Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 141 to 154 of 154 Records
-
1976 (11) TMI 14
Actual Cost, Capital Employed, Central Government, Computation Of Capital, Excess Profits Tax, Income Tax
-
1976 (11) TMI 13
Reference To High Court, Subject Matter ... ... ... ... ..... d subsidy had the character of income. Under these circumstances, it was clear that the department had not established that the subsidy had the character of income, in which case alone the actual expenses could have been adjusted against the receipt of the subsidy. This conclusion of the Tribunal has not been specifically challenged in the form of an appropriate question referred to this court and what is challenged is only the alternative ground given by the Tribunal holding that since the matter was not the subject-matter of consideration before the AAC, it could not be urged before the ITA Tribunal in an appeal preferred by the department. Hence, the said conclusion of the Tribunal has become final and on that conclusion the department is bound to fail and, therefore, it has become unnecessary to answer the question actually referred to this court. Under these circumstances, the reference is returned without the question being answered. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1976 (11) TMI 12
Depreciation Applicable, Income Tax Act, Income Tax Rules, Rate Of Depreciation, Set Off, Unabsorbed Depreciation
-
1976 (11) TMI 11
Agricultural Income Tax Act ... ... ... ... ..... partition has taken place among the members or groups of members of such family, branch, tarwad or tavazhi, the Agrl. ITO shall make such inquiry thereinto as he may think fit, and if he is satisfied that the joint family property has been partitioned among the various members or groups of members in definite portions, he shall record an order to that effect. Thus, it is clear that for the section to apply there must be an assessment under s. 17 and that assessment should be made on a HUF. In this case, as we pointed out already, there was no assessment made under s. 17 on the petitioner herein as a HUF and consequently the question of recognising any alleged partition did not arise. Therefore, looked at from any point of view, the order of the Agrl. ITO was utterly untenable and the Commr. of Agrl. I. T. was fully justified in setting aside that order and the consequential orders. The result is the tax revision case fails and is dismissed with costs. Counsel s fee Rs. 250.
-
1976 (11) TMI 10
Bona Fide, Business Expenditure ... ... ... ... ..... the last prayer in the petition was concerned, was justified and properly advised, inasmuch as this court rejected the prayer of appointment of the special officer for management of the business of the assessee-company and instead appointed a composite board of directors on which there were representatives of the Government, of the company and of the court. The Tribunal has also found that the resistance made by the assessee-company to the petition was in the bona fide belief that the appointment of such special officer would adversely affect the reputation, credit and management of the assessee-company and it would also affect the freedom of speech and expression. Having regard to the aforesaid position, it seems to us clear that the answers to the two questions which have been raised are self-evident having regard to the nature of business undertaken by the assessee-company and the findings which have been recorded by the Tribunal. Rule is, therefore, discharged with costs.
-
1976 (11) TMI 9
Acquisition Proceedings, Income Tax Act ... ... ... ... ..... to s. 269D, such initiation should take place within nine months from the end of the month in which the transfer in respect of such property is registered under the Registration Act. When such is the position it cannot be said that s. 47 of the Registration Act is applicable to the case. When having regard to the provisions of s. 54 of the Transfer of Property Act and ss. 269A and 269F of the Act a sale is completed only by the registration of the instrument of transfer under the Registration Act, it is not possible to invoke the provisions of s. 47 of the Indian Registration Act more so, when the Supreme Court has held in Ram Saran s case, AIR 1961 SC 1747, that the completion of sale takes effect on the date of its registration. We are fortified in our view by the decision of the Delhi High Court in Mahavir Metal Works P. Ltd. v. Union of India 1974 95 ITR 197. We, therefore, see no substance in this appeal. It is, accordingly, dismissed with costs. Advocate s fees Rs. 250.
-
1976 (11) TMI 8
Delay In Filing Return ... ... ... ... ..... utory obligation to file a return of his income voluntarily under s. 139(1) and the default committed in not filing a return voluntarily under s. 139(1) cannot be taken note of for initiating proceedings for imposition of penalty if a notice under s. 139(2) is issued or that the period of default shall cease from the date when the notice under s. 139(2) is served on the assessee. A reference in this connection may also be made to the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Mullapudi Venkatarayudu v. Union of India reported in 1975 99 ITR 448 (AP). The Andhra Pradesh High Court is of opinion that because the ITO issues a notice under s. 139(2) after the termination of the period prescribed by s. 139(1), the ITO cannot be deemed to have condoned the non-compliance to furnish a return under s. 139(1). In the premises aforesaid our answer to question No. 2 in this reference is also in the affirmative and in favour of the revenue. We make no order as to costs. DEB J.-I agree.
