Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 2001 2001 (4) This

Law	-- All -- GST Income Tax Benami Property Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy FEMA PMLA Service Tax Central Excise CST, VAT & Sales Tax Wealth tax Indian Laws
Court	-- Any -- Supreme Court SC Orders / Highlights High Court Appellate Tribunal Tribunal Appellate authority for Advance Ruling Advance Ruling Authority National Financial Reporting Authority Competition Commission of India ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY Commission Central Government Board DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court Commissioner / Appellate Authority Other
Citation	--Year-- 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982 1981 1980 1979 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1973 1972 1971 1970 1969 1968 1967 1966 1965 1964 1963 1962 1961 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 1953 1952 1951 1950 Upto 1949 - -Volume- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -
Landmark	Nil - N/A Referred in >= 3 Cases Referred in >= 4 Cases Referred in >= 5 Cases Referred in >= 10 Cases Referred in >= 15 Cases Referred in >= 25 Cases Referred in >= 50 Cases Referred in >= 100 Cases
Order by	TMI Citation Date of Decision

Advanced Search Options

Case Laws

Showing 461 to 478 of 478 Records

• 2001 (4) TMI 20 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... f the assets distributed among the partners at the time of dissolution. The question referred to us as to whether the Tribunal was right in holding that there was no gift from the partner who agreed to take over the running business consequent on the dissolution of the firm and made payments to the other partners has therefore to be answered in the affirmative. The questions referred to us are answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee.

  ---

• 2001 (4) TMI 19 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... he had entered into an agreement with a firm which comprised his wife and mother as partners of which he claimed to be the general manager, under which he was to make over to the firm his income from the insurance agency. Under section 42, sub-sections (7) and (8) of the Insurance Act, 1938, it is an offence for a person to carry on business as an insurance agent without a licence. The firm with which he had entered into the agreement admittedly did not have the licence, and could not have carried on insurance business. It is obvious that the device adopted by the assessee was only to reduce his tax burden by purporting to show his income as the income of the registered firm. The Tribunal was in error in accepting the assessee s case that he could not be taxed and that he had also not suppressed his income by not showing the income from the insurance agency as his income. The questions referred to us are, therefore, answered against the assessee, and in favour of the Revenue.

  ---

• 2001 (4) TMI 18 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... ion (2) appearing in the section would mean that once a notice has been issued under sub-section (2), then in that case, the Assessing Officer shall not resort to section 143(1)(a)(i). The expression without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (2) means that it saves the action already initiated under section 143(2) of the Act. If the Legislature really intended to give full power to the Assessing Officer under section 143(1)(a)(i), then they would not have saved the action under section 143(2). In fact, this expression has carved out an exception that the Assessing Officer can send intimation to the assessee if the Assessing Officer has not exercised his power under section 143(2) of the Act. That apart the disallowance invoking section 143(1)(a) was not justified as prima facie adjustment on the issue was clearly a debatable one. For the reason aforesaid, we do not find any substantial question of law involved in the present appeal. The appeal is dismissed in limine.

  ---

• 2001 (4) TMI 17 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... ellate Tribunal with a reasoned order. It being so, this court be not pleased to direct the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to make a reference in the context with the said question to this court. We uphold the submission of Shri Sarda by holding that by a reasoned order the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has dealt with the topic involved in the matter and the judgment of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is well reasoned dealing with all the matters and situation on record. The conclusion drawn by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is borne out from the record and is consistent with the provisions of law and spirit behind the Voluntary Disclosure Scheme. Thus, in view of the discussion above and the ratio of the judgment of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Lakhiram Ramdas 1962 44 ITR 726 we do not find any substance in the application started with the prayer for a reference as sought. Therefore, we turn down the said prayer and dismiss this M.C.C., but with no orders as to the costs.

  ---

• 2001 (4) TMI 14 - DELHI HIGH COURT
  

  "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in law in allowing the carry forward of the loss of Rs. 1,08,364?" - Since section 80 which deals with submission of return for losses did not specifically refer to return under section 139(3) and at the relevant point of time referred to the return filed under section 139, without specifying the subsection thereof, the benefit of carry forward and set off of loss was available to the assessee - our answer to the question referred is in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.

  ---

• 2001 (4) TMI 13 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  

  Levying of service tax on airline agent - petitioners pray for a writ of declaration or any other appropriate writ or order in the nature of writ by declaring the provisions contained in section 65(3) and section 67(k) of the Finance Act, 1994, as amended in the year 1996, and rule 2(d)(viii) of the Service Tax Rules as amended as unconstitutional and void. - we do not find any merit in the writ petitions which are liable to be dismissed and are ordered to be dismissed - levying of service tax on airline agent is valid

  ---

• 2001 (4) TMI 12 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
  

  Tribunal - the manner in which the Tribunal has disposed of these cases - Tribunal has glossed over important issues such as matters concerning the nine Supreme Court judgments that were cited, in a one sentence statement that these judgments are distinguishable - Even assuming that the judgments are either not applicable or distinguishable, it is a well-defined procedure that applies to all judicial forums that it is essential to record which the judgments in question are or a brief summary of the contentions raised and to record the findings thereon - It is not permissible to merely brush aside important legal issues or to disregard them as it will become impossible for the next higher authority to be able to decipher as to what is the ground on which the Tribunal rejected a particular contention.

