|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 60 of 177 Records
-
1978 (4) TMI 197 - HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Company – Incorporation of ... ... ... ... ..... ed upon in that meeting. It will thus be seen that the development authority did not decide to give up or defer the imposition of any other tax except the octroi tax. The decision contemplated non-imposition of octroi tax in lieu of annual contributions to be made by the industrial undertakings functioning within the special area. The chairman of the development authority was, therefore, not entitled to sign any agreement promising on behalf of the development authority not to impose any tax whatsoever. The chairman may have been competent to enter into an agreement with respect to octroi tax, but as no decision had been taken with respect to other taxes, the agreement executed by him on behalf of the development authority was wholly unauthorised. For this reason also, the petitioner cannot rely upon the agreement. The petition fails and is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs of this petition. The security amount deposited by the petitioner shall be refunded to it.
-
1978 (4) TMI 183 - HIGH COURT OF PATNA
Managing director – Tenure of appointment ... ... ... ... ..... his period only the company will be liable in terms of the pronote itself. Accordingly, while affirming the judgment and decree of the learned subordinate judge so far as the company is concerned, I modify the said judgment and decree in respect of the appellants in F.A. No. 386 of 1967 on two points. Firstly, the heirs of Shri Binay Krishna Rohatgi shall be liable to pay in accordance with the terms and conditions of guarantee an amount of Rs. 1,62,000 along with interest with effect from the date of the filing of the suit, and secondly, that in execution of the decree only such properties can be followed which have devolved upon these appellants after the death of Shri Binay Krishna Rohatgi. In the result, F.A. No. 409 of 1967, filed on behalf of the company is dismissed, whereas F.A. No. 386 of 1967, filed on behalf of the heirs of Shri Binay Krishna Rohatgi is allowed in part to the extent as indicated above. The parties shall bear their own costs. Jha, J. mdash I agrees.
-
1978 (4) TMI 175 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Winding up – Powers of tribunal on hearing petition ... ... ... ... ..... s application for adjournment. With the exception of one unsecured creditor in the sum of Rs. 3,000, the only creditors before me who are supporting Mr. Chagla s application are, as may be expected, the United Western Bank and SICOM and they feel that if the company is wound up, its assets (which are wholly secured in respect of the debts to the United Western Bank and SICOM), will not be sufficient to meet those debts. The views that are material are not those of such creditors. The company has been dormant since March, 1976. It is admittedly in no position to pay its debts. There is no reasonable expectation of its revival or profit-making. In the circumstances, no useful purpose can be served by staving off the evil day. I, therefore, wind up the company and pass an order in terms of prayer (a) of the petition. The costs of the petitioner will come out of the assets of the company. On Mr. Chagla s application, the aforesaid order is stayed until 5 p.m. on 27th April, 1978.
-
1978 (4) TMI 174 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Penalty for contravention of sections 417, 418 and 419 ... ... ... ... ..... 418 of the Companies Act. On the other hand the averments made in para. 6 of the petition of complaint indicates complete non-application of the mind and does not show how the accused persons were responsible for the commission of the alleged offence. In the absence of such indication in the petition of complaint the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate has had no authority or jurisdiction to issue process under section 420 of the Companies Act against any of the accused persons including the accused petitioner. It may be that excepting the accused petitioners the other accused persons are not before me but having regard to the circumstances as stated above and also in view of what I have said, it must be held that the entire proceeding pending against all the accused persons must be quashed. In the result the rules are made absolute. The impugned orders are set aside and the proceeding pending against the accused persons including, the accused petitioner are hereby quashed.
-
1978 (4) TMI 162 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Shares warrants and entries in register of members, Powers of Court to rectify register of members
-
1978 (4) TMI 161 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Winding up - Power of registrar to strike defunct company off register, Powers of court to grant relief in certain cases
-
1978 (4) TMI 160 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Circumstances in which a company may be wound up, Winding up - Company when deemed unable to pay its debts and Application for
-
1978 (4) TMI 139 - ITAT PUNE
... ...
... ... ..... ares are known and determinate on that date has to be accepted, had the above legal principles in equal force apply to the provisions of s. 164 of the Act, there is no dispute in the present cases as to who the beneficiaries in the case of each of the trusts before us in the relevant previous year are and that their shares are determinate and known on the said date. It is also not in dispute that none of these beneficiaries had income in the year under consideration chargeable under the IT Act. That being the position, the decision of the AAC in the present cases that the proviso to s. 164(1) of the 1961 Act is attracted and has to be upheld. We have also to hold his conclusion that the income of each of the trusts for the year under consideration is to be taxed in the hands of the various beneficiaries in each of the trust fund, who are there in the previous year, according to their sharing rations. 10. In the result, the appeals by the Revenue fail and are hereby dismissed.
-
1978 (4) TMI 136 - ITAT PATNA-A
... ...
