|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 81 to 100 of 137 Records
-
1977 (8) TMI 57 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Sugar - Reprocessing - Effect ... ... ... ... ..... d in the production of sugar. Consequently, if there was reprocessing of what had been produced earlier and might have become unmarketable did not amount to production of sugar. In our view the approach of.the learned Counsel is not correct. Apart from the fact that the decision in C.W.J.C. 1838/70 is an authority against the proposition of the respondents, we are also of the view that where sugar which is, for one reason or the other, unmarketable goes through reprocessing, it has to be held that the end-product is sugar produced as a result of the reprocessing. 7. In the view that we have taken, it is clear that the demand made is not justified in law. We accordingly allow this application and quash Annexures 1 to 4. 8. It is stated that the amount of Rs. 16,366/- has been deposited by the petitioner. If the amount is so deposited, it is clear that the amount will either have to be refunded or readjusted towards the excise duty that may be payable for the succeeding years.
-
1977 (8) TMI 56 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Refund of duty under writ ... ... ... ... ..... adras Rubber Factory v. Union of India, AIR 1976 SC 638, where an order of the Central Government passed in further proceedings from an order under S. 27 of the Customs Act was upheld by the Supreme Court in an appeal taken from that order by special leave granted by the Supreme Court. In that appeal, the Supreme Court could not have exercised its jurisidiction under Art. 32 of the Constitution but could only have decided the question whether the authority functioning under the Act had acted in accordance with law. This decision is distinguishable. No decision of the Supreme Court where it had refused to exercise jurisdiction under Art. 226 of the Constitution in an application for refund of tax collected without the authority of law, had been brought to our notice. In the light of the above, we dismiss the appeal. We have chosen to write a speaking order in dismissing the appeal because the matter was argued at length before us and we assume that it is not going to end here.
-
1977 (8) TMI 55 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Short levy due to mis-statement - Rule 10 and 173I. -Interpretation of Statute - Two interpretation possible
-
1977 (8) TMI 54 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
Change Of Law, Law Applicable, Penalty For Concealment ... ... ... ... ..... ssessment when the assessing authority would have the satisfaction that the assessee had concealed income which had escaped assessment. The court, therefore, held that the existing law on the date of satisfaction of the Income-tax Officer would be the law to apply to the penalty proceeding. As we find, in the instant case the assessee made the second return on April 6, 1971, wherein there was the suppression. Assessment was completed on 30th of August, 1971, and it was at that point of time that penalty proceedings were ordered to be initiated. The ratio in K. C. Behera s case 1976 103 ITR 479 (Orissa), therefore, directly applies and the amended provision is applicable to the penalty proceeding. Our answer, therefore, to the question is The amount of penalty imposable is to be worked out on the basis of the law in force on the date the Income-tax Officer directed initiation of the proceeding under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. We make no order as to costs. PANDA J.-I agree.
-
1977 (8) TMI 53 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Assessment Year, Change In Constitution Of Firm, Income Tax Act ... ... ... ... ..... Manufacturing Co. Ltd. AIR 1962 SC 1314 at page 1318 (para. 6) and the subject is capable of discussion in possible alternative views . There is no case in this court in which the view taken in Visakha Flour Mills case 1977 108 ITR 466 (AP) FB is doubted. The facts necessitating the references in R. C. No. 22 of 1975 and in R. C. No. 67 of 1975 have been fully stated in the opinion of the Chief Justice. Following the reasoning stated in the Visakha Flour Mills case 1977 108 ITR 466 (AP) FB in R.C. No. 22 of 1975, I answer the question that a single assessment could be made. The answer is against the assessee and in favour of the revenue. In R. C. No. 67 of 1975 the firm constituted in the deed on October 26, 1970, has not succeeded the earlier firm constituted by the deed on October 1, 1970, within the meaning of section 188 of the Act but was a change under section 187(2) of the Act. The answer is in favour of the revenue and against the assessee. Memo of costs will follow.
