|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 181 to 200 of 223 Records
-
1989 (11) TMI 43 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Prosecution - Allegation of non-declaration with intention to evade customs duty - Import ... ... ... ... ..... n be said to have been disclosed against him either under Section 135 of the Customs Act or under any of its sub-clauses or under Section 5 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947. I, therefore, find that the order of discharge is perfectly justified and calls for no interference. 11. It may additionally be mentioned that the Government of India were pleased to exonerate the Respondent for similar reasons as have been considered above in Customs Revision Application Order No. 305 of 1986 dated 24-7-1986 a copy of which has been produced before me by Mr. Kotwal, the learned Advocate for the Respondent. The reasons given in the said order provided further assurance that the view taken by the learned Magistrate was perfectly justified on the material that was produced before him. 12. In the result, the order of discharge of the Respondent passed by the Court below dated 31-10-1985 is hereby confirmed and the Revision Application is dismissed. Rule accordingly discharged.
-
1989 (11) TMI 42 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Prosecution - Bail - Jurisdiction ... ... ... ... ..... period of sixty days expired on 16-11-1989. As a result of the pendency of the criminal revision application in the Sessions Court of Greater Bombay and as a consequence of the interim stay granted by that Court, the Petitioners have been detained in custody beyond the statutory period stipulated by the proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is true that the learned Addl. Sessions Judge did not intend the detention beyond the period stipulated by Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. But the interim relief granted by him has resulted in such detention. Since the chargesheet has not been filed within sixty days or to this date, the accused/petitioners are entitled to be released on bail and cannot be detained merely because the Sessions Court stayed the operation of the Order granting them bail. 6. For these reasons, the petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer (a). Except this, no order on the application
-
1989 (11) TMI 41 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Prosecution - Revision - Evidence ... ... ... ... ..... acted properly, within the law and taken a view of facts which cannot be said to be erroneous. The analysis of the evidence reveals that the learned Additional Sessions Judge arrived at conclusions which a reasonable mind would arrived at on such evidence. Mr. Patwardhan, learned Counsel for the Petitioner argued, as he always does, all the points with reference to the evidence. But he was handicapped by the loose, weak links which do not form the evidence sufficient to proceed to a trial. I am afraid this is not a case in which I should exercise the revisional powers to reverse the findings which are sound, consistent with evidence, ordinary human conduct and reason. 8. For all these reasons, the Criminal Revision Application No. 155 of 1989 filed by the Assistant Collector of Customs is dismissed. The Order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge in Criminal Revision Application No. 224 of 1988 discharging the accused No. 1 - Bharat Kalyani is confirmed. Rule discharged.
-
1989 (11) TMI 40 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Business Connection, Non-resident ... ... ... ... ..... esent application under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act has been filed by the Department. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and are of the opinion that the question whether M/s. Schreiner Airways was an agent of M/s. Inter Aviation Service Co. is a finding of fact inasmuch as it is based on the inferences drawn from the facts of the case. A finding based on inferences drawn from the facts of a case is purely a question of fact and no statable question of law arises under section 256 (2) of the Income-tax Act from such a finding. Moreover, learned counsel for the assessee also cited before us a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Toshoku Ltd. 1980 125 ITR 525, in support of his contention that an income earned as commission by a non-resident company outside the country cannot be held taxable in India. That being so, we do not find any merit in the submission of the Department and this application under section 256 (2) is, accordingly, rejected.
-
1989 (11) TMI 39 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Interest On Refund, Refund, Writ ... ... ... ... ..... a direction to pay interest on the seized amount at the rate of 12 per annum. The petitioner did make an application to the Commissioner of Income-tax for the refund of the principal amount but had never made any prayer for the payment of interest. In that view of the matter, we decline to issue mandamus to the petitioner, the principal amount having already been paid. The writ petition is dismissed. If law permits, the petitioner may approach the Commissioner of Income-tax for payment of interest.
