Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 221 to 240 of 268 Records
-
1994 (2) TMI 48 - PATNA HIGH COURT
Powers Of Tribunal, Registration Of Firm ... ... ... ... ..... ss and its efficiency and profitability. In other words, the expenditure incurred was for the better conduct and improvement of the existing business. We are of the view that in this perspective, in the light of the recent decision of the Supreme Court in Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd. v. CIT 1989 177 ITR 377, at page 391, the conclusion of the Appellate Tribunal that the expenditure incurred is revenue in character is unassailable. The Revenue has not assailed the finding of the Tribunal that the two gear boxes fitted in L. C. T. M. V. (bridge) rendered it more efficient and resulted in earning more income. In the light of the aforesaid finding, the expenditure can only be a revenue expenditure. We are of the view that no referable question of law arises out of the appellate order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna. Accordingly, we dismiss the petition filed by the Revenue under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
1994 (2) TMI 47 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ... ... ... ..... TR 542 (SC)). The only question is whether it is deductible in that assessment year though it was not actually remitted. It is not disputed that the assessee maintained his accounts on the mercantile basis. Section 43B was not there during the relevant assessment year it came into force much later. In these circumstances, it cannot be disputed in view if the decision of this court in Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. CIT 1971 82 ITR 363 that it is a deductible expenditure. Thus, the amounts of excise duty collected by the assessee from the customers would form part of its trading receipts. Where the amount of the excise duty is required to be refunded to the customers, such amount will also be a deduction which the assessee can claim. In view of the above discussion and our answer to question No. 2B, question No. 3 is answered in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The reference stands disposed of accordingly, with no order as to costs.
-
1994 (2) TMI 46 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Appeal To Supreme Court, Assessment Year, Charitable Trust, Full Bench, High Court, Income Tax, Question Of Law, Res Judicata
-
1994 (2) TMI 45 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Borrowed Capital, Business Expenditure, Computation Of Capital, Entertainment Expenditure, Income Tax Act, New Industrial Undertaking, Special Deduction, Travel Expenditure, Written Down Value
-
1994 (2) TMI 44 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Attributable To, Business Income, Finding Of Fact, Question Of Law ... ... ... ... ..... curities held by a co-operative society as its stock-in-trade qualifies for exemption. In our opinion, no statable question of law arises on the facts found by the Tribunal. The application is accordingly rejected. The decision of this court referred to above was followed by this court in Income-tax Application No. 131 of 1983-CIT v. Zila Sahakari Bank Ltd.-decided on March 29, 1984, when an application under section 256(2) of the Act was rejected on a similar issue. It appears that the Revenue filed a special leave petition before the Supreme Court against the latter decision of this court which was dismissed by the Supreme Court by its order dated April 18, 1991, since reported as CIT v. Zila Sahakari Bank Ltd. Having regard to the above decisions, in our opinion, the second question proposed in the applications does not give rise to any statable question of law. In the result, all the applications are rejected being devoid of any merit. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
1994 (2) TMI 43 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Recovery Proceedings ... ... ... ... ..... , on the other hand, contended that even a balance-sheet had not been filed in order to make out a case of alleged financial stringency. The amount in question, it was pointed out, had not gone out of the hands of the petitioner-society. It was credited to the account of the cane grower-members by way of increase of their share capital. In other words, the amount had been appropriated under one head instead of paying the tax which had been assessed and the order of the Assessing Officer had been confirmed in the appeal by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). After hearing learned counsel for the parties and in the facts and circumstances briefly touched upon above, we find that no case had been made out to show that the impugned order had been passed arbitrarily or is the result of non-application of mind or is based on any extraneous consideration and accordingly we are of the view that no case for interference is made out. We accordingly dismiss the petition in limine.
-
1994 (2) TMI 42 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Capital Asset, Interest On Borrowed Capital ... ... ... ... ..... hallenged as perverse the finding of the Tribunal that the assessee s business activity consisted of acquiring shares for managing, controlling and rehabilitating different companies listed by the Assessing Officer. A businessman like the assessee in this case does not purchase shares of different companies for acquiring controlling interest therein only for earning dividends. Acquiring controlling interest in companies and managing, administering, financing and rehabilitating companies under control are for business and/or professional purpose. The Supreme Court in the case of P. Krishna Menon v. CIT 1959 35 ITR 48 held that in order that an activity might be called a vocation, it was not necessary to show that it was indulged in with a motive of making profits. In view of the above and in view of the facts, as discussed above, we answer both the questions in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. Each party to pay and bear its own costs. ARUN KUMAR DUTTA J.-I agree.
