|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 21 to 40 of 188 Records
-
1978 (7) TMI 221 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Amalgamation ... ... ... ... ..... be held guilty of any evasion of provisions of law even if it may avoid certain incidence of tax or duties. In this case, that it is the only suggestion, thereby raising suspicion in the minds of the court, was admitted by the Company Law Board for whom Mr. A.C. Law appeared. The decision cited by Mr. Mukherjee and also provisions of sections 391-394 make it quite clear that there is no illegality or infirmity in the said scheme which has been propounded and unanimously approved by the shareholders of both the companies. Therefore, it cannot be said that the said scheme is unfair, unreasonable or not honest which an ordinary prudent shareholder would not approve. Therefore, I hold that the said scheme is fair, reasonable and honest and should be sanctioned as prayed for. In the result, I am making the following order There will be an order in terms of prayers (a), (b), (c ), (d), (e), (f ) and (g). The petitioner to pay the costs of the Company Law Board assessed at 60 G.Ms.
-
1978 (7) TMI 220 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Powers of court to grant relief in certain cases ... ... ... ... ..... appointed as the trustees for the said depositors who are beneficiaries and, therefore, it appears also that the said security is within the meaning of Expln. 1 to rule 3(3) of the Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Rules, 1975. No useful purpose will be served by prosecuting the person who has defaulted but acted honestly and bona fide and has made up the default lawfully by creating security for the depositors for whose benefit the said section 58A and the Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Rules, 1975, have been framed. I have no doubt in my mind after carefully considering the facts of the case that the petitioner has acted reasonably and honestly and they fairly ought to be relieved subject to the terms which I am imposing on them. In the result, there will be an order in terms of prayers (a ), (b) and (c). The said relief will only cover the petitioner s liability for any default committed in respect of the period which is the subject-matter of the present application.
-
1978 (7) TMI 219 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Power of Registrar to Call for Information or Explanation, Winding up – Application for ... ... ... ... ..... court in the affidavits filed on behalf of the company and the Registrar that there are very good grounds for suspicion as to the nature of the business of the company and the manner in which it is conducted which requires to be probed into and investigated according to the provisions of the Companies Act or any other provision of law. Further, it appears that the books, papers and documents of the company up to the year 1963, were seized by the C.B.I. and that itself gives an indication that the company s affairs are not conducted in a proper manner. In these circumstances, the Registrar is directed forthwith to take appropriate steps to discharge his duties and functions for proper investigation of the affairs of the company under the provisions of the Companies Act. In the result, I cannot but hold, that the present application is barred by limitation on the face of it and, therefore, the winding-up petition is to be taken off the file. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1978 (7) TMI 200 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
... ...
... ... ..... T v. Parson Tools and Plants 1975 35 STC 413 1975 4 SCC 22, 27-29 (SC) (7) CST v. Mangal Sen Shyam Lal 1975 35 STC 621 AIR 1975 SC 1106, 1110 (8) CIT v. T. V. Sundaram Iyengar and Sons (P.) Ltd. 1975 101 ITR 764 1976 1 SCC 77, 84 (SC) (9) State of Haryana v. Jeewan Singh 1976 1 SCC 99, 100 AIR 1976 SC 63 (10) Nasiruddin v. State Transport Appellate Tribunal 1975 2 SCC 671, 680 AIR 1976 SC 331 (11) State of Rajasthan v. Mrs. Leela Jain, AIR 1965 SC 1296, 1299 (12) CIT v. Indian Bank Ltd. 1965 56 ITR 77 AIR 1965 SC 1473. List II (1) Bageshwari Charan Singh v. Thakurain Jagarnath Kuari, AIR 1932 PC 55 (2) State of Assam v. Ranga Muhammad, AIR 1967 SC 903, 906 (3) Amar Chandra Chakraborty v. Collector of Excise, AIR 1972 SC 1863, 1868 (4) State of Bombay v. Hospital Mazdoor Sabha 1960 17 FJR 423 AIR 1960 SC 610, 613-614 (5) Devendra M. Surti v. State of Gujarat 1969 34 FJR 376 AIR 1969 SC 63, 67 (6) M. K. Ranganathan v. Govt. of Madras 1955 25 Comp. Cas. 344 AIR 1955 SC 604, 609.
-
1978 (7) TMI 191 - ITAT PATNA-A
... ...