  ---

• 2001 (4) TMI 11 - SUPREME COURT
  

  Plea for stay of notice under section 158BC - It is needless to mention that the subject-matter of the writ petition was the notice issued under section 158BC of the Income-tax Act and not the proceedings before the Settlement Commission - Settlement Commission was not a party to the writ petition, therefore, the question of the Settlement Commission being bound by the observations of the High Court does not arise - plea not accepted

  ---

• 2001 (4) TMI 10 - SUPREME COURT
  

  Production or manufacture of processed fish - processing of marine products for export - Tribunal is right in law and fact in holding that the assessee is an industrial company eligible to be taxed only at the rate of 55 per cent - entitled to relief under section 80J

  ---

• 2001 (4) TMI 9 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE (MADRAS)
  

  Service Tax – Air travel agents (1) Air travel agent received commission from air lines (2) Alternative mode of taxation (3) Constitutionality (4) Independent measure

  ---

• 2001 (4) TMI 8 - HIGH COURT MADRAS
  

  Service Tax – Architects and Chartered Accountants (1) Legislative competence

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... lso taken the similar view. In paragraphs 37 to 41 its judgment, the Bombay High Court has repelled the attack on these provisions in relation to Art. 14. We accordingly hold that the impugned provisions do not in any manner offend Art. 14 of the Constitution of India. We accordingly hold that all the petitions have no merits and must fail. They are accordingly dismissed but without any orders as to the costs. Connected W.M.P. Nos. 26985 and 26986/98 and 518, 28852 and 28853 of 2000 are closed. 42. Before we part with the judgment, we must put on record our appreciation for the services of the learned senior counsel, Mr. Arvind P. Datar as also the learned counsel Mr. Mohan Parasaran and other learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners as also the valuable assistance given to us by the learned senior Central Government Standing Counsel Mr. Chandrasekharan and the learned Additional Central Government Standing Counsel, Mr. Veeraraghavan. We record our appreciation.

  ---

• 2001 (4) TMI 7 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  

  Service Tax on Carriage –Distinction between Contract Carriage and Stage Carriage (1) Service tax on Motor Cab Owner’s or Maxi Cab Operators, tour operators or rent-a-cab operator (2) Scheme operator

  ---

• 2001 (4) TMI 6 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  

  Service Tax – Mandap Keeper (1) Constitutional Validity (2) Only official, social or business functions are included.

  ---

• 2001 (4) TMI 5 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
  

  Service Tax – Penalty for delayed filing the return for each quarter

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... the tax had been paid, there was no loss of revenue. He vacated the orders of penalty for the first two quarters but retained penalties for the next two quarters. 3. The appellant appeared in person. The arguments were the same. The appellant is a retired engineer and is motivated more by social service than by the commercial consideration. He is also advanced in age. His expertise and his age require due consideration. I therefore allow the appeal, and set aside the remaining penalties also.

  ---

• 2001 (4) TMI 4 - HIGH COURT (MADRAS)
  

  Service Tax – Sound System versus Pandal or Shamiana Contractor

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... ind the salutary principle ejusdem generis. The words, and other articles for use therein , which provide a broader category will have to draw their colour from the accompanying earlier words, which form a class by themselves. For this reason also we are of the clear opinion that the sound system operators would not be covered under the provisions of Section 65(27) of the Act. 9. As it is, since the said service has been taken out of the tax net, there will be no question of granting any writ, excepting to quash the impugned notice dated 25-9-1997. It is hereby declared that the persons like the petitioners alone would not be liable to the payment of service tax. However, it is clarified that if such persons have provided any other service, the situation would be entirely different. But, that would depend upon the facts and circumstances of each individual case. With these observations, the writ petition is allowed. Under the circumstances, there will be no order as to costs.

  ---

• 2001 (4) TMI 3 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  

  Service Tax on advertising agents - (1) Legislative competence (2) Constitutional validity.

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... ise, in our opinion, the question raised by the learned Counsel would not be apposite to decide the constitutional validity of the provisions much less under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. We do not see any discriminatory in the relevant provisions. The learned Counsel for the respondents invited our attention to the Division Bench s judgment of the Gujarat High Court reported in 1998 (98) E.L.T. 14, cited supra, wherein the provisions were challenged on the ground of violation of Article 14 and Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India as also on the ground of legislative competence . The challenges were repelled by the Division Bench. We are in respectful agreement with the Division Bench in holding that the taxing provisions cannot be faulted on the touchstone of Article 14 or on the principle of legislative competence . 24. In our view, the petitions have no merits and must be dismissed. They are accordingly dismissed. No costs. Connected W.M.Ps are closed.

  ---

• 2001 (4) TMI 2 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  

  Service Tax – Consulting Engineers (1) Valuers of plant and machinery (2) Valuers of immovable property (2) Legislative competence (3) Constitution validity.

  ---

• 2001 (4) TMI 1 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
  

  Service Tax – Consulting Engineer (1) meaning of consulting engineer (2) exemption to computer software (3) Interpretation of statute

  ---

1 ....2021222324