|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 60 of 63 Records
-
1972 (5) TMI 23 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
"1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of this case any part of the sum of Rs. 2,000 paid remuneration to Sri Satyandrajit Singh was liable to be disallowed under section 10(4A) of the Act? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, a part of the expenditure of Rs. 11,700 incurred on the purchase of crockery and linen was liable to be disallowed as capital expenditure ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the of the case, the deduction claimed by the assessee-company of the sum of Rs. 1,500 on account of the medical expenses incurred on the treatment of its chairman was allowable ?" Question No. 1, in the negative. Question No. 2, in the negative. Question No. 3, in the affirmative
-
1972 (5) TMI 22 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
U.P. Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1948 - The State of U. P. instituted a suit for the recovery of Rs. 3,02,982.62 as arrears of agricultural income-tax for the assessment year 1952-53 with pendente lite and future interest at twelve per cent. per annum. The learned civil judge, Faizabad, decreed the suit for recovery of Rs. 1,89,364.62 with interest at 41/2 per cent. per annum. Aggrieved Raja Jagdambika Pratap Narain Singh, the defendant, has come up in appeal - Whether U.P. Agricultural Income-tax Act bars suit for recovery of tax and whether interest on arrears of tax can be recovered - In the present case the suit is for realising the statutory demand for tax - interest cannot be, granted on any equitble principle - there being no agreement to pay interest or any provision in any law for award of interest under such circumstances, the plaintiff was not entitled to a decree for past interest. The decree under appeal, in so far as it grants past interest, cannot be sustained - In the result the appeal succeeds and is allowed in part
-
1972 (5) TMI 21 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Assessee is a partnership firm which carried on wholesale business in cloth. During the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1958-59, it collected from its customers sales tax amounting to Rs. 4,46,944 and paid a sum of Rs. 3,16,899 to the sales tax department leaving a balance of Rs. 1,30,045. The Income-tax Officer treated the sum of Rs. 1,30,045 as the assessee's income for the assessment year in question and levied tax thereon. When a dealer collects sales tax from customers and paid only a portion of it to the Government whether the balance is an income assessable in his hands - " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 1,30,045 represents income of the assessee for the assessment year 1958-59 ?"
-
1972 (5) TMI 20 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Search And Seizure - assessee was denied an opportunity of copying the seized documents - order under section 132(5) cannot be sustained
-
1972 (5) TMI 19 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Reassessment notice - reason to believe – income escaping assessment – validity of notice ... ... ... ... ..... acts had been disclosed at the time of the original assessment, it would have become the duty of the Income-tax Officer to investigate the matter further and to hold whether the sale at the stated rate was genuine or not. Because of the non-disclosure of these facts, the Income-tax Officer did not doubt the trading account of the petitioner-firm and believing them to be true, made the assessment because he was of the opinion that the profit of Rs. 64,614 on the sale turnover of Rs. 2,05,927.50 was fairly high. There was no reason for him to suspect that the profits made by the firm had not been truly disclosed. For the reasons given above, I hold that the notice issued by the Income-tax Officer to the petitioner-firm on November 14, 1969, was valid and within the jurisdiction of the Income-tax Officer and he can continue reassessment proceedings pursuant thereto. There is thus no merit in this petition which is dismissed with costs. Counsel s fee Rs. 100. Petition dismissed.
-
1972 (5) TMI 18 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Petitioner constitute the legal representatives of the deceased, P. Kunhi Bava, who was an assessee under the Agricultural Income-tax Act - Whether legal representative can be assessed on the income of whole year of the deceased for the previous year
-
1972 (5) TMI 17 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
When assessee had income from Tea Industry and had loss in another business whether deduction of 8% from profits under s. 80E is to be made from the profits of Tea or from Tea less other loss - " Whether Tribunal was justified in holding that for the purpose of allowing a deduction under section 80E the words such profits' occurring in that section mean ' the profits and gains attributable to an activity as specified in the 5th Schedule ' before deducting any loss incurred in any business activity ? The language of the provision is clear and the view taken by the Tribunal, in our opinion, is right. Accordingly, we answer the question referred in the affirmative and against the department.