-
1977 (8) TMI 52 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
House Property, Reopening Assessment ... ... ... ... ..... lution of the board that the managing director shall not be paid his remuneration, the managing director was not entitled to draw the salary. The resolution of the board to write back the remuneration to the managing director meant that the provision in the balance-sheet was to stand deleted and the accounts were accordingly to be readjusted. In such circumstances, it was not open to the revenue to contend that section 15(a) of the Act applied and, on the basis that the salary was due from the employer, the same could be treated as income. Our answer to the question referred, therefore, is On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amounts said to have been due to the assessee by way of remuneration qua managing director of M/s. Orient Engineering Works Private Ltd., Cuttack, in each of the three years in question was not income of the assessee. Assessee shall have his costs. Consolidated bearing fee is assessed at rupees one hundred and fifty. PANDA J.--I agree.
-
1977 (8) TMI 51 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Illegal Search ... ... ... ... ..... ce. The assessment for 1969-70 also is seen to have been made on a proper basis relying on the current consumption after allowing deduction towards consumption for flour mill, etc. No evidence has been adduced to show that the computation of the officer is unreasonable and would call for any interference. Hence the assessment for that year is confirmed. So far as the year 1968-69 is concerned it made a slight reduction in the estimated turnover. It noted that the accounts seized were made up to 26th August, 1968, and could be taken to represent five months turnover. The turnover for the year was worked out on strict geometrical proportion, rather than by doubling the turnover disclosed up to 26th August, 1968, as done by the Sales Tax Officer and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. In our attenuated revisional jurisdiction under section of the Act, we find no scope to interfere in revision. We dismiss these tax revision cases, with no order as to costs. Petitions dismissed.
-
1977 (8) TMI 50 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
Change In Constitution Of Firm, Partnership Deed, Previous Year, Retirement Of Partner ... ... ... ... ..... 22 where the provisions were somewhat different and the definition of the term change in the constitution of the firm was not available. On our analysis of the provisions of sections 170, 187 and 188 of the Act and taking the tell-tale features of the case into account, we are of the view that the revenue has gone wrong in applying section 187 of the Act to the facts of this case. Two separate assessments should have been made in accordance with the provisions of section 170. Our answer to the question referred, therefore, is On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and on a true interpretation of section 187, the total income of the entire previous year in which a change in the constitution took place was not liable to be assessed to income-tax in the hands of the firm as constituted at the date of assessment but the assessment should have been completed under section 188 of the Act read with section 170 thereof. We make no direction for of costs. PANDA J.-I agree.
-
1977 (8) TMI 49 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Income Escaping Assessment, Notice For Reassessment ... ... ... ... ..... the belief contemplated by section 147(a) of the Income-tax Act for reopening the assessment have a rational connection and relevant bearing on the formation of the belief. It appears that there existed a direct nexus or live link between the materials coming to the notice of the Income-tax Officer and the formation of his belief that there had been escapement of income of the assessee from assessment in the particular year because of his failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts. The belief of the Income-tax Officer in the instant case cannot be said to be a pretence. In the instant case, the conditions precedent for reopening of the assessment as laid down in section 147(a) of the Act being satisfied the notice given under section 148 must be held to be valid. As the learned trial judge came to a correct finding his judgment and order should be upheld. This appeal is, therefore, dismissed. There shall, however, be no order as to costs. S. C. GHOSE J.--I agree.
-
1977 (8) TMI 48 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Income Escaping Assessment ... ... ... ... ..... 1976 102 ITR 287 (SC), such report would not constitute information within the meaning of section 40(b) upon which the Income-tax Officer could have initiated proceedings for reassessment. It was, therefore, a case not of receiving information within the meaning of section 147(b) as understood and explained in decided cases but of a mere change of opinion and under such circumstances the Income-tax Officer could not have initiated proceedings for reassessment. The foregoing discussion would show that the Income-tax Officer was not justified in the present case in initiating proceedings for reassessment to income-tax in respect of the four assessment years in question and that the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the proceedings for reassessment were not justified. Accordingly, we answer the question referred to us in the negative, that is to say, in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. The Commissioner will pay the costs of this reference to the assessee.
