Case Laws |
Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 1960 1960 (10) This
|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 44 of 44 Records
-
1960 (10) TMI 4
Whether the proceedings for assessment were commenced within the period of limitation prescribed for serving notice of assessment under section 34(1)(a) of the Act?
Held that:- The High Court was therefore right in holding that the proceedings for assessment were properly commenced within the period of limitation prescribed by section 34(1)(a) from the close of the year of assessment. The appeal fails and is dismissed
-
1960 (10) TMI 3
Whether the proportionate profits on the goods of the value of ₹ 4,10,785 were received or were deemed to be received in British India, in the year of account, by or on behalf of the assessee company within the meaning of section 4(1)(a) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 ?
Held that:- The income, profits or gains must be deemed to have been received in the taxable territories, and the answer to the question ought to have been in the affirmative. We accordingly allow the appeal, and answer the question in the affirmative. Appeal allowed.
-
1960 (10) TMI 2
Whether there was any material before the Tribunal for the finding that the wages had been inflated?
Held that:- If the income-tax authorities chose not to accept these explanations as correct, that does not mean that the finding as to inflation of wages at which they arrived was a finding based on no material. The materials were there ; what happened was that the income-tax authorities did not accept as correct the explanations offered by the assessee-company. We do not think that the non-acceptance of the explanations given by the assessee-company converts the question of the inflation of wages, which is essentially a question of fact, into a question of law. The High Court was, therefore, right in its answer to the first question.
The Tribunal accepted some of the explanations as good explanations ; yet the Tribunal found that the defects in the keeping of acquittance rolls or the wages record indicated an inflation of wages and held that the Income-tax Officer was right in adding back ₹ 50,000 in respect thereof. This finding of the Tribunal can have only one meaning, namely, that there was an inflation of wages. Therefore, we are of opinion that it is idle on the part of the assessee-company to contend that no opportunity was given to it to explain the defects in the acquittance rolls.. Appeal dismissed.
-
1960 (10) TMI 1
Whether onus of proving the import of the goods lay on the appellant?
Held that:- We cannot accept the contention that by reason of the provisions of Section 106 of the Evidence Act the onus lies on the appellant to prove that he brought the said items of goods into India in 1947. If Section 106 of the Evidence Act is applied, then, by analogy, the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence must equally be invoked. If so, it follows that the onus to prove the case against the appellant is on the Customs authorities and they failed to discharge that burden in respect of Items 1 to 5. The order of confiscation relating to Items 1 to 5 is set aside.
Coming to Items 6 to 10, we have no reason to reject, as we have been asked to do, the statement made in the order of the Collector of Central Excise dated October 27, 1951, that the appellant accepted that Items 6 to 10 were smuggled goods from Pakistan. having regard to the circumstances under, and the manner, in which the said confession was made, we have no reason to doubt the correctness of the statements of fact in regard to this matter made in the orders of the Customs authorities. If so, it follows that the finding of the Customs authorities that the appellant purchased the said items, which were smuggled goods, should prevail. The order of confiscation of these five items will, therefore, stand. Appeal partly allowed.
|
|