|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 241 to 252 of 252 Records
-
1988 (4) TMI 12 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Deduction, Estate Duty ... ... ... ... ..... f the view that the decision has to be treated as confined to the facts of that particular case and does not lay down any principle of universal application. In our view, the case before us is directly covered by the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in Mohini Thapar s case 1972 83 ITR 208, the cash gift being direct, the income arising from the property purchased with the cash gift being indirect income and the relationship between the income and the cash gift being proximate. For the aforesaid reasons, we disagree with the Conclusion of the Tribunal, accept the contention of the Revenue and reject the contention advanced on behalf of the assessee. We answer the reference in the negative and hold that the annual letting value attributable to Rs. 36,516 is to be included in the income of the assessee and not merely the annual letting value proportionate to the sum of Rs. 10,000. In other words, we answer the reference in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee.
-
1988 (4) TMI 11 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Deduction, Estate Duty ... ... ... ... ..... ficult to say that there is any nexus between both and in the absence of nexus, section 46 would not apply. None of the three authorities, viz., the Assistant Controller, the Appellate Controller, or the Tribunal, have addressed themselves to this aspect. In the circumstances, therefore, it is not possible for us to say that the amounts repaid by the deceased within two years of his death to his two grand-daughters aforesaid are subject to abatement under sub-section (2) of section 46 of the Act. We are also of the opinion that in all the circumstances of the case and also having regard to the value of the items in dispute, it would not be appropriate to call for a finding in this behalf. It is better that the matter is given quietus here on the ground mentioned by us hereinabove. For the above reasons, all the three questions referred to us are answered in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the accountable person and against the Revenue. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
1988 (4) TMI 10 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Depreciation, Plant ... ... ... ... ..... lant . It may indeed be of interest to lawyers to note the following from 1977 British Tax Review (p. 200) Once upon a time, there was a newly called barrister who bought a wig and gown in case anyone should think of briefing him to appear in the High Court. Having incurred this expenditure, he claimed a first year allowance on the ground that it was capital expenditure on the provision of machinery or plant for the purposes of his profession. The Inland Revenue, regarding a wig and gown as a kind of law-book, disallowed the claim but on appeal last autumn, the Special Commissioners distinguished Daphne v. Shaw (which had not then been overruled by the Court of Appeal) and decided that the wig and gown were at least plant and therefore the barrister was entitled to 100 per cent. first year allowance. The Inland Revenue have decided to acquiesce in the decision. In the result, we answer the reference in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee and against the Department.
-
1988 (4) TMI 9 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Deduction, Net Wealth, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... years are 1974-75 and 1975-76. The point involved for decision is covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in CWT v. J. K. Cotton Manufacturers Ltd. 1984 146 ITR 552. It was held therein that the deductions claimed by the assessee were allowable in the computation of the assessee s net wealth. Following that decision, this reference has to be answered against the revenue. Consequently, the reference is answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee by holding that the Tribunal s view in the assessee s favour is justified. No costs.
-
1988 (4) TMI 8 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Appeal To Tribunal, Business Expenditure, Question Of Law ... ... ... ... ..... his court the questions of law arising out of the substantive order of the Appellate Tribunal. We are of the opinion that the following question of law, regarding additional excise duty in respect of the assessment years 1976-77, 1977-78 and 1978-79 and regarding additional sales tax for the assessment year 1977-78, arises out of the order of the Appellate Tribunal and we direct the Appellate Tribunal to draw up a composite statement of case for the three years in question and to refer it to the High Court for its opinion Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in allowing the deduction of liability on account of additional excise duty in respect of the assessment years 1976-77, 1977-78 and 1978-79 and on account of additional sales tax in respect of assessment year 1977-78 ? Accordingly, I.T.C. No. 214 of 1986 is rejected and the other applications are allowed. Parties are left to bear their respective costs.
-
1988 (4) TMI 7 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Exemptions, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... me assessee for another year of assessment, the same question was referred for decision by this court on the same facts. Division Bench of this court in D. B. Civil Wealth-tax Reference No. 53 of 1972, decided on December 3, 1984 - CIT v. Adarsh Gram Trust 1986 159 ITR 41, answered the question in the affirmative, against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. Following that decision, this reference also has to be answered against the Revenue. Consequently, the reference is answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee by holding that the Tribunal was justified in holding that the net wealth of the assessee is exempt under section 5(1)(i) of the Wealth-tax Act. No costs.
