|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 60 of 137 Records
-
1977 (8) TMI 142 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... R.M. Krishnaswami Naidu 1970 26 S.T.C. 42 (S.C.). 6.. The principle which can be deduced from the decisions cited above is that an article can be regarded as a component part of the principal object only if the latter is incomplete, without the former, and the former is capable of identification either visually or through chemical or other test as a distinguishable part of the finished product. Applying this test it is not possible to say that copper wire, although a necessary material or constituent used in the manufacture of electrical transformers, has an identity of its own to be regarded as a component part of electrical goods. In our view, the Tribunal was perfectly justified in observing Though copper wires are used as one of the materials in the production of certain electrical goods, it cannot be termed as a component part of such item. In the circumstances, the tax revision case lacks merits and it is dismissed with costs. Counsel s fee Rs. 150. Petition dismissed.
-
1977 (8) TMI 141 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... nt, we have the direct authority of the decisions of the Supreme Court noticed earlier, and of the Division Bench of this Court in the tax revision cases. We are, therefore, unable to accept the contention of the assessee-respondent. 5.. The learned Government Pleader also raised the contention that against exhibit P8, the assessee has its alternative remedy by way of appeal and further appeal under sections 36 and 39 of the Act and, therefore, the petition under article 226 was not maintainable, having regard to sub-clause (3) of article 226 of the Constitution as amended by the 42nd Amendment, and of section 58 of the 42nd Amendment Act. As we have expressed ourselves against the respondent on the merits, we think it unnecessary to base our decision on this ground, which also appears wellfounded. 6.. We allow this appeal, set aside the order of the learned Judge and direct that 0. P. No. 2871 of 1975 will stand dismissed. There will be no order as to costs. Appeal allowed.
-
1977 (8) TMI 140 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the provision as to the forfeiture in the impugned section is a penalty or whether it is merely a device to collect the amount unauthorisedly realised by the dealer?
Held that:- Appeal allowed. It was submitted by the learned counsel for the assessees that apart from the question of legislative competence and the challenge based on articles 14 and 19(1)(f) certain questions of facts arise and they will have to be dealt with by the High Court. On ascertainment of such cases a direction will issue to the High Court to decide those cases on merits.
-
1977 (8) TMI 134 - SUPREME COURT
Whether a sale effected by the respondents-M/s. Swaika Oil Mills-is a sale in the course of the export of goods out of the territory of India?
Held that:- Appeal allowed. Set aside the judgment of the High Court and hold that the sale in respect of which the respondents claimed exemption, is not a sale in the course of export and is, therefore, exigible to sales tax.
-
1977 (8) TMI 124 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Shares warrants and entries in register of members ... ... ... ... ..... it would be clear that the ITO should be satisfied that the amount of tax paid by her or on her behalf for the assessment year in question exceeded the amount for which she was properly chargeable for tax for that year and in that situation she would be entitled to claim credit for the excess tax paid by her or on her behalf to the income-tax department. In our view, therefore., even on the basis of the alternative submission made by Mr. Dwarkadas under section 237, the assessee would be entitled to claim credit for the excess tax paid by her in respect of dividend income receivable by her from the company in the previous year relating to the assessment year in question. Having regard to the above discussion, the question that has been referred to us will be answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. Mr. Dwarkadas says that he is not pressing for costs since the assessee has not been charged by her legal advisers there will therefore, be no order as to scosts.
