|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 61 to 80 of 101 Records
-
1973 (4) TMI 42 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ho is a resident on the income, profits and gains received or accrued to him in the taxable territories during the year of account. It cannot, therefore, be assumed that the legislature intended to exempt the income or profits or gains accrued to a resident but not ordinarily resident from tax in respect of the amounts accrued in the year of account and to impose tax only on the income earned or accrued in the prior years. The proper construction of section 4(1) in our view would be to interpret clauses (ii) and (iii) as supplementing each other. Clause (b)(ii) is to be taken as covering the income of a resident accrued and remitted during the year and clause (b)(iii) covering cases of accrual of income in the previous years but remitted in the taxable territories during the year. In this view we have to uphold the view of the Tribunal in this case. The reference is answered in the affirmative and against the assessee. The revenue will have its costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 250.
-
1973 (4) TMI 41 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Carrying On Business, High Court To Interfere, Jurisdiction Of High Court, Succession To Business
-
1973 (4) TMI 40 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ondly, the purchase contract entered into by the assessee will not also come under clause (a) for the reason that it is not intended to guard against future loss in respect of any contract of sale of goods entered, into by him with another party. As a matter of fact the evidence in this case disclosed, and the Tribunal has also found, that the price of cotton and yarn was rising and the object of the assessee in purchasing the goods from the dealer to whom it has agreed to sell the goods is to secure a larger price for the goods and consequently a higher profit, and not with a view to guard against losses. In this view it has to be taken that the assessee has not established its case that the transactions in respect of which the losses in question have occurred are covered by clause (a) of the third proviso to section 24(1). The reference is therefore, answered in the negative and against the assessee. The revenue will have its costs from the assessee. Counsel s fee Rs. 250.
-
1973 (4) TMI 39 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Business Expenditure, Capital Expenditure, Income Tax Act ... ... ... ... ..... done under clause (b) of section 34(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, are well settled by the decisions of the Supreme Court. Reference may be made to the decisions of the Supreme Court in the case of Maharaj Kumar Kamal Singh v. Commissioner of Income-tax and in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. A. Raman and Co. If it is a new look at the old facts unprovoked by any knowledge of any fact or law coming into the possession of the department subsequent to the original assessment either from records or from any direction or decision it would be nothing but mere change of opinion and such a change of opinion would not be justified under clause (b) of section 34(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. Such a thing appears to have happend in this case. For the aforesaid reasons question No. 1 must be answered in the negative and in that view question No. 2 really becomes academic and need not be answered. I agree with the order for costs proposed by my learned brother.
-
1973 (4) TMI 38 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Income Tax Investigation ... ... ... ... ..... ter of law that the material collected by the Investigation Commission could not be relied upon by the Income-tax Officer. As has been seen, the Income-tax Officer relied upon the admissions made by the assessee in his two letters and, after referring to the findings of the Commission, made an estimate of the income of the assessee which was in excess of that made by the Investigation Commission. In making this enhanced estimate, the Income-tax Officer took into consideration a number of circumstances which have already been tabulated above. The estimate as such cannot be said to be arbitrary, capricious or conjectural. It is supported by the relevant materials on the record. The questions raised are mostly of fact and those which have a semblance of questions of law, are based upon a misreading of the order of the Income-tax Officer. All the applications are accordingly dismissed with costs. There shall be one set of costs which we assess at Rs. 100. Applications dismissed.
-
1973 (4) TMI 37 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Computation Of Capital, Sugar Mills, Super Profits Tax ... ... ... ... ..... account was clearly wrong, inasmuch as there did not exist any current liability against the company. As has been pointed out by the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Standard Vacuum Oil Co. 1966 59 ITR 685 (SC) the name given to an account is not material. What is to be seen is its true nature. The Tribunal has found that having regard to the terms of the notification and the circumstances prevailing in the assessee s case, the liability, of the company was unreal and imaginary and not a real liability at all. The directors of the company did, however, set apart an amount to meet this liability in future. In the circumstances, the amount set apart could properly be treated as reserve. We are satisfied that the view taken by the Tribunal is correct. We, accordingly, answer the question in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the department. The assessee is entitled to the costs, which we assess at Rs. 200. Question answered in the affirmative.
-
1973 (4) TMI 36 - JAMMU AND KASHMIR HIGH COURT
Proper Service ... ... ... ... ..... he service of the prescribed notice on the assessee is a condition precedent to the validity of any reassessment made under section 34. If no notice is issued or if the notice issued is shown to be invalid then the proceedings taken by the Income-tax Officer without a notice or in pursuance of an invalid notice would be illegal and void. Keeping in view the facts found by the Tribunal, the provisions of section 63 of the old Act and the case law bearing on the subject we are clearly of the opinion that the service of notice on the assessee under section 22(2) of the old Act was not legally valid so as to sustain an order of penalty under section 271(1)(a) of the new Act for committing default in filing the return of income. We, therefore, answer the reference in the negative and hold that, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the penalty was not exigible. In the circumstances of the case, we leave the parties to bear their own costs. S. M. F. ALI C.J.--I agree.
