|
Advanced Search Options
Income Tax - Case Laws
Showing 81 to 100 of 155 Records
-
1996 (9) TMI 79 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Charitable Purpose, Charitable Trust ... ... ... ... ..... the said amount shall be paid to the nominee(s). The nominee(s) shall produce a death certificate issued by a competent authority for claiming the service benefit. (e) In the event of any dispute arising with regard to payment of otherwise under these rules, the decision of the managing committee shall be final and binding. Any financial assistance to be rendered under these rules is at the discretion of the managing committee. The rules unambiguously indicate that the benefit of the scheme or the alleged charitable purpose can be utilised only by specified persons who are required to be the subscribers or their dependents. Contributories to the fund allegedly collected for their personal benefits could not be held to be forming an association for charitable purpose and thus being entitled to the benefit of exemption under section 11 of the Act. For the reasons stated hereinabove we answer the question of law referred to us in the negative and against the assessee. No costs.
-
1996 (9) TMI 78 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Recognised Provident Fund ... ... ... ... ..... Schedule has no application to the contributions made to the Provident Funds Act, 1925, the ceiling limit of Rs. 250 envisaged in rule 75(1) of the Income-tax Rules will not apply. As already stated, rule 75(1) of the Income-tax Rules limits the ceiling deduction to Rs. 250 only in respect of contributions made by an employer to the recognised provident fund maintained by the company and these crucial words were not noticed by the Division Bench in the aforesaid case. We, therefore, with great respect to the learned judges, are inclined to hold that the view expressed by the Division Bench is per incuriam, in that, the crucial part of the rule has not been noticed. For the above reasons, we are unable to accept the argument of Sri S. R. Ashok, the learned senior advocate appearing for the Revenue, that the assessee is not entitled to deduction in excess of Rs. 6,000. In the result, we answer the question in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.
-
1996 (9) TMI 77 - HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
Law Applicable ... ... ... ... ..... Act, which will necessarily relate to an earlier period than the notice. In this case, the notice under section 148 of the Act was issued in 1995. At that time, the Additional Commissioner was empowered to grant sanction. Hence, the objection fails. The third contention is that the notice is barred by limitation. This is a matter, which can be raised by the petitioner before the concerned authorities. It is only a notice issued under section 148 of the Act and this court will go into the question of jurisdiction only. Once, it is found that the authority during the said period has done the same within his power, as required under the statute, as such, the other objections regarding notice can be raised by the petitioner before the concerned authorities. With the above observations, this writ petition is dismissed. CWP No. 645 of 1996 In view of the dismissal of the writ petition, the present application is also dismissed and the interim order dated April 8, 1996, is vacated.
-
1996 (9) TMI 76 - PATNA HIGH COURT
Cold Storage Plant, Investment Allowance ... ... ... ... ..... n the negative, that is, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. In this context, the Supreme Court observed In a cold storage, vegetables, fruits and several other articles which required preservation by refrigeration are stored. While, as a result of long storage, scientific examination might indicate loss of moisture content, that is not sufficient for holding that the stored articles have undergone a process within the meaning of section 2(7)(c) of the Finance Act, 1973. Taking the view following the Supreme Court decision as to what are the functions of the cold storage, we find ourselves unable to agree with the view expressed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court and we are inclined to follow the decisions of the Allahabad, Madhya Pradesh and Calcutta High Courts. Accordingly, we answer both the questions in the negative, that is, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. Since no one is appearing for the assessee there shall be no order as to costs.
-
1996 (9) TMI 75 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Assessee Carrying On Business, Higher Rate, Motor Vehicles, Rate Of Depreciation ... ... ... ... ..... t use of vehicles cannot be said to be used in the business of running them on hire. Those vehicles are used for the purpose of the business but in the case of a transporter, the business is of running the vehicles on hire to make the vehicles available to the customers for transporting their goods for hire or reward. In view of the above, we are of the firm opinion that the assessee company used the motor vehicles and lorries for running them on hire. Therefore, in our opinion, the higher rate of depreciation as provided under entry (1A) of Appendix I, Part 1, item III-E will be available to the assessee-company. In view of the above, we answer questions Nos. 1 and 3 in the negative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue and question No. 2 in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee against the Revenue. 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, Gauhati.