-
1977 (8) TMI 115 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Company – Membership of, Shares warrants and entries in register of members, Transfer of Shares – Power to refuse registration and appeal against refusal, Powers of Court to rectify register of members
-
1977 (8) TMI 114 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Winding up – Circumstances in which a company may be would up ... ... ... ... ..... has happened in the past is not re-enacted in the future ? Could the sanction to institute the petition not have been granted earlier ? Could a provisional liquidator not have been appointed ? Could the financial position of the company not have been exposed to the eyes of the poor public in order to warn them of the booby trap ? And to foreclose a repeat performance of the Robinhood drama in reverse (here the poor are robbed to pay to the rich) can it not be ensured that no company which has not obtained a certificate of solvency (to be procured within 3 or 6 months of the close of every accounting year) from the company law authorities or the Reserve Bank authorities is permitted to issue advertisements inviting the public to join the scheme and from collecting subscriptions, contributions or deposits ? The exercise is worth undertaking if the endeavour to protect the common man (if not to improve his lot) is not to be drowned in the tears shed for the miseries of the rich.
-
1977 (8) TMI 113 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Compromise and arrangement ... ... ... ... ..... judge was right in rejecting the said application on merits. The learned judge has already noted in his judgment that a good part of the assets had already been sold and the landlord has refused to grant any renewal of the lease of the land on which the factory site of the company is situate. The landlord in fact has already instituted a suit. We have also carefully considered the provisions of the scheme which the contributories seek to propound and to place at the meetings of the creditors and also of the contributories. Without going into the question of bona fides, we are of the opinion that, in the facts and circumstances of this case, the learned judge was right in dismissing the said application even before the scheme had been considered at any meeting of the creditors or the contributories. This appeal, therefore, fails and is dismissed. All interim orders are vacated. Official liquidator will retain his costs out of the assets. Bimal Chandra Basak, J. mdash I agree.
-
1977 (8) TMI 94 - ITAT MADRAS-D
... ...
... ... ..... in that section i.e. 143(3), the same meaning has to be given to status referred to in explanation to s. 246(c) also. Therefore, I am of the view that the Accountant Member had rightly held that the appeal before the AAC was competent. 9. It is no doubt true that in a single assessment order, there can also be an order under s. 184(7) and it is open to the assessee to appeal against the order of assessment as well as the order under s. 184(7). Thus, in my opinion, even if an appeal is still not provided under s. 184(7), in view of the explanation added to s. 143(3) w.e.f. 1st April, 1971, an appeal against the order of assessment under s. 143(3), objecting to the status adopted therein, is now available to the assessee and, therefore, there is no need to provide a specific provision for appeal in s. 246, against order under s. 184(7). 10. In the light of the above discussions I answer the question referred to me in the affirmative and in agreement with the Accountant Member.
-
1977 (8) TMI 92 - ITAT MADRAS-C
... ...
... ... ..... in the net wealth of the assessee for all the assessment years under appeal. No other point is pressed. The appeal are allowed. D. Rangaswamy, Vice-President I agree fully with the reasonings of my learned colleague. I only wish to add further that in the absence of any provision in the WT Act to substitute on the valuation date or relate back to the valuation date of the future accrued amount arising as in this case on the date the final lsquo determination, as per the various High Court decisions cited by my learned brother, the only inevitable requirement under the WT Act is to evaluate or ascertain the market value of the right to receive just and reasonable compensation. As my colleague has already found, with which I agree, no prudent person will pay anything to purchase a right, the potentiality of its fetching anything to him being a matter of chance only, in the context of the whole matter being dispute before the Court and resting finally on its ultimate decisions.
-
1977 (8) TMI 90 - ITAT MADRAS-C
... ...
... ... ..... iness was not a conclusive that for determining whether the businesses were separate or not, but the real test was the unity of control. The test of unity of control is satisfied in the present case and therefore we hold that the bus business as well as the other businesses formed one business. In view of this, though the bus business was discontinued, inasmuch as the loans were taken by and far for the purposes of business (though at the time when the bus business was in existence), it has to be held that interest thereon so far as it relates to business is an admissible deduction. The ITO has disallowed a portion relating to borrowings for non-business purposes. The disallowance was of Rs. 50,000. In the absence of any further material, we have to hold that the Commissioner was not justified in directing disallowance of the balance of Rs.92,024. 10. In the result, the order of the Commissioner is set aside and that the ITO is restored. The appeal of the assessee is allowed.