... ... ..... of profit at 10per cent had hardly any basis, whereas, the AAC had given some basis for taking the profit at 7.5per cent. Considering all the circumstances, the estimates made by the AAC appears to be reasonable and do not call for any interference. As regards the addition made in the coke shortage account, we agree with the AAC that the value of short production could not be added when the total income was being estimated on the basis of the materials on record. The AAC has fairly taken an estimated profit if the production was on the expected basis. We, therefore, do not find any default in the estimate by the AAC which appears to be fair to the assessee as well as to the revenue. Considering all the circumstances, we hold that as a best judgment, the assessment order of the AAC is well based and reasonable and we, therefore, uphold it. The appeals by the assessee as well as by the Department are, therefore, dismissed. 13. In the result, all the three appeals are dismissed.
-
1978 (4) TMI 135 - ITAT PATNA-A
... ...
... ... ..... e in this building would come to Rs. 75,000. We, however, agree with the contention of the learned counsel for the assessee that exemption under s.5(1)(iv) would be available to the factory building and this could be considered to be a house after amendment of s.5(1) (iv) in 1971. In this connection, we may refer to the commentary of Sampath Ayangar-Three new Taxes, page 344, where it has been observed that the exemption is available for all kinds of houses whether residential buildings or business premises or factory premises without any restrictions as to their user. In this connection the book has referred to the letter of the Central Board of Direct Taxes F. No. 317/23/73 WT. d,. 29th July, 1973 published in Taxation Sec. V at page 6 in Jan., 1974 edition. Thus it appears that the department itself has accepted that such buildings would be exempt under this provision. We, therefore, accept the claim of the in this regard. 7. In the result, the appeals are allowed in part.
-
1978 (4) TMI 131 - ITAT MADRAS-A
... ...
... ... ..... to be eligible for deduction in that business and, therefore, so long as those assets are used for scientific research it cannot be said that they are used in the business. Once they cease to be used for scientific research and if they are used in the business then only depreciation has been provided. We have already explained how in the case of such assets representing expenditure incurred after 31st March, 1967, no depreciation can arise and in the case of assets representing expenditure incurred before 1st April, 1967 depreciation can arise under sub-cl.(v) to s. 35(2). Having regard to the above we are unable to agree with the views expressed by the Tribunal earlier on which reliance has been placed by the assessee. On the other hand we hold that no depreciation is admissible in the case of post 31st March, 1967 assets, where only deduction under s. 35(2)(1-A) alone would be admissible. 18. In the result, we reverse the order of the AAC and allow the Departmental appeal.
-
1978 (4) TMI 130 - ITAT MADRAS-A
... ...
... ... ..... ssion of the Madras High Court in the same case reported as 56 ITR 256, looking to the productive unit as a whole, we consider that the expenditure on conversion material was only in the nature of current repairs. The fact that the assessee had in the accounts classified the same as deference in the computation to be adopted in arriving at the total income. The amount of Rs. 6,53,483 which was disallowed by the ITO and upheld by the AAC is, in our view, in the light of the aforesaid discussion, clearly an admissible revenue expenditure. We would, therefore, allow the contention of the assessee on this point. In the view that we have taken, it is not necessary to consider the alternative contention, namely, that if the amount was not allowed as a deduction, depreciation should have been allowed. 18. The only other ground taken in the appeal which related to the set off of unabsorbed development rebate was not pressed before us. 19. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part.
-
1978 (4) TMI 129 - ITAT MADRAS-A
... ...
... ... ..... irm having once been included in computing the total income of the Hindu Undivided Family of which the individual is the karta, cannot be considered again in the assessment of the individual. It has to be appointed out that there is no question of considering the share income of the individual in a case like this as being assessable in the hands of the individual at all. The decision of the Allahabad High Court is consistent with the view taken by the Supreme Court that where the karta of a Hindu Undivided Family enters into a partnership investing the funds of the family therein, it is only he who is the partner in the firm and not the Hindu Undivided Family. 13. For the above reasons, I would hold that the view taken by the Commissioner of Income tax is correct and the share income of the minor sons of deceased S. Thiagarajan Chettiar has to be included in the assessment made on S. Thiagarajan Chettiar in his individual capacity for the assessment years under consideration.
-
1978 (4) TMI 125 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... ers passed under s. 18(1)(c) of the Act. Thus the Tribunal finally held that such orders were really orders under s. 18(1)(c) of the Act. 13. In view of the aforesaid discussion and also considering the decision of Supreme Court in D.M. Manasvi rsquo s(1) case and Jain Bros.(2) case on the face of it the orders passed by the Wealth-tax Officer would be called orders passed by him under s. 18(1)(c) of the Act. Thus, in our opinion, no question of law would arise, as stated in the Reference Applications. 14. The other question in the applications also could not be referred. The Tribunal after considering the evidence on record gave finding of fact that no penalty is leviable under s. 18(1)(c) of the Act. This finding is purely a finding of fact. 15. In view of the aforesaid discussion, in our opinion, no question of law would arise out of Tribunal rsquo s order. Thus, all the reference Applications are liable to be dismissed. 16. Accordingly, all the applications are dismissed.