-
1989 (11) TMI 38 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
HUF, Reassessment ... ... ... ... ..... missioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and accordingly affirmed the orders of the Income-tax Officer. The only question before us is whether the finding of the Tribunal is either perverse or is based on no evidence. We cannot go into the adequacy of the evidence. In this case, it may be noted that no explanation was submitted nor was there any response to the notice issued to the Hindu undivided family. The appeals by the Hindu undivided family were all filed by Mr. T. Appa Rao only, representing the Hindu undivided family. Though it was stated in the appeals that he has taken loans for the purpose of the said investment, no material whatsoever was placed before the appellate authority in support of the said plea. Having regard to the probabilities of the case and because there was no evidence to the contrary, the Tribunal came to a conclusion adverse to the assessee. We cannot say that the finding is based on no evidence. The Income tax case is, accordingly, dismissed. No costs.
-
1989 (11) TMI 37 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... gh Courts have held that, in the absence of a provision similar to section 159 of the Income-tax Act, the legal representatives of an assessee under the Wealth-tax Act cannot be penalised for the default of the deceased assessee. In the statement of objections filed on behalf of the respondents, this point of jurisdiction is not met and the penalty is sought to be justified on facts only. Having regard to the provisions of section 24(2) and in the light of the decisions of the High Courts referred to above, dealing with the corresponding provisions of section 19 of the Wealth-tax Act, I am of the opinion that the orders levying penalty on the petitioners under section 18(2A)(b) of the Agricultural Income-tax Act, impugned in these writ petitions, cannot be sustained in law. The liability on the legal representatives under the Act is only to pay tax from out of the estate of the deceased to the extent it is capable of meeting the charge of the agricultural income-tax assessed.
-
1989 (11) TMI 36 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Company In Liquidation ... ... ... ... ..... uidation), there Will be a direction to the Official Liquidator to declare a further dividend in respect of the amount of Rs. 27 lakhs provisionally set apart as per the order of this court in M. C. A. No. 37 of 1989, to the workmen and to the Canara Bank under section 529A of the Companies Act. Before doing so, the liquidator will reimburse to the Canara Bank the amounts advanced by the bank to the liquidator and the expenses incurred by them which will be ordered separately. In M. C. A.No. 106 of 1988 and C. A. No. 478 of 1989 and A. No. 487 of 1989 in respect of Brunton and Company (Engineers) Ltd. (in liquidation), the liquidator is directed to declare a further dividend under section 529A of the Companies Act in respect of the sum of Rs. 25,59,526.50 to the workmen and to Canara Bank after reimbursing the Canara Bank amounts advanced by the bank to the liquidator and the expenses incurred by the bank which will be ordered separately. Applications disposed of accordingly.
-
1989 (11) TMI 35 - PATNA HIGH COURT
False Statement In Verification, Offences And Prosecution, Procedure For Prosecution ... ... ... ... ..... s the prosecution did not examine any witness, the question of discharging the accused, at that stage, did not arise. In this view of the matter, in my opinion, in the interests of justice, the petitioners should be permitted by the learned court below to raise all these contentions, as referred to hereinbefore, at the time of framing of the charge and he shall pass an appropriate order at that stage. The learned court below may, however, consider the question whether, in view of the notification constituting special courts for trying of an offence under the Income-tax Act at Muzaffarpur, it will be in a position to continue with the trial of the case or not and in the event it is found that it is not so empowered, it may pass an order transferring the case to an appropriate court for trial and disposal. The question of the jurisdiction of the court below may be decided at the first instance. With the aforementioned observations and directions, this application is dismissed.