-
1977 (8) TMI 88 - ITAT MADRAS-B
... ...
... ... ..... quired such notification it has been specifically provided so-vide Ss. 10(15)(i), 10(15)(iv), etc. That such notification is not required is also made clear by the grant of exemption to informants in respect of rewards made by the Central Government under the provisions of s. 10(17B). Even if it is considered that a notification of the Central Government is required, in our opinion, the letter of the Ministry of Finance referred to above sanctioning the payment of reward would satisfy the requirement of notification by the Central Government. Looked at from any angle we are of the considered opinion that the assessee rsquo s claim fall clearly under s. 10(17B) of the IT Act, 1961. The assessee having satisfied the conditions laid down in the said provision as discussed above, is entitled to the exemption claimed. We have, therefore, no hesitation in upholding the order of AAC accepting the assessee rsquo s claim for exemption. The appeal of the Revenue fails and is dismissed.
-
1977 (8) TMI 85 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... 18(2A) of the Act. As the Accountant member has mentioned in his note that once it is held that the orders in question are, in fact, order u/s. 18(1)(c), there is no difference of opinion about the appealability of such orders. I do not think that questions No. 1 and 2 as referred could still be said to survive for any answer by me. It would suffice to mention, however, that in case any answer was still needed, I would answer the same by holding that in question No. 1 an appeal would lie to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner against the orders passed by the Wealth-tax Officer and to question No. 2 by holding that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was not right in holding that no appeal lay against the impugned orders. 10. It has already been mentioned that the Accountant Member has not expressed any opinion on merits. 11. The matter will not go back to the Bench for passing suitable orders and disposing of the cases in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Act.
-
1977 (8) TMI 84 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... hare income of both the partners were determined and the firm paid tax as required under the Act. Sri Alisher was not financially sound. As such he entered into sub-partnership with Shri Shaffi Mohd. provide finances on behalf of Shri Alisher for running of the business of the main firm. As a result of sub partnership, the share of profit which was received by Shri Alisher was further sub-divided between him and Shri Shaffi Mohd. From this fact, it is clear that this sub-partnership entered into between Shri Alisher and Shri Shaffi Mohd. helped the main firm in carrying on its business. Shri Alisher has already paid tax according to his share. If Alisher sub-divides his profit with Shaffi Mohd., in my opinion, he will not be required to pay further tax. If Alisher is further required to pay the tax, it would be double taxation on the same income. Thus, in my opinion, the finding of the learned AAC is quite correct. 8. In the result, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed.
-
1977 (8) TMI 83 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... or the assessee, that even if penalty was exigible in the present case, the quantum of penalty will be nil as the tax actually paid by the assessee by way of advance-tax was larger than the tax demanded under s. 210. According to law, the quantum of penalty under s. 273(a) is to be not less than 10 per cent and more than 1-1/2 times of the amount by which the tax actually paid during the financial year immediately preceding the assessment year falls short of either 75 per cent of the assessed tax or where a notice under s. 210 has been issued to the assessee, the amount payable thereunder, whichever is less. In the present case, the tax actually paid i.e., Rs. 2,750 exceeded the tax which the assessee had been required to pay under s. 210 i.e., Rs. 1,581. On all these considerations, we hold that the AAC was not justified in confirming the penalty levied by the ITO. We cancel the orders of the AAC and the ITO levying the impugned penalty. 6. In the result the appeal succeeds.