-
1994 (2) TMI 41 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Alternate Remedy, Assessment Notice, Assessment Proceedings, Assessment Year, Information That Income Has Escaped Assessment, Reassessment Proceedings, Writ Petition
-
1994 (2) TMI 40 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Capital Asset, Capital Gains, Income From Property, Individual Income, Total Income ... ... ... ... ..... facts. The real question is whether the consideration proceeded from the profits of the business enterprises or from the assessee s or his wife s separate funds or from the share of the assessee or his wife in the profits of the enterprises. The finding of the Tribunal based on the nature of the settlement that section 64 is not attracted is erroneous. The error arose on account of failure to consider relevant aspects referred to above. The matter will have to be considered afresh by the Tribunal. Question No. 2 has to be answered in the negative, that is, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. Both the questions are answered in the negative, i.e., in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. The real controversy involved in question No. 2 will have to be decided afresh by the Tribunal. A copy of the judgment under the signature of the Registrar and the seal of the High Court will have to be sent to the Appellate Tribunal. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1994 (2) TMI 39 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Development Allowance, Weighted Deduction ... ... ... ... ..... of the specified categories of expenditure. We are of the opinion that in view of a categorical finding of fact recorded by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and affirmed by the Tribunal to the effect that the commission was paid to the agents abroad, who introduced buyers to the assessee and thereby provided information in regard to export markets and the said finding not being in contest, the expenditure incurred by the assessee on payment of commission to its foreign agents will qualify for weighted deduction under section 35B(1)(b)(ii) of the Act. We do not see any reason or justification to interfere with the view taken by the Tribunal that the ratio of the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in J. Hemchand s case I. T.A. Nos. 3255 and 3330 of 1976-77 is applicable to the facts of the present case. The result, therefore, is that we answer the question referred to us in the affirmative, that is, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. No costs.
-
1994 (2) TMI 38 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Cash Credits ... ... ... ... ..... that the Tribunal has to be directed to refer to this court the following question under section 256(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the findings of the Tribunal that the explanation offered by the assessee about the nature and source of the cash credit in the aggregate of Rs. 1,71,500 or any portion of it is not satisfactory, is perverse, unreasonable, contrary to law and one which no reasonable person would have come to that conclusion ? In the result, we allow O. P. No. 9510 of 1985 and direct the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin, to draw up a statement of the case and refer the above question for the decision of this court. In the light of what we have stated above, O. P. No. 10168 of 1985 is dismissed. By virtue of the decision in O. P. No. 9510 of 1985, we feel that question referred to us in Income-tax Reference No. 42 of 1988 need not be answered. Accordingly, we decline to answer the question in Income-tax Reference No. 42 of 1988.
-
1994 (2) TMI 37 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Income Tax Act, Manufacture Or Production, New Industrial Undertaking, Special Deduction, Withdrawal Of Development Rebate
-
1994 (2) TMI 36 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Income Tax Act, Movable Property, Purchase Of Immovable Property By Central Government, Supreme Court
-
1994 (2) TMI 35 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Quoted Equity Shares, Trust For The Benefit, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... section (3) lays down the method and extent of taxation. The taxation would be on the basis of two fictions. One is that the minor is not a minor but of full age. The second fiction is that even though his interest is a beneficial interest and not in absolute interest, yet he would be treated as the direct owner of such assets. The expression of the nature of the interest as direct ownership necessarily predicates the interest to be absolute interest. Thus, the contention of the Revenue has the support of the literal interpretation of sub-section (3) of section 21. On the face Of the unambiguous provisions, there is, thus, no escape from the inference that in the instant situation, we have to take the minor beneficiary as the direct owner of the property and his tax liability should be governed accordingly. For the reasons stated, questions Nos. 3 and 4 are answered in the negative and in favour of the Revenue. There will be no order as to costs. SHYAMAL KUMAR SEN J.-I agree.