-
1989 (11) TMI 34 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Delay In Filing Return, Penalty, Reference, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... tax Act, 1957 requesting the Tribunal to refer to the High Court the questions of law enumerated in para 1 of the order of the Tribunal. The learned Tribunal was of the view that the Supreme Court in Maya Rani Punj s case 1986 157 ITR 330, has already concluded the points raised by the Revenue and, furthermore, the M. P. High Court in M. C. C. No. 252 of 1987 (CWT v. Babulal Agrawal 1989 176 ITR 497) has again followed the aforesaid Supreme Court decision in its order dated July 11, 1988. After considering the arguments raised by learned counsel for the par ties, we are of the opinion that this matter has already been concluded by the Supreme Court and that the Supreme Court decision reported in Maya Rani Punj s case 1986 157 ITR 330 having been followed by this court in M. C. C. No. 252 of 1987 (CWT v. Babulal Agrawal 1989 176 ITR 497), there is no case for admission of this application. The application filed by the Revenue is, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs.
-
1989 (11) TMI 33 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Accrual, Income ... ... ... ... ..... anced rate is an inchoate one as this extra amount did not accrue to the assessee until the finalisation of the dispute pending before one court or the other. It is only on the final determination of the amount that the right to such income in the nature of levy price would arise or accrue and till then there is no liability in praesenti in respect of the additional amount of price claimed by the assessee. Therefore, these cases fall within the scope of first class of cases noticed by the Supreme Court in Hindustan Housing and Land Development Trust Ltd. s case 1986 161 ITR 524 (SC), where it was held that where the right to receive payment is in dispute and it is not merely a question of quantifying the amount to be received, no income would arise or accrue till the levy price is finally fixed. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the Tribunal is right in its view, and, therefore, we have got to answer the question referred to us in the affirmative and against the Revenue.
-
1989 (11) TMI 32 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Capital Gains, Deduction ... ... ... ... ..... the nature of the expenses incurred by the assessee, the Tribunal held that what was claimed as cost of improvement was only cultivation expenses which cannot be called cost of improvement within the meaning of section 55 of the Income-tax Act. We are of the view that the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding so. The expenses incurred by way of manuring, spraying, weeding, etc., are really expenses incurred in connection with the cultivation and incidental thereto. They cannot be called improvements. The Appellate Tribunal was, therefore, justified in holding that the expenses incurred in that behalf cannot be considered to be cost of improvement as envisaged by section 55 of the Income-tax Act. We, therefore, answer question No. 5, referred to us, in the affirmative, against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. A copy of this judgment under the seal of this court and the signature of the Registrar will be forwarded to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench.
-
1989 (11) TMI 31 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Previous Year, Valuation Date, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... ed family recorded by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the question as to whether the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was justified in arriving, at the said finding was not agitated before the Tribunal. It cannot, therefore, be said that this matter arises out of the order of the Tribunal. If it is held that there was a partition of the Hindu undivided family on February 19, 1976, and the valuation date for the assessment year 1976-77 was March 31, 1976, the amount of Rs. 1,08,888 being the estimated value of the assets disclosed under the Ordinance has to be excluded from the wealth of the assessee for the assessment year 1976-77. Question No. 2 also must, therefore, be answered in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. For the above reasons, both the questions which have been referred for the consideration of this court are answered in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. No order as to costs.
-
1989 (11) TMI 30 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Reassessment ... ... ... ... ..... carried forward relief under section 80J originally granted for the assessment year 1973-74 is also valid. There is no merit in the plea of the assessee that the reopening of the assessment on the basis of a valid objection is untenable in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Indian and Eastern Newspaper Society v. CIT 1979 119 ITR 996, as we are of the view that the finding of the Appellate Tribunal that the audit objection merely drew the attention of the Income-tax Officer and that did not in any manner amount to an expression of opinion in the matter. In the light of the above, we answer question No. 1 in the affirmative, against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. We answer question No. 2 also in the affirmative, against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. The reference is disposed of as above. A copy of this judgment under the seal of this court and the signature of the Registrar will be forwarded to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench.