-
1977 (8) TMI 82 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... s. 8,000 and the same was exempted from wealth-tax in terms of s. 5(1)(iv) a of he WT Act. The assessee had also claimed exemption in respect of his 1/42nd share in shop No. 107 at Ahmedabad in terms of s. 5(1)(iv) which relates to one house or part of a house belonging to the assessee. The exemption under s. 5(1)(iv)(a) in respect of agricultural land had obviously nothing to do with the exemption under s. 5(1)(iv) claimed in respect of the assessee rsquo s share in the said shop. There is no dispute that the assessee was co-owner of this shop alongwith several others. That being so, the assessee rsquo s claim should have been allowed, unless the assessee has been granted exemption under s. 5(1)(iv) in respect of some other house or part of a house. We direct that unless exemption under s. 5(1)(iva) has been granted to the assessee already in respect of any other house property, this claim of the assessee should be allowed. 10. In the result both the appeals succeed in part.
-
1977 (8) TMI 81 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... firms were nominally introduced in the firms with a view to lend semblance of genuineness to the partnership deeds. The Supreme Court on those facts held that all the firms were benami and L was proprietor of the same. 19. In the present case, no such facts were found out by the authorities below. 20. As discussed above, the firm R.F.C. was held to be genuine by the Department in the past. Even Registration was granted to the firm. In the present case as discussed above, there is no finding that the profits of R.F.C. were really enjoyed by the assessee firm. There is also no finding that the entire business of R.F.C. was really managed and separate. There is no inter-lacing of the funds. Thus, we are of the view that the learned AAC was wrong in holding that income of R.F.C. should be taxed in the hands of the assessee firm. Thus income of Rs. 20,070 earned in the name of R.F.C. could not be added in the hands of the assessee. 21. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part.
-
1977 (8) TMI 80 - ITAT HYDERABAD-B
... ...
... ... ..... ircular issued by the Board, after seeking advice from the Ministry of Law, is to the following effect It will thus be seen that the Ministry of law have advised that in such cases interest under s. 217(1A) should not be charged. Comptroller and auditor General of India has also agreed with this view. The Board, therefore, desire that in case of the type referred to above, interest under s. 215 only need be charged. It is a familiar principle and the decisions of the Supreme Court have invited our attention to this principle that the Board rsquo s circulars are binding on the Department under s. 119 of the Act. In such circumstances, Mr. Swamy rsquo s contention has to be upheld. Therefore, interest under s. 215 only can be charged and that interest has been charged in the instant case. No further interest can be charged under s. 271(1A) of the Act. We reverse the order of the Commissioner and restore the order of the ITO. 3. In the result, the appeal succeeds and is allowed.
-
1977 (8) TMI 79 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... .,1969. 5. On a careful consideration, we are inclined to agree with the AAC in the view he has taken. Of course according to the evidence produced before us by the learned counsel for the assessee, it appears that there was an application for extension of time in form 6,but it was only up to 31st Dec.,1969. It does not appear that there was any application for further extension. Be that as it any, the fact remains that the assessee had no taxable income and it is evident from the record that the ITO did not issue any notice under s. 139(2).In such circumstances, there was no obligation on the part of the assessee to file voluntarily a return under s. 139(1) of the Act. There was thus no question of any default on the part of the assessee and the provisions of s. 271(1)(a) are not attracted. The penalty was rightly cancelled by the AAC and we uphold his order. 6. In the result, the appeal fails and is dismissed while the assessee rsquo s cross objection is treated as allowed.
-
1977 (8) TMI 78 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... clubs etc., this object cannot be considered to be one for charitable purpose and decision of the Mysore High Court in Bangalore Race Club vs. CIT (77 ITR 435), has a bearing on this. Further this object does entail an activity requiring huge organisational participation including periodical advertisements of the race meetings as is evident from the considerable expenditure incurred on the establishment and other expenses. The Accountant Member rsquo s view that this racing activity is necessary in order to attain the object to establish institutions, schools etc, would have found favour with me only if that was the main object. In the result, I find that the Accountant Member rsquo s reasoning to hold that the assessee club would be entitled to the exemption under s. 11 r/w s. 2(15) of the Act does not appeal to me. I, therefore, answer the question No. 1 in the affirmative and question No. 2 in the negative, and in agreement with the views expressed by the Judicial Member.
|
