Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 1970 1970 (8) 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 41 to 60 of 76 Records

• 1970 (8) TMI 55 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
  

  Overall maximum managerial remuneration

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... licence on his making certain payments. Though the petitioner deposited Rs. 40 lakhs in accordance with the proposal no licence was ultimately issued to him. It was in these circumstances that the Supreme Court directed the respondent to issue the licence to the petitioner. In the present case the facts are not so overwhelmingly compelling to induce me to direct the Company Law Board to grant the approval asked for. It would be for the Board to consider the matter in , the light of the provisions of section 198(4) of the Act and the financial position of the company and then to approve or refuse approval to the 1 petitioner s application. I, therefore, set aside the impugned order and direct the respondent. Company Law Board, to consider the petitioner s application in Form No. 25-C in the light of the provisions of section 198(4) of the Companies Act. The rule is made absolute to the extent indicated above. All interim orders are vacated. There would be no order as to costs.

  ---

• 1970 (8) TMI 47 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
  

  Right to obtain copies and inspect trust deed, Winding up - Company when deemed unable to pay its debts and Company when deemed unable to pay its debts

  ---

• 1970 (8) TMI 46 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
  

  Winding up – Suits stayed on winding-up order

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... e, the company and not in favour of the plaintiffs, and that no leave under section 446 of the Companies Act, 1 of 1956, was necessary in vespect of such suits. This question, however, does not arise before us. The application before us is for leave to continue the suit already instituted on the footing that it is against the company. However, it will be open to the plaintiffs to take up this contention at the hearing of the suit. Similarly, Mr. Shah contended that if leave to continue the suit was refused against the defendant No. 2, the entire suit would be without jurisdiction and could fail even in respect of the defendant No. 1. In our view, this is also a contention which arises at the hearing of the suit and not on the hearing of the judge s summons with which we are dealing. It will be open to the defendants to take this contention at the hearing of the suit. In the result, the judge s summons fails and is dismissed. Costs will be costs in the suit. Counsel certified.

  ---

• 1970 (8) TMI 33 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
  

  Search and seizure

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... n force. In any event with effect from 4th May, 1963 there is a further power of seizure of documents in Section 110(3) of Customs Act, 1962 which provides that the proper officer may seize any documents or things which will in his opinion be useful for or relevant to these proceedings. The position with regard to the legality or illegality of the search for and seizure of documents prior to 4th May, 1963 is rendered purely of academic interest by sub-section (3) of Section 110 and in any event the documents being required as evidence in the inquiry that is pending against the Petitioners under Rule 9(2) of the Excise Rules, we see no reason to interfere or to order the return of the goods or the documents seized by the Excise Authorities from the possession of the Petitioners. In the result, the Petition fails and is dismissed. As complicated questions of law arose which the Petitioners were entitled to have adjudicated upon by this Court, there will be no order as to costs.

  ---

• 1970 (8) TMI 32 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
  

  Clandestine removal - Natural justice

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... ime has lapsed. Several documents which are exhibits to the affidavit in reply contain substantial material for investigation of the fact that the powerloom cloth in respect were of these notices are issued might have been got manufactured by the Mills Company. This, however, does not mean that we have formed any opinion at all on the questions involved, which are complicated questions of law and fact. 20.In our view, the impugned notices having been issued without giving any proper opportunity to the Mills Company are invalid and liable to be struck off. The impugned detention order dated June 17, 1964, was the result of the impugned notice of demand dated June 17, 1964. As all the notices of demand are set aside, the detention order also is liable to be struck off. In the result, the rule is made absolute in terms of prayer (a) of the peti-tion. The order setting aside the detention order dated June 17, 1964, not to operate for six weeks. There will be no order as to costs.

  ---

• 1970 (8) TMI 31 - SUPREME COURT
  

  Imposition of excise duty on circles of kansi and brass prepared in the process of manufacturing utensils challenged

  Held that:- In the case before us, circles in any form are envisaged as the completed product produced by manufacture which are subjected to excise duty. The process of conversion of billets into circles was described by the legislature itself as manufacture of circles.

  It cannot be contended that the whole of this process cannot be described as manufacture of circles. In this process of manufacture of circles, there are two stages. At the first stage, billets are produced and, at the second stage, circles. In any case, it has to be held that the circles thus prepared are the result of this process of manufacture. The end-result of this process of manufacture is the production of circles in some form "which is envisaged as the goods to be subjected to excise duty. The excise duty was, therefore, correctly levied by the appellant. Appeal allowed.

  ---

• 1970 (8) TMI 30 - SUPREME COURT
  

  Whether the Government of Madhya Pradesh was entitled to amend its rules and add the impugned clause as a part of the licence conditions?

  Held that:- No tax can be imposed by any bye-law or rule or regulation unless the statute under which the subordinate legislation is made specially authorises the imposition even if it is assumed that the power to tax can be delegated to the executive. The basis of the statutory power conferred by the statute cannot be transgressed by the rule-making authority. A rule-making authority has no plenary power. It has to act within the limits of the power granted to it.

  We are of the opinion that the impugned rule as well as the demands are not authorised by law. Hence we allow these appeals as well as the writ petitions from which these appeals arise and quash the impugned notification as well as the demand notices.