-
1976 (11) TMI 7
Assessment Year, Interest On Borrowed Capital ... ... ... ... ..... elying upon this deletion or omission of these words, Mr. Joshi urged that the relief under s. 80M would be required to be computed with reference to the net dividend income and not gross dividend income. It may be stated that in the statement of objects and reasons and notes on clauses of the Finance Bill, 1968, it has been clarified why the deletion of the words, received by it was effected and it has been explained thus The effect of the amendment will be that the concessional tax treatment in respect of dividends received by a company from any domestic company will be available to the recipient company even where the shares to which the dividend relates are registered in the name of a person other than the recipient company. In view of this position, which has been clarified we do not think that the deletion or the omission of the words received by it from s. 80M will have the effect as suggested by Mr. Joshi. In this view of the matter, the rule is discharged with costs.
-
1976 (11) TMI 6
... ... ... ... ..... it is impossible to hold that by this instrument an interest in the property was sought to be conveyed to the assessee-company. At the highest it may be regarded as a licence given to the assessee-company to utilise the factory and use the other vacant premises belonging to Progressive but subject to effective control by the owners and also subject to the right of the owners to use these premises as also the factory, which right has not been merely provided for in the agreement but in fact exercised by the owners. In this view of the matter, it must be held that there was no transfer of any building in favour of the assessee-company as decided in Capsulation Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT 1973 91 ITR 566 (Bom) and the assessee-company was, therefore, not disentitled to relief under section 15C. By the court In the result, the question referred to us will be answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. The revenue will pay to the assessee the costs of this reference.
-
1976 (11) TMI 5
Appeal Relating To Capital Gains, Appeal To AAC, Capital Gains, Reference ... ... ... ... ..... he basic worth of the shares and the Tribunal has valued those shares in the light of well-known principles of accountancy regarding the valuation of the shares of a private limited company. It cannot be said that the Tribunal has adopted any wrong principles or has erred in law in arriving at the conclusions regarding the valuation of the shares. Hence, questions Nos. 1 and 2 which turn upon the question of capital gains cannot be said to arise as questions of law out of the order of the Tribunal. As regards question No. 3, since the question of charging of interest was part of the appeal relating to capital gains, it cannot be said that the appeal was filed only on the question of interest under s. 139. Hence, the appeal was certainly maintainable as laid down by several decisions of the different High Courts. Under these circumstances, even question No. 3 cannot be said to arise out of the order of the Tribunal. This income-tax reference, therefore, fails and is dismissed.
-
1976 (11) TMI 4
Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that for computing the reduction in rebate under para. D of part II to the first Schedule to the Finance Act, 1959 and 1958 in the composition of profits as the year from which the dividend had been declared should be looked into and that the paid-up capital should be proportionately reduced for the purpose of reducing the rebate in corporation tax - question is answered in negative - revenue's appeal is accepted
-
1976 (11) TMI 3
Capital Gains - Foreign Company - amount received in excess of the face value of the shares held by a shareholder in the course of voluntary liquidation of a foreign company - provisions of s. 46(2) are applicable to in the case of liquidation of a company as per s. 2(17) - Since foreign company is not covered by this section, the receipts and its liquidation is not liable for facts under s. 46(2) - Revenue's appeal is dismissed
-
1976 (11) TMI 2
Agricultural Income - whether corresponding proportion of partner's salary could be treated as agricultural income - Salary paid to a partner by a firm which grows and sells tea is exempt from tax
-
1976 (11) TMI 1
Income-Tax Officer's failed to consider initial depreciation - Officer relied on his records to determine the depreciation allowable in such a case, if he commits a mistake in quantifying the amount of depreciation allowable, the mistake cannot be attributed to the assessee - Assessment cannot be reopened - Assessee's appeal is allowed
....
|