|
Advanced Search Options
Income Tax - Case Laws
Showing 61 to 80 of 155 Records
-
1996 (9) TMI 99 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Business Income, Unclaimed Balances ... ... ... ... ..... the text of Hindu law is very clear that a father cannot make a gift of the coparcenary property to his minor sons. If he does so, the gift would be void. It appears to me that in view of the provisions of the Gift-tax Act and the provisions of the Hindu law, the gift in question would be void. The ratio of the aforesaid case is fully applicable to the point involved in the present case. A father, being the karta of a Hindu undivided family, could not make a gift of the ancestral property either to a coparcener or to a stranger. Such a gift would be void per se and, therefore, there would be no gift within the meaning of the Act, which would be liable to gift-tax. The Tribunal was right in law in affirming the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Gift-tax cancelling the assessment order passed by the Gift-tax Officer against the assessee. The question referred to us is answered in the affirmative, i.e., against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. No costs.
-
1996 (9) TMI 98 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Deemed Gift, Question Of Law ... ... ... ... ..... ied. Which of the two methods should be followed--yield method or break-up method-although is a question of law, having regard to the fact that the Supreme Court has already upheld the yield method in Ambalal Sarabhai s case 1988 170 ITR 144, with reference to gift-tax and there being no subsequent decision under the Gift-tax Act, either explaining away or stating a different principle of law, we are not inclined to agree with learned counsel for the Revenue that this is a fit case to direct the Tribunal to refer the matter. The essential question under section 4(1) is whether the shares have been sold otherwise than for adequate consideration. If there is a finding that the price paid by the transferee is inadequate, then the difference between the market value and the sale price can be brought to tax as a deemed gift. By straightaway estimating the market value, no inference can be drawn that the price paid was inadequate. For these reasons, the gift-tax case is dismissed.
-
1996 (9) TMI 97 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Business Expenditure, High Court, Original Assessment ... ... ... ... ..... ties earlier. On deriving information from the orders passed by the appellate authorities for the years preceding and succeeding the assessment years in question the Income-tax Officer came to the conclusion that certain income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. Assessment proceedings were reopened on the basis of information and not merely on a change of opinion. The decision of the appellate authority or the Tribunal is a source of information and the cases reopened on the basis of such information can provide enough reason to the Income-tax Officer for resorting to sections 147 and 148 of the Act to reopen the already completed assessment. The Tribunal was right in holding that the order passed by the Income-tax Officer under section 147(b) of the Act reopening the assessment proceedings was valid in law. For the reasons stated above, we answer question No. (i) in the affirmative, that is, against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue with no order as to costs.
-
1996 (9) TMI 96 - PATNA HIGH COURT
Charitable Trust ... ... ... ... ..... part of the general revenue of the State but was impressed with an obligation that it should be utilised only for the purpose for which it was entrusted, viz., road development, which was an object of general public utility. Again that is not the case before us. Thus, the aforesaid two decisions are clearly distinguishable and do not apply to the facts of the present case. The objects with which the assessee was incorporated as a company may appear to be of general public utility for development of forestry, but then there were other objects as well which make the assessee a commercial organisation with no restriction as to how its income would be utilised. Thus, considering the principles set out in the aforesaid decision of the Supreme Court we find no difficulty in answering the first question in the affirmative, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. The reference is answered accordingly. There will be no order as to costs. S. J. MUKHOPADHAYA J. --- I agree.
-
1996 (9) TMI 95 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Wilful Attempt To Evade Tax ... ... ... ... ..... ted that the petitioner had filed an application under section 256(1) of the Act which was also rejected and the petitioner did not care to take any steps to approach the High Court under section 256(2) of the Act. The gravamen of the charge in the complaint filed against the respondent is the concealment of income and/or furnishing of inaccurate particulars by the respondent for the assessment year 1980-81 and on the same facts penalty orders were passed. Admittedly, penalty orders have been quashed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal with a finding that there is no such concealment of income by the respondent. Once the basis of the complaint had disappeared, there was no justification to proceed with the prosecution of the respondent on the same ground. I do not find any irregularity or illegality in the two orders (annexures P-2 and P-4) passed by the courts below. For the reasons mentioned above, I do not find any merit in this petition and the same is hereby dismissed.
-
1996 (9) TMI 94 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Charitable Trust, Original Assessment ... ... ... ... ..... v. CIT 1997 224 ITR 453), which is also identical in character in subsequent assessment years such as 1974-75, 1975-76 and 1976-77 in the matter of Chandrika Educational Trust is not at all different. It is to be emphasised that Sree Narayana Chandrika Trust, Irinjalakuda, is also of a cognate nature with Chandrika Educational Trust. In fact, it is seen from the judgment referred to above that the Tribunal had considered the position of law even with reference to the present assessee-trust with regard to the same situation. In our judgment, apart from the factual position discussed hereinbefore, the question is also covered by the above decision of this court. For all the above reasons, all the above three questions are answered in the affirmative, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. A copy of this judgment, under the seal of this court and the signature of the Registrar, shall be forwarded to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, as required by law.