-
1996 (9) TMI 74 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Applied To, Higher Rate, Income Of Individual, Rate Applicable, Share Income ... ... ... ... ..... aph II, it is manifest that the emphasis is on the income of individual member and not of a smaller Hindu undivided family. In the case at hand not the income of an individual member but of a smaller Hindu undivided family exceeds the prescribed limit and, therefore, we are of the view that the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that for the purposes of taxation not the income of a smaller Hindu undivided family but the income of an individual member of the bigger Hindu undivided family has to be taken into consideration and the income of any individual member of the assessee-Hindu undivided family not being in excess of the prescribed limit, a higher rate applicable in the case of a smaller Hindu undivided family cannot be applied to the assessee-Hindu undivided family. For the above reasons, we agree with the view taken by the Appellate Tribunal. The aforesaid question is, therefore, answered in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.
-
1996 (9) TMI 73 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Accounting Year, Assessing Officer, Bad Debt, Bench Of Tribunal, Business Expenditure, Business Income, Cash Payments, Change In Method, Development Allowance, Excise Duty, Expenditure On Scientific Research, High Court, Petition Against Order, Question Of Law, Supreme Court, Weighted Deduction, Write Off
-
1996 (9) TMI 72 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Undisclosed Sources ... ... ... ... ..... d to in section 51 of that Act (ii) co-operative bank shall have the meaning assigned to it in Part V of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 (10 of 1949) (iii) loan or deposit means loan or deposit of money. The validity of section 269SS has already been upheld by the Madras High Court in the case of K. R. M. V. Ponnuswamy Nadar Sons (Firm) v. Union of India 1992 196 ITR 431. Here also, loan transactions have to be through bank cheques so that they can be verified. Thus, there is anxiety on the part of the Legislature to see that all transactions should be open through the banking system so that authenticity of the same can be verified. Therefore, in view of the above discussions, we are of the opinion that section 69D of the Act does not suffer from any vice offending article 14 or 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. Hence, there is no merit in this petition and the same is dismissed. The amount of security, if any, shall be refunded to the petitioners. No order as to costs
-
1996 (9) TMI 71 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Business Or Profession ... ... ... ... ..... mala fide and the impugned notice cannot be sustained. We may mention that although the notice in question related only to the assessment years 1974-75 to 1979-80 and it is only the proceedings in pursuance of the impugned notice that were stayed, the Assessing Officer is not shown to have initiated any such action for any subsequent year though he could do so under the provisions of section 185 of the Act, and in the supplementary counter-affidavit filed to the supplementary affidavit which has been sworn very recently on April 2, 1996, the respondent has not stated that any such action was initiated for any subsequent year and Arvind Kumar Gupta has been found to be a benamidar of Virendra Pal Gupta. For the above reasons, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned notice dated February 3, 1982, a copy of which is annexure 15 to the writ petition, is hereby quashed. The petitioner will get its costs of this writ petition from the respondents that we assess at Rs. 1,500.
-
1996 (9) TMI 70 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Fixed Deposit, Other Sources, Set Off ... ... ... ... ..... other head. (4) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-sections (1) and (2), where in respect of any assessment year the net result of the computation, in relation to any property (other than the property referred to in sub-clause (i) of clause (a) of sub-section (2) of section 23) under the head Income from house property is a loss and the assessee has income assessable under any other head of income, the assessee shall not be entitled to have such loss set off against income under the other head. Therefore, in the present case, the deduction of Rs. 71,013 allowed by the Tribunal is well justified as the assessee has suffered loss on account of premature encashment of the fixed deposits receipts and such set-off is permissible under section 71 of the Act. Accordingly, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal was justified in allowing the relief of Rs. 71,013 to the assessee. We, accordingly, answer all the three questions in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.
