|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 21 to 35 of 35 Records
-
1975 (6) TMI 15 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... eipt of the excess amount but we are to consider the interest that has accrued on the excess amount that has been deposited in call deposit account in terms of the provisions of the Companies Act. In our considered opinion the cases of B. Malick v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Pangal Nayak Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax and Commissioner of Income-tax v. Dr. P. N. Belt have no application to the facts and circumstances of the present case inasmuch as the decisions in those cases are based on facts and circumstances which are quite distinguishable from the facts and circumstances of the present case. In the result we find that, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the interest received by the assessee on the deposit made with the bank is income not exempt from tax under section 10(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Accordingly the question referred is answered in the negative and against the assessee. D. M. SEN J.--I agree. Question answered in the negative.
-
1975 (6) TMI 14 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Business Expenditure, Finding Of Fact, High Court ... ... ... ... ..... object of the present trust is that of a religious and charitable trust. The only thing on which reliance is placed by Mr. Joshi on behalf of the revenue is the provision in the trust deed where the settlor has expressed a desire to give financial aid to poor members of the family of the settlor and their descendants. Construing the trust properly this is only a desire and no fetter is placed upon the power of the trustees to utilise the income of the trust for charitable purposes. Even a direction is not given to give preference but simply a desire is expressed. When such is the case then the facts in the present case are even stronger than those in the Supreme Court case above referred to and, in our opinion, the Tribunal was right in taking the view that the income of the trust was exempt under section 4(3)(i) of the Act. Accordingly, the question referred to us is answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. The revenue shall pay the costs of the assessee.
-
1975 (6) TMI 13 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Delay In Filing Return, Wealth Tax Act, Wealth Tax Return ... ... ... ... ..... ioner on the sole ground that he had not in good faith made full disclosure of his net wealth, have to be set aside. They are accordingly set aside. It is needless to mention that the Commissioner while exercising his discretion under section 18(2A) has to bear in mind several factors such as the gravity of the default, the loss occasioned to the revenue by the assessee not filing the return in time, and the extent of tax withheld. These factors are only illustrative but not exhaustive. Just like in criminal cases a judge while imposing a sentence on the accused who is found guilty of an offence takes into consideration several factors apart from the fact that he has committed the offence in question, the Commissioner should take into consideration all other relevant factors while reducing or waiving the penalty imposed or imposable under section 18(1)(a) of the Act. The cases are remanded to the Commissioner of Wealth-tax to dispose of them in accordance with law. No costs.
-
1975 (6) TMI 12 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Agricultural Income, Attributable To, Banking Company, Relief In Respect ... ... ... ... ..... held that the partitions were used to enable the trader to cope with the vicissitudes of the business as it increased and diminished and relied on the finding of the commissioners that the flexibility of accommodation which the partitions provided was a commercial necessity for the company. Further illustrations were given of assets which would fall within the meaning of plant . The heating installation of a building may be passive in the sense that it involves no moving machinery, but few would deny it the name of plant . The same thing could, no doubt, be said of many air-conditioning and water softening installations. This passage has been cited with approval by the Supreme Court and it is quite apparent that an air-conditioning equipment installed by the assessee in its safe deposit vault will be plant within the meaning of the section. Accordingly, question No. 1 above referred to is answered in the affirmative in favour of the assessee. The revenue will pay the costs.
-
1975 (6) TMI 11 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Assessment Order, Total Income ... ... ... ... ..... t is true that the Commissioner on revision brought to book the tax on capital gains which had escaped taxation at the hands of the Income-tax Officer. But even after such recomputation the ultimate incidence of tax liability on the assessee was lesser than what it was prior to the order passed on revision. As noticed earlier, the tax liability was reduced from one on an income of Rs. 80,558 to one on an income of Rs. 70,160. On the analogy of the Privy Council decision in the Tribune Trust s case, we cannot hold the order revised to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. As a result of that order the revenue was not placed in a different and worse position than the Commissioner s order passed in revision. Section 263 is not attracted. The two years period of limitation also cannot apply to the assessment. The view taken by the learned judge was correct. We affirm the same and dismiss this appeal but, in the circumstances, without costs.
-
1975 (6) TMI 10 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Purchase And Sale, Speculation Loss, Textile Mill ... ... ... ... ..... the transferee s transferee the first transfer would also be a valid transfer and would not be a speculative transaction but that in such cases of chain transfers one has to see whether the ultimate purchaser of the pucca delivery orders has taken actual delivery of the goods sold and it is only then that the title of intermediate transferees get perfected and precisely for this very purpose the Supreme Court remanded the matter to lower authorities. In the case before us there is no material to show that the ultimate buyer of 900 bales had taken actual delivery of the goods from his immediate seller. For these reasons it is not possible to accept Mr. Munim s contention. In this view of the matter, we feel that the Tribunal was right in taking the view that the loss of Rs. 63,892 in hessian cloth suffered by the applicant was a speculation loss. The question is, therefore, answered in the affirmative and against the assessee. The assessee will pay the costs of the reference.