-
1994 (2) TMI 34 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Representative Assessee ... ... ... ... ..... ccount of the trust. The beneficiaries were not obliged to keep these amounts with the trust and the fact that they were treated as loan on which interest was payable by the trust, cannot go against the assessee. A trust is a distinct legal entity and different from the beneficiaries and, therefore, it cannot be said that after the money became payable to the beneficiary under the deed as per their determinate share, it could be treated by the trust as its own money. In the instant case, as rightly held by the Tribunal, there is no person borrowing from one s own wealth. In our view, therefore, the Tribunal was right in holding that the trust was entitled to the deduction of interest paid to the beneficiaries on the income from the trust which was kept by the beneficiaries as loan. Question No. 3 referred to us is, therefore, answered in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The reference stands disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.
-
1994 (2) TMI 33 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Assessment Year, Concessional Rate, Hotel Building, Industrial Company, Investment Allowance, Law Applicable To Assessment, Manufacture Or Production, Rate Of Depreciation, Taxing Statutes
-
1994 (2) TMI 32 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Finding Of Fact, Question Of Law, Revised Return ... ... ... ... ..... much later than the notification issued by the Department on January 5, 1971, as published in the daily issue of the Statesman. Mr. Choudhury also refers to a decision in the case of D. B. Madan v. CIT 1991 192 ITR 344, wherein the apex court has held that it cannot always be said that, in all cases where a similar question of law had been answered in an earlier case in a particular way, an identical question of law arising in a later case would cease to be a referable one and, therefore, the course to be adopted is to reject a reference under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. In our opinion, the ratio of the aforesaid decision is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case as we have held that the questions of law sought to be referred to this court aforesaid appear to us to be questions of fact and not questions of law. Accordingly, we do not find any merit in the application and the same is rejected. We, however, make no order as to costs.
-
1994 (2) TMI 31 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Failure To Disclose Material Facts, Wealth Tax Act ... ... ... ... ..... that the assessee has given a material and necessary fact before the completion of assessment which has now turned out to be so erroneous as to vitiate the same. Once an assessment is complete, the utmost possible finality must attach to it, and the order of reopening as against the assessee cannot be passed, save by assumption of jurisdiction within the four corners of the Act and its words as mentioned above. That has not been so done in the instant case and the writ, therefore, must succeed. There shall be rule absolute in terms of prayer (b) of the petition. Steps, if any, taken under the quashed notice shall also be quashed and be of no effect. It would be an unnecessary duplication, otherwise I would have passed orders in terms of the other prayers in the writ petition also. All parties and all others concerned to act first on a signed xerox copy of this dictated order on the usual undertakings and thereafter upon the rule absolute which is to be drawn up expeditiously.
-
1994 (2) TMI 30 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Criminal Proceedings, Income Tax Act, Law Applicable To Assessment, Offences And Prosecution ... ... ... ... ..... the business of the firm at the time of the alleged offence and so it was held that no criminal liability could be fixed on them and the complaint as well as all the proceedings taken in consequence thereof against those persons were quashed. This authority is not applicable to the facts of the present case as in paragraph No. 6 of the complaint it is specifically mentioned that all the partners of the firm were directly connected and were in charge of and were responsible to the firm for the conduct of its business. So, it cannot be said that there are no averments to that effect. The question whether they were sleeping partners and they had nothing to do with the conduct of business of the firm is to be determined only after evidence is led to that effect. The, allegations made in the complaint prima facie make out a case against the petitioners. No ground for quashing the complaint is made out and I find that the petition is without any merit. The same is hereby dismissed.
-
1994 (2) TMI 29 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Investment Allowance, Law Applicable To Assessment, Question Of Law, Retrospective Effect ... ... ... ... ..... stake of law which is glaring and obvious cannot be similarly rectified. Prima facie it may appear somewhat strange that an order which was good and valid when it was made should be treated as patently invalid and wrong by virtue of the retrospective operation of the amendment Act. But such a result is necessarily involved in the legal fiction about the retrospective operation of the Amendment Act. If, as a result of the said fiction, we must read the subsequently inserted proviso as forming part of section 18A(5) of the principal Act as from April 1, 1952, the conclusion is inescapable that the order in question is inconsistent with the provisions of the said proviso and must be deemed to suffer from a mistake apparent from the record. The above reasoning squarely applies to the facts of the present case and in relation to the exercise of power under section 154 of the Act. The Tribunal was, therefore, justified in declining to make the reference. The petition is dismissed.
....
|