-
1973 (4) TMI 35 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Failure to maintain proper method of accounting and quantitative details - assessments were made on the basis of estimate - " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee was not guilty of fraud or gross or wilful neglect within the meaning of the Explanation to section 271(1)(c) of the Act ? " - In the result, in none of the six cases any question of law arises be cause whether the presumption raised by the Explanation to section 271(1)(c) has been rebutted or not is essentially a question of fact and we decline to direct the Tribunal to refer any, question to us
-
1973 (4) TMI 34 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Tamil Nadu Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1955 - assessee had income from tea and coffee - assessee in this case claimed a sum of Rs. 2,000 spent as stock exchange listing fee, as a deduction under the provisions of section 5(e) of the Madras Agricultural Income-tax Act
-
1973 (4) TMI 33 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Amounts received by the assessee was compensation for the destruction of capital asset, i.e., the right to levy excise duty in his jagir - Whether, Tribunal was right in holding that the sum of Rs. 62,204 received by the assessee in 1958 was a capital receipt not liable to tax ? " - The answer to the question, therefore, is that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right, in holding that the sum of Rs. 62,204 received by the assessee in 1958 was a capital receipt not liable to tax
-
1973 (4) TMI 32 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Interest paid on the loans nad litigation expenses - " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled to the deduction of interest and litigation expenses from the share of the profit derived by him from Niranjan Lal Bhargava & Co. ? " - Question answered in the affirmative
-
1973 (4) TMI 31 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
In the year 1956-57, which was the last year of the business of manufacture of soap and oil, the Income-tax Officer had worked out depreciation, which could not be fully set off against the profits, and, as such, a part of the depreciation was left unabsorbed. In the assessment year in dispute the assessee claimed that the unabsorbed depreciation to the extent that it pertained to the old machinery utilised in the new business should be brought forward and set off against the profits of the new business - Whether same business should be carried on for the purposes of carry forward and set-off unabsorbed depreciation and whether depreciable assets of the original business should be utilised in the new business
-
1973 (4) TMI 30 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Initiation of penalty - validity – When the satisfaction as to default was recorded in the assessment order whether notice can be validly issued later on =- Whether issue of penalty notice under the old act when the new act has come into force is valid
-
1973 (4) TMI 29 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
" 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the word ' month ' occurring in section 271(1)(a)(i) referred to English calendar month? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the penalty should be calculated with reference to the tax found due on the date of the completion of the assessment after deducting, inter alia, taxes paid by the assessee as advance tax and tax as per provisional assessment ? "We, therefore, answer the first question in the negative and in favour of the Commissioner, and the second question in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee
-
1973 (4) TMI 28 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Joint family was converted into limited company with erstwhile members having equal shares. The eldest son was appointed as the managing director. Share income from company was assessed as HUF's income, but the remuneration as managing director was assessed as his individual income. Subsequently, decision of High Court overruling the decision on which assessment was based was received. Whether this decision can be treated as an information for reopening the assessment
-
1973 (4) TMI 27 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Gift Tax Act, 1958 - father sets apart properties for family members - " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the transaction evidenced by the deed dated May 7, 1963, was not a gift and that there is no liability to gift-tax ? "
-
1973 (4) TMI 26 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
This reference raises a short question of construction of section 21, sub-section (1), of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 - Whether the trust property standing in the name of beneficiary is assessable in the hands of the trustee - test for this purpose is to see whether the asset forms part of the trust property
-
1973 (4) TMI 25 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
One Palaniappa Mudaliar owned considerable movable and immovable properties. He died on June 14, 1937, leaving behind him his only son Pichai alias Shanmugasundaram. The deceased had executed a will on 4th March, 1936 - Whether an executive-assessee is liable to wealth-tax in respect of the property held by him under will - We have already expressed our view that section 3 as such imposes charge only on those who own the wealth and not on those who merely possess the wealth for specified purposes without any personal or beneficial interest either in the properties or in their income. We are, therefore, clearly of the view that before the introduction of section 19A executors cannot be brought to charge under section 3 of the Wealth-tax Act in respect of the properties held by them as per the directions in the will except as provided under section 19.
-
1973 (4) TMI 24 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Wealth Tax Act, 1957 - assessee was entitled to monthly instalments of annuity for thirty-five years from a specified date - Whether entire value of annuities can be included in net wealth of the assessee after that specified date
-
1973 (4) TMI 23 - PATNA HIGH COURT
Allowability u/s 10(2)(x) - Money borrowed - assessee borrowed for business purposes and agreed to pay 12 1/2 % of the profits instead of interest - When a claim for allowance under s. 10(2)(xv) is made, the department has to decide whether the expenditure was incurred voluntarily on the grounds of commercial expediency - reasonableness of these expenditures is to be from the point of view of the businessman and not that of the revenue - Whether the commission paid to employee on sale of trucks in addition to salary is deductible - hold that, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was not justified in disallowing commission on sale to the employee, Parikh, to the extent of Rs. 7,145 ; the whole of the amount was allowable under section 10(2)(x) of the Act.
|