-
1996 (9) TMI 93 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Capital Gains On Sale, Special Deduction ... ... ... ... ..... gains out of the transaction dated February 25, 1983, would have to be considered in addition to Rs. 65,750 making a total of Rs. 1,14,750 for the purpose of calculation of capital gains tax under the provisions of section 80T of the Income-tax Act. For the above reasons, we answer the above question in all its threefold aspects in the negative, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. Before parting with this judgment we must record our appreciation for the efforts and sincerity with which Sri Pathrose Mathai, counsel appearing amicus curiae, assisted us in the process of reaching our conclusion. We thank him, if not anything else. However, we feel that we should recommend the Revenue to make a token payment of Rs. 1,000 to Sri Pathrose Mathai who has assisted as an advocate amicus curiae. A copy of this judgment under the seal of the court and the signature of the Registrar shall be forwarded to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, as required by law.
-
1996 (9) TMI 92 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Business Income, From Other Sources ... ... ... ... ..... nture or concern in the nature of trade, commerce or manufacture. The definition of trade does not find its place in the Act. The dictionary meaning of trade as per dictionary of Webster s New Twentieth Century Dictionary, (Second edition), means amongst others, A means of earning one s living, occupation or work . In Black s Law Dictionary also trade means a business which a person has learnt or he carries on for procuring subsistence or profit occupation or employment, etc. From the dictionary meaning, it is abundantly clear that the commission received in real estate transaction can definitely be said to be business income arising out of business. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal has rightly held that the commission received by the assessee in connection with the real estate transaction is assessable under the head Income from the business . In view of the above, we answer the question in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.
-
1996 (9) TMI 91 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Manufacture And Sale ... ... ... ... ..... hall not be added to the income of the assessee for the purpose of deduction of allowance under section 32AB of the Act. Mr. Joshi, on the other hand, submits that in order to come to a proper calculation the provisions of sub-section (3) of section 32AB of the Act is relevant. We are of the view that we cannot answer that question because there is no such question whether the income is calculated rightly or wrongly. We are required to answer whether under the facts and circumstances of the case the interest and dividend received by the assessee-company is from the investment made out of business income. The Tribunal went wrong in holding that this should be included by giving the benefits of section 32AB of the Act. In view of the above, we answer the question in the negative in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. A copy of this judgment under the signature of the Registrar and the seal of the High Court shall be transmitted to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal.
-
1996 (9) TMI 90 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Estate Duty, Investment Allowance, New Industrial Undertaking, Profits And Gains, Special Deduction
-
1996 (9) TMI 89 - PATNA HIGH COURT
House Property, Income From Property, Provident Fund ... ... ... ... ..... , counsel appearing for the Revenue, also does not contest this point that the loan could have been so advanced by the assessee to the Hindu undivided family. Once we come to the conclusion that the assessee could have given the loan aforesaid to the Hindu undivided family, the first question has to be answered in the negative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. Once having given the answer to the first question in favour of the assessee we are of the opinion that the second question as a matter of fact does not arise for consideration and need not be answered on the facts and circumstances of the case. In any case, the answer to this question No. 2 has to be returned in the negative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. In these circumstances the third question has also to be answered in the negative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. All the questions are answered in favour of the assessee. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
1996 (9) TMI 88 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Export Business, Gross Total Income ... ... ... ... ..... l be calculated with reference to the gross amount of such income as reduced by the expenditure specified in the other sections of the Act. Learned counsel also submitted that even the Constitution Bench has also observed that these provisions are declaratory in character and have to be understood with reference to the intrinsic material in the statutory provision itself. For all the above reasons, the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal gets quashed and set aside and that of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) would require endorsement. For the above reasons, we answer the question--the first two parts thereof in the affirmative and the third part in the negative to mean that the assessee is not entitled to claim anything in excess of Rs. 33,103 under section 80HHC of the Income-tax Act. A copy of this judgment under the seal of the court and the signature of the Registrar shall be forwarded to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, as required by law.
-
1996 (9) TMI 87 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Delay In Filing Application For Registration, Previous Year ... ... ... ... ..... could not be executed on account of the peculiar circumstances, namely, that the widow who became the partner of the firm had confined herself to solitude on account of death of her husband and she was not talking and meeting anybody and as the death of her husband had taken place only on March 2, 1977, the new partnership could not be executed before the end of the previous year, i.e., on or before March 31, 1977. Therefore, there was reasonable cause for non-execution of the partnership deed and consequently there was sufficient cause for condoning the delay caused in preferring the application under section 184(4) as well as section 184(5) of the Income-tax Act. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the Tribunal as well as the authority below them were not justified in rejecting the claim of the assessee. We, therefore, answer questions Nos. 1, 2 and 3 in the negative and in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The parties are directed to bear their own costs.