-
1978 (4) TMI 124 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... his decision has absolutely no relevance to the facts of the present case. We are not concerned here with the closure of the Court or office on a public holiday and the act done in that Court or office when it opened on the next day. In our opinion Mr. Rangaiah has misapprehended and misread the scope of s. 10 of the general Clauses Act. If that much is clear, the problem, we comprehend, it capable of easy solution. In our opinion, if 31st happened to be a holiday the ITO should have exhibited due diligence and care to have the notice served on 30th itself on which day the notice was issued. We have no doubt that the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court on which the assessee s counsel has placed strong reliance is squarely applicable. Since the notice was served beyond the period of limitation the reassessment made as a result thereof was without jurisdiction and void. No exception can be taken to the order of the AAC. 4. In the result, the appeal fails and is dismissed.
-
1978 (4) TMI 123 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... ation (2) to sub-s. (1) thereof were being interpreted and applied by the Income-tax Officers. The decision of the Board is to the following effect The Board are unable to accept this suggestion as a general rule. It is already provided that if on the facts of any case it can be demonstrated that the forward transaction has been entered into only for safeguarding against loss through future price fluctuations, such a transaction should not be treated as a speculative transaction but as a case of hedging. However, the case of a bona fide ready delivery contract being settled by delivery to a substantial extent and by payment of differences for the balance is exceptional and, in such a case the difference paid need not be treated as a loss arising in a speculative transaction. The Board rsquo s circular thus fully covers the impugned transactions for the relevant assessment years. We take no exception to the order of the AAC. 3. In the result, the appeal fails and is dismissed.
-
1978 (4) TMI 122 - ITAT GAUHATI
... ...
... ... ..... circumstances the penalties imposed should be cancelled. On the other hand, it was contended on behalf of the Revenue that the orders of the authorities below should be upheld. 4. On a careful consideration of the rival submissions, we are of the opinion that the penalties imposed cannot be sustained. The Revenue has accepted the fact of the hostilities having affected the business of the assessee as well as the illness of the partner resulting in the set back to the business of the assessee. It is obvious from the very assessment record that all was not well with the assessee and the delay in the filing of the return was for reasons beyond the control of the assessee. Such being the position, there can be no inference of any wilful default and hence the imposition of penalties cannot be justified by the facts of the case, as the delay in either of the years cannot be said to be without reasonable cause. We, therefore, cancel the penalties imposed. 5. The appeals are allowed.
-
1978 (4) TMI 121 - ITAT DELHI-E
... ...
... ... ..... see provided tea and cold drinks etc. to its customers and the employees. The expenses are not of lavish nature but are of customary nature. The view convassed by the learned D.R. that any expenses incurred for providing refreshments etc. even if the same are not of lavish nature are entertainment expenses is supported by the decisions reported in 111 ITR 134 and 106 ITR 610. The contention of the learned counsel for the assessee, on the other hand, that as the expenses are not of lavish nature and are customary nature, the same cannot be treated as entertainment expenses, is supported by the decision of Patel Bros.(1). It is held in the case of Vegetable Products Ltd (4)by the Supreme Court that if two interpretations are possible, the one which is favourable to the assessee should be adopted. We, therefore, follow the view taken by the Gujarat High Court in the case of Patel Bros.(1). We do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the AAC. The appeal is dismissed.
-
1978 (4) TMI 120 - ITAT DELHI-C
... ...
... ... ..... 6 of the commentary on the Law of Income-tax by Sampath Iyengar do support the stand of the assessee Division as the property admits of . The definition does not always require a physical division, however, inconvenient or impracticable it might be. The expression where the property admits of a physical division denotes that the property should be capable of division. The word admits in the context means capable of and the capability has to be judged with reference to the subject matter of the property, its character and the use to which it is being put to by the members of the joint family. Accordingly, the decisions which have held that a family cremation or burial ground, or a family deity are not divisible are good law under this definition. Likewise, heirlooms are rarely divided . We, therefore, agree with the finding of the AAC that a partial partition had been effected in the assessee family in terms of s. 171 of the Act and accordingly dismiss the Departmental appeal.
-
1978 (4) TMI 119 - ITAT DELHI-C
... ...
... ... ..... n of the Hon rsquo ble High Court of Delhi. From the above observations, it is clear that it is for the Department to establish that for the applicability of s. 52(1)that transaction in question was to avoid or reduce the tax liability of the assessee under s. 45 of the IT Act,1961. The mere fact that the declared consideration fell short of the fair market value is not conclusive to determine that the transfer was made with the object of avoiding or reducing the tax liability of the assessee under s. 45 of the Act. The transferees no doubt are the sons of the assessee but the consideration of love and affection for them on the part of the assessee cannot also be ignored. We are, therefore, of the view that s. 52(1) cannot be applied to the facts of the present case. We, therefore, direct the ITO to determine the capital gains tax taking the sale consideration of Rs. 72,000. 10. In the result, the Departmental appeal fails and is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed.
........
|