... ... ..... re, the impugned order dt. 15th Jan., 1975 was passed by the CIT before the service of the notice in question on the assessee. No other material has been brought to our notice by the learned representative of the Department to prove that this notice was, in fact, served upon the assessee before 15the Jan., 1975 by Registered Post or by any other mode. In these circumstances, and after appraising the entire material on record, we hold that a reasonable opportunity of being heard was not given by the learned CIT to the assessee before passing the order under s. 263(1). This being so, the impugned order is not valid in the eye of law. In this connection, we may refer to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT West Bengal vs. Ramendra Nath Ghosh(3). In that case, the order of the CIT was held to be not sustainable for want of proper service of the show cause notice on the assessee. We accordingly, cancel the impugned order. 10. In the result, the appeals are allowed.
-
1978 (7) TMI 188 - ITAT PATNA
... ...
... ... ..... ed from the end of the financial year in which the account relating to the previous year in which the debt is written off is made. 37. The AAC has already held that the claim became time barred in the asst. yr. 1973-74. Thus the assessee is entitled to allowance of the amount of Rs. 22,211 in the asst. yr. 1973-74. We agree with the AAC that the claim of the assessee became barred in the asst. yr. 1973-74. However, the claim of the assessee cannot be allowed in the asst. yr. 19976-77. We, therefore, reject the ground of the assessee relating to the claim of bad debt amounting to Rs. 22,211 for the asst. yr. 1976-77. 38. The assessee may claim the amount of Rs. 22,211 before the ITO in accordance with the provisions of s. 36(2)(iv) r/w s. 155(6) of the said Act and the ITO will decide the claim of the assessee in the asst. yr. 1973-74 after giving opportunity to the assessee of being heard and decide this issue according to law. 39. In the result the appeal is allowed in part.
-
1978 (7) TMI 186 - ITAT MADRAS-D
... ...
... ... ..... ecause the Hundiwalas proved to be witnesses of the Department. In this case when facts have been taken by the assessee through cheques, when interest was also paid to the bankers by cheques and when the assessee had given the names and addresses of the bankers who had advanced the moneys to it and amounts borrowed from these have been repaid and when these bankers were income-tax assessee and when the bankers had originally confirmed the transactions, we are of the opinion that in the circumstances of the case the assessee has reasonable proved that all the credits in the accounts of the Hundiwalas did not belong to it. As a corollary it follows that the interest paid by the assessee to these parties is to be accepted as genuine. Thus we delete the additions made during these years and allow the payment of interest by the assessee to the Hundiwalas, in all the years under appeal. 7. In the result, the assessee s appeals are allowed and the Department s appeals are dismissed.
-
1978 (7) TMI 185 - ITAT MADRAS-D
... ...
... ... ..... 1970 it is seen that only a sum of Rs. 219 was carried over to the balance sheet. In this background, the payment made on 2nd Jan.,1971 would entitle the assessee to claim relief. Alternatively if this sum cannot be taken as application of income for the year 1971-72, it can be taken as application of income for the year 1972-73. The income for that year was only Rs. 622. As regards the bad debts, we agree with the AAC and hold that the assessee is entitled to this deduction. He has noticed the details furnished to him. No account copy has been placed before us to show that they have already become bad and that they cannot be allowed in this year. In the circumstances, we uphold the order of the AAC on this ground as well. Apart from this, we also find that the assessee had donated Rs. 6,000 in the calendar year 1972 as seen from a certificate given by Sri Aurobindo Ashram dt. 24th July,., 1972 in the file of the ITO. 9. In the result, the departmental appeals are dismissed.
-
1978 (7) TMI 182 - ITAT MADRAS-D
... ...
... ... ..... me before the AAC, he felt that the ITO had not established that the credit was not genuine or that Shri Thirunavukarasu Chettiar could not have deposited an amount of Rs. 9,000 and so he deleted the addition. 7. At the time of hearing it is pointed out that there was an account in the name of Thirunavukarasu who is the relation of the partner of the assessee. It transpires there was an opening credit of Rs. 12,000 and that was debited in Dec., 1972 of Rs. 3,000. At the most, the assessee had failed to explain the credit to the extent of Rs. 6,000, in as much as, after deducting a sum of Rs. 6,000 in Dec., 1972 there was a credit of Rs. 3,000 in April, 1973. As such, we sustain an addition to the extent of Rs. 6,000. The learned counsel for the assessee has not been able to explain the source of the credit. As such the order of the AAC is reversed and the addition of Rs. 6,000 on this account by the ITO is confirmed. 8. In the result, the Department appeal is allowed in part.
-
1978 (7) TMI 178 - ITAT MADRAS-C
... ...