-
1977 (8) TMI 47 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Set Off Of Loss ... ... ... ... ..... se facts the Tribunal s finding that the widow Bai Mani was taken up as a partner by inheritance was not disturbed by the High Court and the benefit of set-off as contemplated by clause (e) was made available to Bai Mani. We are unable to see any difference between the facts of the present case and the facts in Bai Maniben s case 1960 38 ITR 80 (Bom) and the principle laid down by this court in that case will equally be attracted in the present case, more so, when the surviving partners have while entering into a new agreement decided to continue the partnership by taking the heirs of the deceased partner as partnes. Thus, in our opinion, the Tribunal was right in coming to the conclusion that the assessee was entitled to claim a set-off to the extent of one-fourth, share, of the losses. In the result, our answers to the two questions referred are as under Question No. 1, in the affirmative. Question No. 2, in the affirmative. The revenue shall pay the costs of the assessee.
-
1977 (8) TMI 46 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
Assessing Officer, Cash Credits, Income From Undisclosed Sources ... ... ... ... ..... refuse to interfere with the assessment particularly with reference to the addition of Rs. 50,000 seems to be wholly unsustainable. An enquiry should have been made to find out whether the genuineness of the loan of Rs. 50,000 had been established and, if that was accepted, addition of Rs. 1,01,000 would have stood reduced by a further sum of Rs. 50,000. Learned standing counsel also accepts this submission to be substantial. We would accordingly hold that, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was not justified in upholding the addition of Rs. 1,01,000 as concealed income of the assessee. This, however, would not mean that the addition should stand deleted. The Tribunal may itself examine the justifiability of the assessee s contention or in its discretion it might remit the matter to the Income-tax Officer for investigation and report whereafter the appeal be re-disposed of in accordance with law. We make no direction for costs. PANDA J.--I agree.
-
1977 (8) TMI 45 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Income From Business, Manufacturing Concern ... ... ... ... ..... r exploitation of its commercial assets was leasing only two machines to the sister concern when it could not instal them for want of adequate air-conditioning facilities in its premises. The argument of redundancy in such a context was thoroughly is conceived. Similarly, the argument was equally misconceived that merely because temporarily for want of air-conditioning facilities these machines could not be installed in the assessee's premises, these machines were not part of the commercial assets of the assessee, even though they were capable of being used as such in installation of air-conditioning facilities and were actually used in the sister concern in the identical business. The Tribunal has followed the settled legal position. Therefore, both the references must be answered in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. Both these references are accordingly disposed of and the revenue shall pay the costs of the assessee in each case.
-
1977 (8) TMI 44 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Assessment Year, Change In Constitution Of Firm, Income Tax Act ... ... ... ... ..... ry difficult to say that if the company had not met the foreign tour expenses of the assessee s wife it would be the assessee who was or would be under an obligation to meet those expenses. The assessee s wife herself, who has been assessed to income-tax separately as an individual, would have and could have met those expenses. In our view, therefore, in the absence of any legal fiction or specific provision in that behalf it would be difficult to interpret the provisions of section 2(24)(iv) of the Act so as to include the value of the benefit or perquisite received by the relative in the income of the director or of such person. In our view, the Tribunal was right in coming to the conclusion that the item of Rs. 10,662 was not liable to be treated as the income of the assessee under section 2(24)(iv) of the Act. In the result, the question referred to us is answered in the negative, in favour of the assessee. The revenue will pay the costs of the reference to the assessee.
-
1977 (8) TMI 43 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Agricultural Land, Burden Of Proof, Business Profits, Capital Asset, Capital Gains ... ... ... ... ..... been made by the assessee. The land was repurchased, according to the assessee, because it was adjacent to the land in which the existing building of the assessee stood. In any event, it seems to us that the revenue has not discharged the burden of establishing that the repurchase and sale of these two plots out of Survey No. 335 was an adventure in the nature of trade it cannot be said in view of the totality of the circumstances of the case that this was the sole intention of the assessee at the time when he repurchased the land in 1964 to sell the two plots at a profit. Under these circumstances, the conclusion reached by the Tribunal that the amount of Rs. 23,627 should be treated as capital gains and assessed as such and not as business profits is correct. Under these circumstances, the question referred to us is answered in the affirmative, that is, in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. The Commissioner will pay the costs of this reference to the assessee.