-
1996 (9) TMI 86 - PATNA HIGH COURT
Fair Market Value, Immovable Property, Movable Property ... ... ... ... ..... g the property did not take into consideration all the relevant factors particularly the fact that the property was encumbered on various counts. The immovable property transferred did not fall within the provisions of section 269C of the Act. It could not be said that there was any difference between the apparent consideration and the fair market value or the consideration was not truly stated in the instruments of transfer. No presumption could be raised against the transferor as contained in section 269C. However, before initiating proceeding under section 269C, the competent authority must record valid grounds for its proposed action as the term has reason to believe in section 269C would show. The provision of acquisition of immovable property cannot become an instrument of oppression or harassment for either the transferor or the transferee. These appeals are, therefore, dismissed, but we will leave the parties to bear their own costs. S. J. MUKHOPADHAYA J. -- I agree.
-
1996 (9) TMI 85 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Assessing Officer, Assessment Year, Fixed Deposit, High Court, Income Escaping Assessment, Income From Other Sources, Reason To Believe, Writ Jurisdiction
-
1996 (9) TMI 84 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Application For Directing Reference, High Court ... ... ... ... ..... would have appeared on behalf of the applicant on the date of dismissal of the cases. The question is not one of non-appearance only, but of failure to take steps and, thus, of utter disregard to the opportunities granted by this court to do the needful. In view of the aforesaid position, we are satisfied that no sufficient cause is made out for allowing the prayer ex voto and recall the orders passed by this court in the aforesaid miscellaneous civil cases and to set the dismissal aside. We know that such prayers should be considered liberally, but the facts as unfolded in these cases clinched the issue against the applicant and did not justify revival of the cases dismissed in default. In the circumstances, we decline admission and dismiss these applications summarily. Retain this order in the record of Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 368 of 1996 and place its copy each in the records of other connected miscellaneous civil cases, as particularised above, for ready reference.
-
1996 (9) TMI 83 - HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
Bona Fide, Income Tax Act ... ... ... ... ..... section 269T. So also clause (c)(iii) will not apply in this case. There is no question of obstructing or tending to obstruct the administration of justice in any other manner. In any event, as pointed out by us, the respondent has acted bona fide on the basis of section 269T and the circular issued by the Reserve Bank of India. Consequently, we are of the opinion that the respondent is not guilty of any contempt. In any event, the respondent has tendered an unqualified apology, even though he has not made the payment as directed by the court. The apology tendered by him is accepted. We record the apology and discharge the respondent from these proceedings. We are thankful to learned counsel, Mr. G. D. Verma, President Bar Association, Mr. B. P. Sharma, Mr. Rajiv Sharma and Mr. Shrawan Dogra, who were requested by this court to assist for their valuable assistance. We appreciate the assistance rendered by them in the matter to decide these proceedings in accordance with law.
-
1996 (9) TMI 82 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Assessment Order, Revised Return ... ... ... ... ..... d when the Act permits the filing of a revised return, it is expected to be considered by the assessing authority, if the same is filed before the order is made by it otherwise, the very purpose of giving such a right would be frustrated. Even though the decision in Panchmahal Steel Ltd. v. Joshi (U. A.), ITO 1994 210 ITR 723, was delivered on September 8, 1993, there was no mention or it was not brought to the notice of the High Court the earlier decision rendered on February 27, 1992, by the same High Court in Shri Vallabh Glass Works Ltd. v. ITO 1995 212 ITR 433. Under such circumstances, we consider that there is no infirmity in the order passed by the Tribunal in the present case in setting aside the order made by the Income-tax Officer and directing him to redo the assessment after taking into consideration the revised return filed by the assessee. In that view of the matter, we answer the question referred to us in the affirmative and against the Department. No costs.
-
1996 (9) TMI 81 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Capital Or Revenue, Sales Promotion ... ... ... ... ..... ) receiving the answer in favour of the Revenue that it is income of the assessee during the assessment year in question. The question has been considered in detail with reference to the decisions of the Bombay High Court and of this court also. We have no hesitation in following the said decision. For the above reasons we answer the referred questions as follows Income-tax Reference No. 88 of 1992 Question No. 1 is answered in the negative, i,e., in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. Question No. 2 is also answered in the negative, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. Income-tax Reference No. 53 of 1991 Question No. 1 is answered in the negative, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. Question No. 2 is answered in the affirmative, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. A copy of this judgment under the seal of the court and the signature of the Registrar shall be forwarded to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench.
-
1996 (9) TMI 80 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Delay In Filing Return, Rectification Proceedings ... ... ... ... ..... d and the Assessing Officer had rightly charged the interest which was disallowed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as well as the Tribunal. Law in this regard is very clear. Section 139(8)(a) of the Act says that where the return under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) or sub-section (4) for an assessment year is furnished after the specified date, or is not furnished, then the assessee shall be liable to pay simple interest at the rate prescribed under that section. Similarly under section 217 of the Act interest is liable to be paid for conditions specified therein. In this case admittedly as per the assessment proceeding the return was not filed on the due date. In our opinion, the interest is liable to be paid. Therefore, we answer the question in the negative, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. A copy of this judgment under the signature of the Registrar and the seal of the High Court shall be transmitted to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal.
|