... ... ..... in such a case if what he considered to be his income was less than the amount which was not chargeable to income-tax, he was not required to file a voluntary return even if the income finally assessed was more than the maximum amount which was not chargeable to income-tax. The Gauhati High Court was in agreement with the above observation of the Allahabad High Court. The Gauhati High Court held that there was no obligation on the assessee to file the return of income under s. 139(1) since the income returned was below the taxable limit notwithstanding that the assessed income was chargeable to tax. In the case before us since, on the basis of the assessee s return, the assessee s total income was below Rs. 11,500 on penalty is exigible under s. 271(3)(a). Respectively following the ratio of the above ruling of the Gauhati High Court we hold that no penalty is exigible in accordance with the provisions of s. 271(3)(a). We accordingly delete the penalty. The appeal is allowed.
-
1978 (7) TMI 177 - ITAT MADRAS-C
... ...
... ... ..... d counsel for the assessee and the departmental representative have cited before us number of rulings as set out above. Whether the assessee is guilty of concealment of income or of furnishing of in accurate particulars under s. 271(1)(c) is essentially a question of fact. The decisions cited above are rendered on the facts of such particular case. We have therefore to see whether on the facts and in the circumstances of this case the levy of penalty is justified. As pointed out above, the AAC has confirmed the penalty on the ground that the assessee has not discharged the burden of proof cast on it under the Expln. to s. 271(1)(c). What all we have to see in this case is whether the assessee has discharged the onus under the above Explanation. We have found on a consideration of the entirety of the fact and circumstances of the case that the assessee has discharged the onus cast on it under the Expln. to s. 271(1)(c). We accordingly cancel the penalty. The appeal is allowed.
-
1978 (7) TMI 176 - ITAT MADRAS-C
... ...
... ... ..... ract-works were not divided among the partners in accordance with the profit sharing rate. We were taken through the statements recorded from the partners, by the learned departmental representative. We find that the partners examined had categorically admitted that they entered into a contract of partnership. They had further stated the exact amount of contribution of capital made by them. The partners could not however give the exact amount of income earned because the income, as pointed out above, was arrived at on an estimate by applying a fixed rate of profit on gross receipts. We are unable to agree with the contention of the revenue that the firm is not genuine. The rulings of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, cited on behalf of the assessee also support our above view. It is not stated that the assessee has not complied with the other legal formalities for the grant of registration. We therefore, direct that registration be granted to the assessee. The appeal is allowed.
-
1978 (7) TMI 175 - ITAT MADRAS-C
... ...
... ... ..... erest also should be included in the net wealth he filed the returns voluntarily and co-operated with the department. In our opinion the AAC has rightly found force in the submissions of the assessee. If really the assessee was aware of his obligation to file the WT returns in respect of which the taxes payable were small sums of money as stated above, he would have certainly filed the returns in time and avoided exposing himself to wholly disproportionate and oppressive penalties imposed by the WTO for the delay in filing the WT returns. It is also common ground that the wealth returned by the assessee for the years under appeal were accepted on Appeal. Having regard to the circumstances of the case as set forth above, we are satisfied that the delay in filing the returns of net wealth for the years under appeal by the assessee was not without reasonable cause. We accordingly uphold the order of the AAC cancelling penalties. The appeals of the revenue fail and are dismissed.
-
1978 (7) TMI 171 - ITAT MADRAS-B
... ...
... ... ..... thar Mohamed and Sri Varusai Mohamed were partners they were entitled to withdraw the amounts due to them in respect of their share in the partnership business including capital, etc. The initial burden of proving the credits has been discharged by the assessee before the ITO and that the Department has not established that the credits are not genuine by any acceptable material. We have perused the report of the Income tax Inspector dt. 7th Feb., 1976 pursuant to the anonymous position in the case of Sikkantham Badsha for the alleged evasion of tax. The said report corroborates the submission made before us by the learned counsel that Nathar Mohamed and his children owned agricultural lands and were assessed to agricultural income tax. On a consideration of the entirety of the facts and on a perusal of the records of the case, we are satisfied that the Revenue has not made out a strong case for disturbing the order of the AAC. The appeal of the Revenue fails and is dismissed.
-
1978 (7) TMI 170 - ITAT MADRAS-B
... ...
... ... ..... Sharma Construction Co.(5). The decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Jagdish prasad Rammath(6) also supports the above view. It is common ground that the assessee paid by cheque on 14th Dec., 1973 the sum of Rs. 4,30,500. In the present case the AAC has found on facts that there is no dispute about this, that the above cheque was handed over to the IT Department on 14th Dec., 1973 and that there was also sufficient balance in the account of the assessee. There appears to have been some delay in sending the cheque to the Reserve Bank of India and also some delay in the reserve Bank in encashing the cheque. the AAC has treated the above payment as payment towards advance-tax. We are in entire agreement with him. We have also taken the same view consistently in other cases that came up before the Benches of the Tribunal in Madras. We accordingly uphold the order of the AAC on the above issue. 5. In the result the appeal of the Revenue fails and is dismissed.