-
1988 (4) TMI 6 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Indian Company's Technical Services Outside India, Special Deduction ... ... ... ... ..... 1981, was for rendering technical and engineering services. The contract is also annexed as exhibit-A to the petition and it sets out that the petitioner is required to undertake installation and erection of overhead travelling crane, six numbers pump sets and other equipment as set out in the contract. The petitioner is also required to provide all skilled workmen and supervising staff but not unskilled labour. The agreement is for rendering technical services. Such agreements have in the past been approved by the respondents under section 80-0. There is no reason why the petitioner should be denied approval under section 80-0 of this agreement for the assessment year 1982-83. Orders dated February 27, 1986 and October 14, 1986, being exhibits F and H to the petition, are, therefore, set aside and the respondents are directed to grant approval to the agreement of May 14, 1981, under section 80-0 for the assessment year 1982-83. Rule is made absolute accordingly with costs.
-
1988 (4) TMI 5 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Writ Petition Against Recovery Proceedings ... ... ... ... ..... an appeal before the Tax Recovery Commissioner. The petitioner is also entitled to move an application under rule 86(3) of the Rules. In such a case, if an application is moved and the appellate authority comes to the conclusion that the execution of the tax recovery should be stayed, the consequences of such stay order will be that the petitioner will be entitled to be released forthwith subject to the final decision which is taken in the appeal. If such an application is moved, the same shall be decided by the Tax Recovery Commissioner within a week from the presentation of the application. The Tax Recovery Commissioner will also see to it that the appeal is finally disposed of in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of filing of the certified copy of our order. Subject to the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is finally disposed of. A copy of this order shall be given to learned counsel for the parties on payment of usual charges today.
-
1988 (4) TMI 4 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Reference, Res Judicata ... ... ... ... ..... bject-matter of a reference. This reference, being ITR No. 533 of 1983, is pending in this court. On the facts and circumstances of the case, a question of law does arise from the order of the Tribunal. In view of the fact that the assessee has relied on the Special Bench decision of the Tribunal in J. L. Sawhney s case and in this case, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Tribunal based their decision on J. L. Sawhney s case, we are of the opinion that a reference should be called for in this case also. Consequently, we direct the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to state case and refer the following question of law for the opinion of this court Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in law in holding that income from property situated at 116, Golf Links, New Delhi, was assessable as income from house property and not as income from other sources ? In the result, the application is allowed, but we make no order as to costs.
-
1988 (4) TMI 3 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... risdiction to levy penalty and the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner would have jurisdiction to levy penalty only if the reference had been made to him before April 1, 1976. It was held that mere initiation of penalty proceedings before April 1, 1976, is not sufficient to clothe the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner with the jurisdiction to levy penalty where the reference to the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner had been made subsequent to April 1, 1976. In this case, the reference to the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner was made by the Income -tax Officer subsequent to April 1, 1976, and, therefore, the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner had no jurisdiction to levy the penalty. The above question has to be answered accordingly. Consequently, the reference is answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee by holding that the Tribunal was justified in holding that the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner had no jurisdiction to levy penalty for the reason given by us.
-
1988 (4) TMI 2 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Assessment, Firm ... ... ... ... ..... ods, one up to August 1, 1976, and the other commencing on August 2, 1976. The Tribunal has affirmed the Appellate Assistant Commissioner s view by rejecting the Revenue s appeal. Hence, this reference at the instance of the Revenue. The present is a case governed by the amended section 187 as it stands after the insertion of the proviso in sub-section (2) of section 187 retrospectively with effect from April 1, 1975. The view taken in such situation on the basis of the newly inserted proviso in sub-section (2) of section 187 by this court in CIT v. Assumal Veerumal 1988 170 ITR 489, is that it is a case of succession governed by section 188 of the Act and not of a mere change in the constitution of the firm to which section 187 applies. Following that decision, it is to be held that the Tribunal s view is justified. Consequently, the reference is answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee by holding that the view taken by the Tribunal is justified. No costs.
-
1988 (4) TMI 1 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
New Industrial Undertaking, Special Deduction ... ... ... ... ..... r is 1975-76. The only point for decision is covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in Lohia Machines Ltd. v. Union of India 1985 152 ITR 308. Following that decision, this reference is to be answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. Consequently, the reference is answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee by holding that the Tribunal was not justified in the view taken by it regarding grant of relief under section 80J of the Act. No costs.
....
|