-
1975 (6) TMI 9 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Accounting Year ... ... ... ... ..... t, according to law, the particular tavazhi had ceased to be long before the earliest of the accounting periods with which we are concerned, commenced. In view of this, the machinery provisions of the Act cannot be pressed into service, notwithstanding the wording in section 171 of the Act, for the purpose of taxing the income of the individual members of the family. The legal fiction only enables the assessment to tax of income of the real Hindu undivided family which had ceased to be at the time of the assessment. We are in respectful agreement with the view taken by Isaac J. in the judgment under appeal and accordingly we dismiss this appeal. The point is not at all free from difficulty. As we said earlier, though a number of decisions have been rendered on section 25A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, no case has been brought to our notice which specifically dealt with the aspect that we have considered. We, therefore, direct the parties to bear their respective costs.
-
1975 (6) TMI 8 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Business Expenditure, Finding Of Fact, High Court ... ... ... ... ..... f the judgment of the Tribunal we find that the above finding of the Tribunal is based on materials on record and the finding cannot be said to be otherwise perverse. If a finding of fact is arrived at without any materials on record or if a finding of fact arrived at on the materials on record cannot be said to have been arrived at by any reasonable person such a finding may be said to be perverse. If a finding of fact is contrary to law applicable to the facts of the case then also such a finding may be said to be perverse. In the instant case, however, we find that the Tribunal s finding referred to above cannot be said to be perverse in any view of the matter and that being so the finding of fact is binding on this court. We also find that the question of law referred is concluded by the finding of fact arrived at by the Tribunal in the instant case. That being so, the question of law referred is answered in the affirmative and against the revenue. D. M. SEN J.--I agree.
-
1975 (6) TMI 7 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Assessment Proceedings, Business Income, Income Escaping Assessment, Reassessment Proceedings
-
1975 (6) TMI 6 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Commercial Profit, Income Tax, Tax Liability ... ... ... ... ..... may come up again. They are expected to act as hard-headed businessmen. They are not expected to gamble with the future of the concern. The question is not whether the value of the shares may not go up in future but whether the directors were justified in not declaring dividends in view of the loss incurred. The directors in the instant case before us has taken into consideration the arrears of income-tax liabilities of the earlier years as appears from the auditors report by treating the said liability as contingent liability in view of the pendency of the appeal and they have made a general reserve of Rs. 5 lakhs so that in case of necessity this liability can be met out of this reserve. Hence, we are not impressed by the observations of the Tribunal made in this behalf. In this view of the matter, we return our answer in the negative and in favour of the assessee. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not propose to make any order as to costs. DEB J.--I agree.
-
1975 (6) TMI 5 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Assessment Order, Total Income ... ... ... ... ..... we answer the questions as follows With reference to question No. 1 we hold that onlv the assessment order which was the subject-matter of the appeal merged with the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and there was no merger in respect of levy of penal interest under section 18A(8) and/or section 217 of the two Acts. We answer question No. 1 in the affirmative and in favour of the revenue. Question No. 2 has to be answered with reference to question No. 1 and we answer the same in the affirmative and in favour of the revenue. Question No. 3 is answered also in the affirmative and in favour of the revenue. As to question No. 4 the Tribunal has found as a fact that the Income-tax Officer did not apply his mind to the question. This finding has not been challenged. Therefore, this question is answered in the negative and also in favour of the revenue. We return our answer accordingly. In the facts and circumstances there will be no order as to costs. DEB J.-I agree.
-
1975 (6) TMI 4 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Assessment Proceedings, General Reserve, Liability To Tax, Reassessment Proceedings, Tax Liability, Tax On Undistributed Income
-
1975 (6) TMI 3 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Family Hotchpot, Family Property, Immovable Property, Movable Property ... ... ... ... ..... 75 98 ITR 368. Therefore, the view of the law taken by the Tribunal is clearly untenable. Sri Rajasekharamurthy, learned counsel for the department, did not seriously contend that the view of the Tribunal is right. In our judgment, the properties and the shares described in the assessee s letter dated March 15, 1969, became his HUF property with effect from March 4. 1969, and the income therefrom derived after the said date has to be excluded in the computation of the individual income of the assessee. Accordingly, our answer to the question referred is that, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the income derived after March 4, 1969, from the shares and the property thrown into the common hotchpot of the family as per the assessee s letter dated March 15, 1969, has to be excluded from the computation of the assessee s income in the status of an individual for the assessment year 1969-70. The assessee is entitled to the costs of this reference. Advocate s fee Rs. 250.
-
1975 (6) TMI 2 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Assessment Proceedings, Business Income, Income Escaping Assessment, Reassessment Proceedings
-
1975 (6) TMI 1 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Association Of Persons, Income Tax Act, Principal Officer ... ... ... ... ..... ation of persons and as such there was no evidence before the Tribunal to find that there was such an association. This contention of Mr. Pranab Pal cannot be accepted. The ITO has discretion under s. 2(12)(b) of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922, to treat any person connected with an association as the principal officer and this has been done in the instant case. Mr. Pranab Pal also contended that the ITO summarily rejected the submissions of Rama Devi that she was not connected with any association, or that she was not the principal officer of any association, without assigning any reason therefor and as such the decision to treat Rama Devi as the principal officer of the association was bad. This point was at no time urged by the assessee earlier. Our answer to questions Nos. 1 and 2 disposes of the matter and as such question No. 3 has become purely academic. We do not answer the same. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs. DEB J.-I agree.
|