-
1977 (8) TMI 42 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Act Of 1922 ... ... ... ... ..... ssioner, when he transferred this case, referred not to the Patiala Income-tax Act, but to the Indian Income-tax Act and it was contended that if the Patiala Income-tax Act was in force for purposes of reassessment, action should have been taken under that Act and not the Indian Income-tax Act. The Supreme Court pointed out that this argument, however, lost point, because the exercise of a power would be referable to a jurisdiction which conferred validity upon it and not to a jurisdiction under which it would be nugatory. In view of this position, the initiation of proceedings on October 12, 1962, was fully justified even though notice was issued under section 28(3) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The Tribunal was right in holding that such notice should be regarded as having been issued under the relevant provisions of the Act of 1961. Thus, our answer to question No. 2 is in the affirmative and in favour of the revenue. The assessee shall pay the costs of the revenue.
-
1977 (8) TMI 41 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Balancing Charge, Written Down Value ... ... ... ... ..... ethod of determining the actual cost of the transferred assets with the approval of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner it will be difficult to say that the method adopted was unreasonable or irrational. In the light of the facts and circumstances which obtained in the case, the Tribunal has also taken the view that the manner in which the actual cost had been determined by the Income-tax Officer could not be regarded as unreasonable or erroneous and we do not see any reason to interfere with that view of the Tribunal, and the second question, therefore, will have to be answered accordingly. Having regard to the above discussion, our answers to the two questions are as follows Question No. 1 In the affirmative, against the assessee. Question No. 2 The basis adopted by the department in fixing the actual cost of the transferred assets to the assessee-company would be in accordance with the requirements of law. The assessee will pay the costs of the reference to the revenue.
-
1977 (8) TMI 40 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Computation Of Capital ... ... ... ... ..... e being transferred to an account named as forfeited money reserve. There was no finding that such unclaimed dividend had been forfeited. The Allahabad High Court did not consider the factual and legal aspects of forfeiture of dividend. It was accepted as a fact that a shareholder s claim against unclaimed dividend was met from the forfeited moneys account . In the case before us there is a clear finding that the fund in question consists of forfeited dividend and that this fund has not been set apart for any specific future use. These findings clearly distinguish the case before us from the case before the Allahabad High Court. For the reasons given above, in respect of forfeited dividend we answer the question referred in the negative and in favour of the assessee. As regards provision for taxation and proposed dividend we answer the question in the affirmative and in favour of the revenue. In the facts and circumstances, there will be no order as to costs. DEB J.-I agree.
-
1977 (8) TMI 39 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Levy Of Penalty ... ... ... ... ..... view of this decision of the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court, the decision of the learned single judge in Ram Chandra Sarda v. Income- tax Officer 1970 78 ITR 325 (Cal) does not appear to be good law. The Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Shivlal Kundanmal V. Commissioner of Income-tax 1973 TLR 520 was also of the same view. Their Lordships held In our considered opinion, the initiation of the penalty proceedings does not start with the issuance of notice by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner but the recording of satisfaction that it was a fit case for penalty by the Income-tax Officer or the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, as the case may be, contemplated by section 271 must be construed to be the initiation of the penal proceedings. In the result, we answer the question in the negative and in favour of the department. The reference is disposed of accordingly. The assessee shall bear costs of this reference. Hearing fee Rs. 100. D. PATHAK J.--I agree.
-
1977 (8) TMI 38 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Assessed Income, Question Of Law, Reference To High Court ... ... ... ... ..... admittely, the total income returned by the assessee is much less than eighty per cent. of the total income assessed. It is a matter of common knowledge that concealment of income in our country has created imbalance in our economy and this is one of the most important reasons for the inflationary trend and high prices. The activities of such assessees as the present one have paralysed our economy. The income-tax law has to be construed strictly. The reading of the Explanation to section 271(1)(c) does not admit of any other interpretation. The onus lies heavily on the assessee to prove that concealment was not out of fraud or gross or wilful neglect. In this situations in our view, the question of law as framed by the revenue does arise out of the Tribunal s order dated February 27, 1976, in I.T.A. No. 237(ASR) of 1975-76, and we direct the Tribunal to refer the same along with the statement of the case for the opinion of this court. The costs will abide the ultimate result.
|
