|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 61 to 71 of 71 Records
-
1973 (5) TMI 11 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Assessment order for the year 1959-60 was set aside by the Tribunal on 17th of May, 1962. The Income-tax Officer took six years to pass a fresh order ultimately holding that the tax had wrongly been collected from the petitioners. We find no rational reason why the petitioners should be deprived of the interest for the period of six years during which the Income-tax Officer kept the proceedings pending. If he wanted to withhold the refund, he should have passed an order under section 241 and in that event the petitioners would not have been deprived of the interest. If we accepted the stand taken by the department, an assessee can be deprived of the refund for an indefinite period at the will of the Income-tax Officer, because there is no period or limitation prescribed for passing a fresh assessment order on remand. We find no reason in law or in equity to accept such a preposterous proposition - We, accordingly, allow this petition
-
1973 (5) TMI 10 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
" Whether, Tribunal was legally correct in holding that payment at the rate of 10% received as clerkage by the assessee as a result of contract between him and the client as a senior advocate on the Rolls of the Bar Council did not form part of his income ? " - Question answered in the affirmative
-
1973 (5) TMI 9 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Industrial undertaking - Splitting up or reconstruction of the existing business - "Whether electrolysis plant set up by the assessee-company was a new industrial undertaking within the meaning of section 15C of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and as such the necessary relief under that section was admissible to the assessee? " - question referred to this court must, therefore, be answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee
-
1973 (5) TMI 8 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Assessee owned 500 equity shares and 277 preference shares in Best & Co. (Private) Ltd., Madras, of the face value of Rs. 100 each - articles of association of a private company restricts both transferability as well as the price - whether the value of shares get depreciated and whether break-up method of valuation can be adopted in such a case - questions referred to us are answered technically in favour of the assessee. The Tribunal will have to, therefore, consider the question of allowing depreciation on the value ascertained in this case by the Wealth-tax Officer for the various restrictions contained in the articles of association. However, in view of our rejection of the stand taken by the assessee that the shares are to be valued only at their face value, we direct the assessee to pay the costs of the revenue
-
1973 (5) TMI 7 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
" Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the amount provided by the assessee in its accounts for payment of pension to persons who had already retired was a debt owed by the assessee on the valuation date within the meaning of section 2(m) of the Wealth-tax Act and was as such to be excluded from the net wealth of the assessee ? " - Tribunal came to a correct conclusion and the question referred to this court must be answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee
-
1973 (5) TMI 6 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
" Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 19,11,620 on account of contribution to Kasturi and Sons Ltd. Employees' Gratuity Fund was deductible for purposes of ascertaining the value of equity shares in Kasturi and Sons Ltd.? " - sum of Rs. 19,11,620 was deductible for the purpose of ascertaining the value of equity shares and we, accordingly, answer the question referred in the affirmative and against the revenue
-
1973 (5) TMI 5 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Assessee, a foreign company entered into an agreement with an Indian company – Whether the technical service fee in excess of 5 per cent. received by the assessee-company from the Indian company during the account year relevant to the assessment year 1957-58 has accrued or arisen in India - the entire receipts by the assessee-company has to be taken to have accrued or arisen in India as a result of its business connection and, therefore, taxable. The apportionment made by the Commissioner or the one made by the Income-tax Officer cannot, therefore, be sustained for the assessee cannot be said to have carried on business in India in the context of the definition of " business " and, therefore, there is no question of any apportionment. But, having regard to the fact that the Commissioner has directed the assessment of only 75 per cent. of the technical fee received by the assessee as income accrued in India and it is only that order which was appealed before the Tribunal, the assessment can be made only in relation to the said 75 per cent - question is answered in the affirmative and against the assessee.
-
1973 (5) TMI 4 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Transfer of business as going concern to private limited company - Whether the amounts to a sale and whether the excess amount over written down value is liable to income-tax - In the return for the year ending March 31, 1959, the assessee included a sum of Rs. 223 referable to income from the business on 1st and 2nd April, 1959. The assessee had not asked for any change in the previous year. The Tribunal has found as a fact that the assessee carried on business for a part of the previous year ending March 31, 1960, that the assessee had plied buses on 1st and 2nd April, 1959, and, therefore, the income of Rs. 223 was assessable as income from business in the assessment year 1960-61 – therefore, we answer the questions referred in the affirmative and against the assessee
-
1973 (5) TMI 3 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
" 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the sum of Rs. 5,000 was not a capital loss within the meaning of section 12B of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the provision of section 12B of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, did not apply to the transaction resulting in the loss of Rs. 53,761 incurred by the assessee ? " - we answer both the questions referred to us in the affirmative and against the assessee
-
1973 (5) TMI 2 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
" Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the loss of Rs. 36,035 incurred by the assessee-company on sale of preference shares of S. K. G. Sugar Co. Ltd. and Bengal Jute Co. Ltd. was a loss of capital nature ? "
-
1973 (5) TMI 1 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Super Profits Tax Act, 1963 - amounts set apart for payment of gratuity and excess provision for taxation -1. " Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 2,32,595 represented reserves as contemplated under rule 1 of the Second Schedule to the Super Profits Tax Act, 1963 ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 6,150 was not part of reserve under rule 1 of the Second Schedule to the Super Profits Tax Act, 1963 ? "
|
