the deceased. No doubt it would appear to have been taken as a ground in the appeals before the revenue and perhaps before the Tribunal that the control and use of the money were with the deceased s wife and son. But this remains to be an assertion without any material to support it. We do not think that the fact that the money was withdrawn from the firm of which the deceased was a partner, and it was subsequently invested in the name of the wife and her son in either or survivor accounts established any such control or use of the money by them or either of them. The wife s name was there before and after the withdrawal of the money from the firm and the either or survivor account in her name and that of her son does not, in our opinion, advance the matter further in favour of the accountable person. We, therefore, answer the question against the accountable person with costs. Counsel s fee, Rs. 250
-
1968 (11) TMI 12 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Assessee, a partner of a firm claimed salary and travelling allowance paid to A, who assisted him in the work, which the assessee was to do under the terms of the partnership, as deduction - Expenditure was incurred by the assessee for earning a half share of the profits of the firm - so it is allowable as deduction form his share income
-
1968 (11) TMI 11 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Dissolution of Firm - one partner overdrawn money - This was treated by other partner treating it as loan and entered into his account maintained in that regard - Tax was also paid on interest - However part payment was made. Balance was claimed as debt - held that claim of debt was not allowable
-
1968 (11) TMI 10 - PATNA HIGH COURT
Whether there is any prohibition in the Bihar & Orissa Excise Act that a partnership cannot carry on the business of dealing in excisable articles, provided the person who actually carried on the business has a licence - Held, no - firm is entitled to registration
-
1968 (11) TMI 9 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Whether ITO has jurisdiction to grant stay collection of tax - jurisdiction of the ITO under s. 220(6) is quasi-judicial and has been exclusively entrusted to him by the State - question is answered in positive
-
1968 (11) TMI 8 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Agricultural lands - determining the nature of land - section 2(e)(i) of the WT Act.
... ... ... ... ..... of the case that the buildings situate inside that area have each compound walls of their own. Therefore, this large extent of land of 108 acres cannot be treated as a court-yard or a land merely appurtenant to the said buildings. The circumstances relied upon by the learned counsel for the department do not outweigh the other factors which indicate the character of the land as agricultural land . Sri Ananta Babu contends that every land is capable of being cultivated, and that, if mere capacity for cultivation is to be taken into consideration, no distinction can be drawn between the expressions, land and agricultural land . But, as we have mentioned earlier, the mere capability is also a strong factor which should also be taken into consideration for determining the true character of the land. For the foregoing reasons, the question referred is, therefore, answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. The assessee will have his costs. Advocate s fee, Rs. 250.
-
1968 (11) TMI 7 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Firm - there is not much difference between registration and renewal of registration - Tribunal was not justified in dismissing the appeal merely because the assessee applied for renewal of registration
-
1968 (11) TMI 6 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Assessee challenged the notice of demand on the grounds that the ITO was bound to make the provisional assessment on the basis of the return filed by the assessee - petition is allowed - notice of demand u/s 141 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is quashed - It is open to the Income-tax Officer to proceed afresh in accordance with law in order to provisionally assess the petitioner under section 141 of the Act
-
1968 (11) TMI 5 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Whether profits lying unutilised and not specially set apart for any purpose do not constitute a `reserve` within meaning of proviso to section 23A(1) - Held, yes
-
1968 (11) TMI 4 - PATNA HIGH COURT
Firm - registration ... ... ... ... ..... partnership deed in question, the rules and regulations of the Excise Act had to be observed and the working and the management of the liquor shop business had only been put under the supervision of Sri Ram. Therefore, it was in the contemplation of the two partners that the law regarding sale of liquor had to be observed as provided by section 22 of the Excise Act. Hence registration under section 26A was rightly ordered on the principle laid down by this decision. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the judgment of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated the 10th July, 1964, was correct. As the assessee-firm was legally entitled to registration under section 26A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, for the years 1959-60 and 1960-61, the reference is answered against the Commissioner of Income-tax. The opposite party, the applicant for registration, will be entitled to costs, which I assess at Rs. 250. KANHAIYAJI J.-I agree.
-
1968 (11) TMI 3 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Notice of reassessment - service of notice - limitation ... ... ... ... ..... of the decisions, to which reference has already been made that onus was on the assessee and, in the absence of his establishing the same, the legal inference was permissible that the entire amount was the undisclosed income liable to be taxed in the year of account. In our opinion, therefore, the second question raised on the supplementary statement also must be answered against the assessee. In the result, therefore, question No. 1 raised on the original reference is answered in the affirmative and question No. 2 in the negative, and question No. 1 raised on the supplementary statement is answered in the affirmative. Question No. 2 raised on the supplementary statement is answered in the affirmative with regard to the whole of the amount of Rs. 1,75,000. The assessee will pay the costs of the Commissioner. The notice of motion taken out by the department for deleting the reference to the Bombay Cotton Annual, 1946-47, No. 28, is allowed. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1968 (11) TMI 2 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
No failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment - hence, proceedings could not be initiated u/s 34(1)(a)
-
1968 (11) TMI 1 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Profit on sale of immovable properties - not income liable to assessment under the IT Act
... ... ... ... ..... ated as part of the stock-in-trade. The conduct consisted in this the sale proceeds were actually utilised in the money-lending business like the income from the properties before their sale. There was also the further fact that loss resulting from the sale of properties was treated as business loss. That is not the case here. It is also urged for the revenue that on a mixed question of fact and law, this court should not upset the Tribunal s conclusion, unless we consider that it is unreasonable. But keeping it in full view, we are not satisfied that, on the facts in this case, the Tribunal drew the reasonable inference from the facts all taken together. We think that the evidence on record and the facts emerging therefrom fall short of impressing the immovable properties or their sale proceeds with the character of stock-in-trade of the money-lending business of the assessee. On that view, we answer the reference in favour of the assessee with costs. Counsel s fee Rs. 250.
|