Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 1953 1953 (12) This

Law	-- All -- GST Income Tax Benami Property Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy FEMA PMLA Service Tax Central Excise CST, VAT & Sales Tax Wealth tax Indian Laws
Court	-- Any -- Supreme Court SC Orders / Highlights High Court Appellate Tribunal Tribunal Appellate authority for Advance Ruling Advance Ruling Authority National Financial Reporting Authority Competition Commission of India ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY Commission Central Government Board DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court Commissioner / Appellate Authority Other
Citation	--Year-- 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982 1981 1980 1979 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1973 1972 1971 1970 1969 1968 1967 1966 1965 1964 1963 1962 1961 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 1953 1952 1951 1950 Upto 1949 - -Volume- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -
Landmark	Nil - N/A Referred in >= 3 Cases Referred in >= 4 Cases Referred in >= 5 Cases Referred in >= 10 Cases Referred in >= 15 Cases Referred in >= 25 Cases Referred in >= 50 Cases Referred in >= 100 Cases
Order by	TMI Citation Date of Decision

Advanced Search Options

Case Laws

Showing 21 to 28 of 28 Records

• 1953 (12) TMI 17 - NAGPUR HIGH COURT
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... or to the commencement of the Act. 12.. The tax is on the sale or supply of goods and if sale or supply is made after the commencement of the Act the seller is prima facie liable to pay the tax unless exemption is granted under some pro- vision of the Act. In our view, the exemption granted by the proviso is limited to the contracts as defined in section 2(b) of the Act and not to any other contract for sale of goods made prior to the commencement of the Act. Our answer to the second question therefore is that the word contract occurring in this proviso to section 4(1) is to be under- stood in the special sense given to it by its definition in section 2(b) of the Act. 13.. In view of the divided success, the costs of the reference will be borne by the parties as incurred. The paper book costs will be paid by the applicant. A copy of this judgment will be sent to the Board of Revenue as required by section 23(5) of the Act for necessary action. Reference answered accordingly.

  ---

• 1953 (12) TMI 16 - MYSORE HIGH COURT
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... nando(1), it was held that persons who do nothing more than crying out the bids at the auction and who have no custody or possession over the property auction- ed and have no authority to pass the property in the goods to the pur- chasers can only be brokers not falling within the definition of dealers and as such not liable to sales tax. If these principles are applied to the facts in the present reference, the answer to the first question must be in favour of the assessee. The learned Advocate-General has not made out that a different view is possible or necessary to justify the assessment. Section 9 provides for a person obtaining a licence to exempt from taxation. It cannot imply that all those who do not have the licence may be taxed as what is material is their being dealers and not licensees. The answer to both the questions raised is in the negative. The parties will bear their own costs. Reference answered in the negative. (1) 1953 4 S.T.C. 331 A.I.R. 1954 Mad. 184.

  ---

• 1953 (12) TMI 15 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
  

  Winding up – Circumstances in which a company may be would up and Company when deemed unable to pay its debts

  ---

• 1953 (12) TMI 14 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
  

  Winding up – Circumstances in which a company may be would up

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... edies except a winding up petition without obtaining payment of his debt, should be in a worse position than ant ordinary creditor who has got no security upon the undertaking. It seems to me that the remedy given to him to enforce his security upon the undertaking as a going concern, does not deprive him of his remedy as a creditor who has obtained a judgment for his debt, but cannot obtain payment. So that was a case in which the petitioning creditor could not enforce payment of his debt in any way other than by a winding up order. That is not the case here. For the reasons above mentioned, we allow the appeal and set aside the order of Panchapakesa Aiyar J. directing the appellant company to be wound up. We, however, think it just and necessary that we should direct the official liquidator not to hand over possession of the properties of the company in his possession to the company till the expiry of a period of three months from to-day. There will be no order as to costs.

  ---

• 1953 (12) TMI 4 - SUPREME COURT
  

  The jurisdiction of the Income-tax Officer, Special Survey Circle, Bangalore, to assess the appellant to income-tax and super-tax on his income accruing prior to 1st April, 1950, in the State of Mysore challenged

  Held that:- We find nothing in Article 277 of the Constitution to preclude Parliament making a law providing for the levy and collection of income-tax and super-tax under the Mysore Act through authorities appointed under the Indian Income-tax Act. Accordingly, we hold that the Income-tax Officer, Special Survey Circle, Bangalore, had jurisdiction to assess the appellant to income-tax and super-tax in respect of the income of the period prior to the commencement of the Constitution. Appeal dismissed.

  ---

• 1953 (12) TMI 3 - SUPREME COURT
  

  Whether Rajasthan became taxable territory during the financial year in this case, i.e., 1949-50?

  Whether the petitioner must be held to be immune from liability to assessment on the income of that year?

  Held that:- The difference in the constitutional position which previously existed between the Provinces and the acceding States has thus disappeared except, of course, in regard to matters in which such distinction has been preserved by the Constitution itself, e. g., by Article 238 and Article 371. It follows that the amendment of Section 2, clause (14-A), of the Indian Act by the Finance Act, 1950, so as to authorise the levy of tax on income accruing in the territory of Rajasthan in the year 1949-50, is within the competence of Parliament and therefore valid.

  ---

• 1953 (12) TMI 2 - SUPREME COURT
  

  Whether Section 42(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act has application to the case of a resident assessee or whether its scope is limited to non-resident assessee alone?

  Held that:- The answer returned by the High Court of Bombay to the question referred to it was wrong. We therefore allow this appeal with costs and answer this question referred to the High Court in the affirmative.

  ---

• 1953 (12) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT
  

  Whether in view of the finding of fact in this case that the entire profits were received in India and the company is liable to tax under Section 4(1)(a) of the Act, the provisions of Section 42(1) have any relevancy ?

  Can the income received in India be said to arise in India within the meaning of Section 4A(c)(b) of the Act ? If not, should only those profits determined under Section 42(3) as attributable to the operations carried out in India be taken into account for applying the test laid down in Section 4A(c)(b) ?

  Held that:- Answer to question No. 1 in the negative.

  Answer to question No. 2 - The income received in British India cannot be said to wholly arise in India within the meaning of Section 4A(c)(b) of the Act and that there should be allocation of the income between the various business operations of the assessee company demarcating the income arising in the taxable territories in the particular year from the income arising without the taxable territories in that year for the purposes of Section 4A(c)(b) of the Act. Appeal allowed.

  ---

12