  ---

• 1970 (8) TMI 29 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
  

  Application For Rectification, Error Apparent On Face, Provision For Payment

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... alth-tax although he has shown that in the orders of assessment there was a mistake apparent from the record and in view of the failure of the authorities under the Act to grant relief on an erroneous view of the law, a patent error of law clearly appears on the face of the record and we think this is a fit case for exercise of our discretion in favour of the petitioner. In the result, the petition succeeds. The rule is made absolute. We issue a writ of certiorari against the respondents as prayed in prayer clauses (a) and (b) and quash and set aside the impugned orders passed by the respondents. The Wealth-tax Officer is directed to pass appropriate orders on the three applications, each dated March 20, 1962, filed by the petitioner under section 35 of the Wealth-tax Act for the assessment years 1957-58, 1958-59 and 1959-60 in accordance with law and in the light of the observations made in this judgment. The respondents will pay the costs of the petition to the petitioner.

  ---

• 1970 (8) TMI 28 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
  

  Failure to disclose income of the wife - reopening of the assessment - though, if the case of the department was that the wife was a mere benamidar, no question of application of section 64 would arise - records showed that approval for the notice of reassessment was obtained on the ground that the wife's income was to be clubbed with that of the husband under section 64 - notice under section 148 is quashed and the respondents are prohibited from taking any further steps in respect of the aforesaid notice

  ---

• 1970 (8) TMI 27 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
  

  "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, in arriving at the written down value for the purpose of computing the profits of the assessee under the second proviso to section 10(2)(vii) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the sum of Rs. 61,553 which had been allowed to the assessee as the initial depreciation under section 10(2)(vi) of the said Act was liable to be excluded?" - Held yes

  ---

• 1970 (8) TMI 26 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
  

  Assessee had been refused registration under section 185(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on the ground that the element of agency which is an essential ingredient to constitute a valid partnership was absent - clause 5 of the deed of partnership is not repugnant to the provisions of the Act and it cannot be said that, in view of the provisions of clause 5, the element of agency is lacking - Tribunal was not right in law in holding that the assessee was not entitled to the benefit of registration

  ---

• 1970 (8) TMI 25 - KERALA HIGH COURT
  

  Kerala Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1950 - Commissioner exercised his revisional power to direct Agricultural Income-tax Officer to reopen an assessment and make a reassessment after the lapse of the period prescribed for issuing the notice u/s 35 - Whether Commissioner has jurisdiction to pass an order u/s 34 of the Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950

  ---

• 1970 (8) TMI 24 - KERALA HIGH COURT
  

  Ex gratia payment to the widow of managing director - whether it is an allowable expenditure

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... ement of the case submitted by the Tribunal is incomplete inasmuch as the Tribunal has not stated its finding on the material question mentioned above inclusive of its different aspects which we have indicated. The case is therefore referred back to the Tribunal for the purpose of drawing up and submitting to this court a fuller statement of the case incorporating its finding on the points referred to above. We are not called upon at this stage to express any opinion regarding the correctness or otherwise of the Tribunal s finding that the payment of gratuity to Shri Varugis is an expenditure laid out wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the company s business but reserve that point for consideration, if found necessary, after receipt by this court of the fuller statement of the case called for under this order. A copy of this judgment together with the records of the case will be transmitted by the Registrar to the Income-tax Appellate. Tribunal, Kerala Bench, Ernakulam

  ---

• 1970 (8) TMI 23 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
  

  Assessee (private company) took lease of the extensive zamindary and it also took assignment of all its estate - lands and collieries were sub-leased - held that, since the land acquired in land acquisition proceedings were stock-in-trade, the compensation received by the assessee for acquisition was not a capital asset but was a trading receipt

  ---

• 1970 (8) TMI 22 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
  

  Validity of a notice of reassesment under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... and the impugned notice must be quashed. The respondents would also be restrained from proceedings or taking any further steps in terms of the said notice. The interim order stands vacated. The stay of the operation of the order is asked for and such stay is granted till a fortnight after the vacation and in the meantime the respondents are not to give effect to the impugned notice. There will be no order as to costs. Dr. Pal points out that in issuing the rule, this court gave to the respondents liberty to continue and conclude the assessment proceedings but not to communicate the final orders, if any, to the petitioner. If, in fact, such an assessment has been completed, in view of the observations made by the Supreme Court in Calcutta Discount Company s case, in addition to the order directing the Income-tax Officer not to take any action on the basis of the impugned notice, a further order is made quashing the assessment, if any, made under the liberty given by this court

  ---

• 1970 (8) TMI 21 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
  

  Assessee is a limited company - rental income from disused godowns - such income is chargeable as income from house property or income from business

  ---

• 1970 (8) TMI 20 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
  

  Notices for filing returns were issued under Old IT Act, 1922 - but return were filed belatedely in December, 1962 - Notice under section 274, r.w.s. 271(1)(a) was issued to the assessee directing him to show cause why penalty be not imposed for the late filing thereof - whether penalty is imposable under IT Act, 1961

  ---

• 1970 (8) TMI 19 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
  

  Levy of penalty u/s 28(1)(c) - whether the quantum of penalty depends on the extent of concealment

  ---

• 1970 (8) TMI 18 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
  

  Whether Shrimati Sharda Ajmani (wife of a non-resident member of staff of embassy) should be taxed as a resident of the taxable territories

  ---

• 1970 (8) TMI 17 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
  

  Wealth Tax Act, 1957 - computation of net wealth - claim for deductions for different debts such as provisions for income-tax, dividends, and balance due on demand of investigation commission -

  ---

1234