-
1972 (5) TMI 16 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Delay in filing returns - Income-tax Officer applying the provisions of section 271(1)(a) of the new Act calculated the penalty leviable at 2 per cent. of the tax for each month of default - Return was filed after penalty notice was issued under the old Act – held that further notice under the new Act for penalty could be validly issued - Tribunal was not correct in holding that the proceedings were not commenced in accordance with the law.
-
1972 (5) TMI 15 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Reassessment Proceedings – reason for reopening of assessment - whether the officer assessing the husband can reopen his assessment if the officer assessing the wife intimates that she was benamidar for the husband
-
1972 (5) TMI 14 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Application under article 226 of the Constitution is directed against a notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as it is alleged that the assessee's income chargeable to tax for the assessment year 1954-55 had escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Act
-
1972 (5) TMI 13 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Failure to disclose income - " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in deleting the penalty of Rs. 6,000 imposed under section 271(1)(c) in respect of the sum of Rs. 41,067 assessed under section 41(1) ? "
-
1972 (5) TMI 12 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Assessee is a public limited company - As there was a revision under section 33B of the old Act for the assessment year 1959-60 by the Commissioner of Income-tax, the Income-tax officer considered it necessary to rectify the assessment orders passed in respect of the later two assessment years, viz., 1960-61 and 1961-62, which are now in question. He, accordingly, issued a notice under section 154 of the new Act, calling for objections, if any, from the assessee. After due formalities, the assessments were rectified under section 154 of the new Act - Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the rectification order could be passed only under section 35 of the IT Act, 1922, and not under section 154(1)(a) of the IT Act, 1961
-
1972 (5) TMI 11 - PATNA HIGH COURT
Whether debts due to the assessee from Sri A. K. Hazra and Sri N. Sahay, on the basis of the usufructuary mortgage held by the assessee, constituted assets in its hands and comprise part of its wealth? - Tribunal was in error in excluding the two sums of money due from A. K. Hazra and N. Sahai altogether from the assessee's net wealth. These two dues must, however, be valued under section 7 of the Wealth-tax Act and in valuing these dues it must be considered whether the assessee could obtain decrees on his rent notes and sue for possession based on them. No facts were considered by the Tribunal in excluding these two dues from the net wealth of the assessee and the answer to this question cannot be given in any further detail
-
1972 (5) TMI 10 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Estate Duty Act, 1953 - Late Lala Thakurdas was the karta of a Hindu undivided family transfers property equally to minor sons – whether it amounts to partial partition?
-
1972 (5) TMI 9 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Assessees are purchasers of rubber trees for slaughtertapping; and the single judge, construing the documents of purchase, has held that, under these documents, the purchasers derived no interest in the land and what they derived was only a right to the trees. And in view of that, the learned judge has held that the income derived by the purchasers of the trees from slaughter-tapping was not agricultural income - income from the slaughter-tapping was not agricultural income was correct
-
1972 (5) TMI 8 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in terms of section 23A(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, super-tax was chargeable only on the distributable surplus less the dividend actually declared before the passing of the order under section 23A on the assessee-company
-
1972 (5) TMI 7 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Effect of rule 6 in the Schedule to the Income-tax Act, 1922 - Whether amount transferred from the dividend equalisation fund to revenue account could be taken into consideration in computing the profits of the relevant year and taxed - Whether amount shown in the revenue account by making a transfer entry from the general reserves could be taken into consideration in computing the profits of the relevant year and taxed
-
1972 (5) TMI 6 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, salary, commission and bonus amounting to Rs. 1,19,118 accrued or arose to the assessee as an income for the relevant year - When the salary along with commission and bonus was payable annually to the managing director, if he foregoes the same prior to the closing of accounting year, whether it accrues to the assessee and whether it is taxable in his hands - Question answered in the negative
-
1972 (5) TMI 5 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee-company derives income from manufacturing or processing of goods and that the rebate should be allowed at 30 per cent - We, accordingly, answer the question in the affirmative in favour of the assessee and against the department - Question answered in the affirmative
-
1972 (5) TMI 4 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Present assessee is admittedly a Hindu undivided family (H.U.F.) carrying on business in jute and country produce in the name and style of Tolaram Bijoy Kumar, of which Tolaram Saraf is the karta - When a Hindu joint family carries on the business after its partition, if the business is carried on by a partnership firm inconstituted by the co-parceners, whether the partners' income can be treated as his separate income
|