-
1978 (7) TMI 169 - ITAT MADRAS-B
... ...
... ... ..... y in filing the WT return was levied only on 28th Feb., 1976. Before doing so the assessee might have been given an opportunity of being heard instead of merely referring to the order passed in the IT penalty proceedings. The learned departmental representative stated that the AAC has erred in cancelling the penalty on this ground. In our opinion the levy of penalty in this case is not justified even on the merits of the case. As pointed out above the wealth of the assessee consisted, among others, of foreign wealth. The plea that it took time to gather the particulars of such wealth and therefore there was delay in filing the return has merit. We are, therefore, of the view, that it has not been established on the facts of this case that there was no reasonable cause for the delay in filing the wealth-tax return by the assessee for the year under appeal. For these reasons we uphold the order of the AAC cancelling the penalty. The appeal of the revenue fails and is dismissed.
-
1978 (7) TMI 168 - ITAT MADRAS-B
... ...
... ... ..... 46 of the WT Act and the same came into force from 1st Apr., 1957. Obviously the above rule would have no retrospective operation in the absence of express provision in this behalf for the purpose of determining the market value of share as on 1st Jan., 1954. Even if it is assured that r. 1D could be pressed into service for determining the market value of unquoted equity shares retrospectively, still r. 1D applies only to determine the market value of unquoted shares of companies other than managing agency companies. Shri Swaminathan submitted that M/s TVS and Sons Ltd. was a managing agency company in the year 1954. The correctness of this statement is not disputed by the learned departmental representative. Therefore r. 1D in any event would not apply to enable the department to take only 85per cent of the break-up value as on 1st Jan., 1954, as the fair market value. 6. For foregoing reasons we uphold the order of the AAC. The appeal of the revenue fails and is dismissed.
-
1978 (7) TMI 167 - ITAT MADRAS-B
... ...
... ... ..... is order. The entire assessment was thus set aside in that case. In those circumstances the High Court held that if the order of the assessment is set aside and the ITO is directed to make a fresh assessment the power of Income Tax Officer has to be exercised with reference to the provisions of s. 143(3) and not with reference to any observations made by the AAC in his order. In the instant case, as pointed out above, there is no direction by the AAC to re-do the entire assessment. Only the finding on the issue relating to the claim of laws in exchange of the company s money on foreign was set aside and the assessment has been directed to be re-done, on this issue. This is clear from the operative part of the AAC s order which says that the assessment is set aside for the above limited purpose. In this view of the matter we do not see any legal flaw in the order passed by the AAC. We accordingly uphold the order of the AAC. The appeals of the revenue failed and are dismissed.
-
1978 (7) TMI 166 - ITAT MADRAS-B
... ...
... ... ..... ectors. The learned Departmental Representative laid considerable stress that from the asst. yr. 1964-65 onwards the interest income was assessed under the head other sources and the assessee did not contest this position. The assessee s learned counsel pointed out that in respect of those assessment years there was no business of money-lending and that was why the assessee did not contest those assessments. So far as the present year is concerned we are satisfied that there is ample material on record to show that the company of M/s. Sivasubramaniam Pvt. Ltd. did carry on money-lending business and that the advance under consideration were made by the company to the assessee in the course of such money lending business. We, therefore, hold that the assessee is entitled to the benefit of s.2 (6-A) (e). In this view of the matter we set aside the inclusion of the sum of Rs. 52,617 made by the authorities below under s. 2 (6-A) (e) of the IT Act, 1922. 5. The appeal is allowed.
-
1978 (7) TMI 165 - ITAT MADRAS-B
... ...
... ... ..... they were not in the nature of speculation business. The High Court held that the transactions amounted to a speculative business and therefore under s. 73 of the Act the losses in speculation business could not be set off except against profits and gains of another speculation business. In the instant case as pointed out already the assessee was carrying on the business of running a spinning mill and it did not carry on any speculation business. The transaction under consideration was a solitary transaction. In fact the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Indian Commercial Co. P. Ltd(4). Held that even if the view taken by the High Court that the impugned transaction within the meaning of s. 43(5) was wrong, it has to be held that it did not amount to a speculation business within the terms of Expln. 2 to s. 28 and that therefore s. 73(1) of the Act was not attracted to that case. For the foregoing reasons we set aside the disallowance. 5. The appeal is allowed in part.
........
|
