Case Laws |
Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 1959 1959 (3) This
|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 44 of 44 Records
-
1959 (3) TMI 4
Whether on the above facts and circumstances of this case the Tribunal was right in holding that the sum of ₹ 2,31,009 was income of the assessee during the assessment year under consideration and was liable to be assessed under the Indian Income-tax Act ?
Held that:- The amount received as repayment of excess profits tax must be deemed to be " income " for the purposes of the Indian Income-tax Act and for assessment it must be treated as income of the previous year. The answer to question given by the Calcutta High Court was thus correct. Appeal dismissed.
-
1959 (3) TMI 3
Whether the Income-tax Officer, Calcutta, could make the assessment in the appellant's case?
Held that:- In the view of the matter the question as to the place of assessment does not arise out of the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and, therefore, no question of law could be referred nor could the High Court make such order under section 66(2). In our opinion, the High Court rightly dismissed the appellant's application for directing the case to be stated under section 66(2) of the Act. Appeal dismissed.
-
1959 (3) TMI 2
Whether the circumstances reasonably supported the Income-tax Officer's presumption that the appellant had converted his secret profits into jewellery, gold and sovereigns, with a view to camouflage his transactions and brought such profits in his accounts by re-sale of such jewellery etc., and remittances through bank drafts?
Whether in the circumstances of the case, Yamnabai could have in her possession jewellery, etc., to the tune of ₹ 1,60,000.
Held that:- The whole of the inference drawn by the Appellate Tribunal in this behalf was allegedly based on no material whatever and was submitted to be at best a suspicion or a conjecture which warped the reasoning of the Appellate Tribunal.
The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is a fact finding Tribunal and if it arrives at its own conclusions of fact after due consideration of the evidence before it this court will not interfere. The conclusions reached by the Tribunal should not be coloured by any irrelevant considerations or matters of prejudice and if there are any circumstances which required to be explained by the assessee, the assessee should be given an opportunity of doing so. On no account whatever should the Tribunal base its findings on suspicions, conjectures or surmises nor should it act on no evidence at all or on improper rejection of material and relevant evidence or partly on evidence and partly on suspicions, conjectures or surmises and if it does anything of the sort, its findings, even though on questions of fact, will be liable to be set aside by this court.
Set aside the order of the Appellate Tribunal and remand the matter back to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "A" Bench, to reconsider the same in accordance with law, in the light of the observations made above. Appeal allowed. Case remanded.
-
1959 (3) TMI 1
Inspection of seized documents - Natural Justice ... ... ... ... ..... the parties by the Authorities concerned, fixing the date for hearing, and the matter will be decided after hearing them. The Rules are made absolute to this extent. 5.Mr. Ginwalla on behalf of the petitioners had gone into the merits of the application that is to say, he was trying to establish that there are errors apparent on the face of the orders. In view of the fact that the respondents are willing to have the orders set aside on the ground of violation of the rules of natural justice, I do not think it is necessary, for me to go into such questions. A certain amount has been deposited as security. This security that has been furnished in any of these applications which I have disposed of to-day, will continue, until two weeks after making the orders on the proceedings. After that, the security will stand discharged unless the Authorities have taken steps to enforce the same. So far as the petitioners are concerned, this order will be an order of Court, and not consent.
|
|