-
1989 (11) TMI 29 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Business Expenditure, Ceiling On Perquisite Given To Employees ... ... ... ... ..... of Direct Taxes No. 336 dated April 16, 1982. The above circular is in regard to the computation of the total income of the assessee. The above circular refers to Circular No. 33 dated August 1, 1955. This is the relevant circular. The above circular has not been placed before us and we are not in a position to say the content and scope of the circular and the applicability of the same or the extent of the applicability of the same in the circumstances of the case. In the circumstances, we decline to answer the question referred to us, but, however, we direct the Tribunal to reconsider the question afresh on the basis of the materials available before the Tribunal. Of course, the Tribunal has to consider whether the circular is applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case. The reference is answered as above. A copy of this judgment, under the seal of this court and the Signature of the Registrar, shall be forwarded to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench.
-
1989 (11) TMI 28 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Income Deemed To Accrue Or Arise In India, Other Sources ... ... ... ... ..... forms. To say so would unnecessarily scuttle down the true effect of the provision. Learned counsel relied upon a decision of this court in Addl. CIT v. Bharat Fritz Werner Private Ltd. 1979 118 ITR 1018 as also a decision of the Gujarat High Court in CIT v. Saurashtra Cement and Chemical Industries Ltd. 1975 101 ITR 502. But, in our opinion, neither of these decisions has any application to the facts of the present case for, in the former, this court was not concerned with the controversy with which we are concerned presently. In that case, there was no business connection and the question of borrowed money being imported into India never fell for consideration. In the Gujarat decision, what was considered was only a transaction of debt and not a case of borrowing as is the case here. In that view of the matter, we find no grounds to disturb the findings recorded by the Tribunal in this case. We answer the question referred to us in the affirmative and against the assessee.
-
1989 (11) TMI 27 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Question Of Law ... ... ... ... ..... period of more than 30 days, it had no jurisdiction to condone the delay. On this ground alone, the application under section 256(1) was dismissed. The present petition under section 256(2) is against that order of the Tribunal. In view of the fact that the application under section 256(1) was dismissed as being barred by limitation, the question of an application under section 256(2) being filed cannot arise. It is only when an application under section 256(1) is dismissed on merits that an application under section 256(2) can be filed. It being so, the present, petition is dismissed. No costs.
-
1989 (11) TMI 26 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Agricultural Income Tax, Surcharge ... ... ... ... ..... rcular issued by the Commissioner. The learned single judge has proceeded on the assumption that the circular was not binding on the authorities since it was contrary to law. With utmost respect, we are not in agreement with this view. The interpretation given to the Ordinance and the effect of its lapsing as understood by the Commissioner and as stated in his circular is a matter relevant to the enforcement of the provisions of the Act. The validity of the view expressed by the Commissioner is not before the court none has challenged it. It is binding on all subordinate authorities. Therefore, in respect of pending assessments, no surcharge could be levied by the assessing authorities. In view of the above, these writ appeals are entitled to succeed. The impugned orders in the writ petitions, annexures A, B and C are hereby quashed so far as they relate to the levy of surcharge under the Ordinance aforesaid. The writ petitions are also allowed. Rules made absolute. No costs.
-
1989 (11) TMI 25 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... emedy provided under the Act and to challenge those notices in an appropriate proceeding. As regards the prayer for the return of the account books in the counter-affidavit, it appears that the Commissioner of Income-tax had authorised the retention of account books till December 31, 1988, and, admittedly, this time limit has been extended up to December 31, 1989. It was also urged on behalf of the petitioner that the appeal was heard by the first appellate authority on August 5, 1988, behind the back of the petitioner and no opportunity of being heard was granted to it. This plea involves investigation of a question of fact. The petitioner would be entitled to urge this ground before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal where the second appeal is pending. In a writ petition, this question cannot be gone into on which there seems to be some dispute. In view of what has been stated above, no relief can be granted to the petitioner and the writ petition is accordingly, dismissed.
-
1989 (11) TMI 24 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Agricultural Development Allowance, Business Expenditure, Depreciation, Reserve For Bad Debt, Weighted Deduction
....
|