-
1996 (9) TMI 69 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Addition To Income, Agricultural Income, Assessment Proceedings, Reason To Believe, Reassessment Proceedings, Revised Returns, Tax Proceedings, Total Income, Valuation Date, Wealth Tax
-
1996 (9) TMI 68 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... in fortifying our approach taken on the factual situation before us. The statutory provisions do provide that on receipt of the proceedings on a reference from the High Court, the Appellate Tribunal has to act conformably in the light of the directions in the answer to the question referred. If the question that is sought to be raised and contested at this stage of the proceedings has not been urged or could not have been urged, the Appellate Tribunal may proceed to consider such question, but only on satisfaction that the question arises afresh for the first time and is of such a nature that it could not have been raised at any time in the earlier travel of the proceedings. For all the above reasons, we answer all the questions 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 67 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Question Of Law ... ... ... ... ..... an the one offered, it must take appropriate action by issuing notice. It was found by the Tribunal as under .....it would have been a different matter if the Gift-tax Officer had required the legal heiresses to file the return in the status of individuals but the return was filed declaring Hindu undivided family status and the Gift-tax Officer raised assessment in the same status in which the notice was issued. We have already observed that in the notice under section 13(2), the legal heiresses were not required to file the return in any particular status and such being the case, the Gift-tax Officer was in error in taking the status as an individual against the declared status of Hindu undivided family. On the facts, therefore, we are unable to sustain the assessment and accepting the assessee s appeal cancel the assessment raised..... The findings recorded by the Tribunal are of fact. No referable question of law arises from the order of the Tribunal. Dismissed. No costs.
-
1996 (9) TMI 66 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Charge On Property, Doctrine Of Merger, Gift Tax ... ... ... ... ..... unal has not left out to note the aspect of improbabilities of the situation on these counts and has aptly observed that the material is in the nature of self-serving documents. Therefore, although the situation in regard to which the authorities have approached is purely factual in character, reading the two orders, one passed under section 24(2) of the Act and the other of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin, in our judgment even if we were left to ourselves to consider the factual situation we would not have come to any conclusion other than the one arrived at by them. For the above reasons question No. 1 is answered in the affirmative, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee, and question No. 2 is also answered in the affirmative, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. A copy of the 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 65 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Previous Year ... ... ... ... ..... of case. With regard to the questions, we feel that answer to question No. 2 in Income-tax Reference No. 109 of 1992 would be more than satisfactory as it would answer all other questions in the other references. Accordingly, we answer question No. 1 in Income-tax Reference No. 109 of 1992 as unnecessary. We answer question No. 2 in Income-tax Reference No. 109 of 1992 in the negative, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. We answer question No. 1 in Income-tax References Nos. 113 and 114 of 1992 in the negative, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. Answers to questions Nos. 2, 3 and 4 in Income-tax References Nos. 113 and 114 of 1992 are unnecessary in view of answer to question No. 1 in Income-tax References Nos. 113 and 114 of 1992 is of a consequential character (sic). 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 64 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Investment Allowance, Manufacture Or Production ... ... ... ... ..... ribunal as a factual situation would not show that the activity can be understood either as manufacture or production in accordance with the law declared in the above four decisions of the apex court. We would like to note that the judgment of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated July 18, 1994, recording the factual situation has been the basis, for the reasons already recorded by us in regard thereto. It is this situation that closes the gates with regard to the finding of fact in regard to the situation, may be with regard to another assessment year. We emphasise this because the finality of the situation rules out any necessity of a remand, again for the same purpose. For all the above reasons, we answer the question in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee in both these references. 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 63 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... . From this, it appears that, in our opinion, the Tribunal abdicated the power and responsibility in discharging the duty. The Assessing Officer surely had the jurisdiction to look into the cash credit and make necessary enquiry and come to a finding on such an enquiry in a proper and fair manner. As indicated above, the enquiry was not properly made. On the basis of this, the Assessing Officer could not come to a conclusion holding that the creditors were fictitious. The Tribunal also totally overlooked the matter on the grounds that the amount was received from R. D. Sharma and Co., that aspect was also not considered. Considering all these aspects, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal without proper materials came to the conclusion regarding the capability. Besides, this court also has held in ITR No. 2 of 1992, Jalan Timbers v. CIT 1997 223 ITR 11. In view of the above, we answer both the questions in the negative and in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.
-
1996 (9) TMI 62 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Assessment Year, High Court, Sales Tax ... ... ... ... ..... of the above discussion would be that the determination of the taxable capital gains arrived at by the first appellate authority would replace the one of the Tribunal which is the result, inevitably in the process of the above reasoning. For the above reasons, we answer question No. 1 in the negative, to mean that the computation of the taxable capital gains should be Rs. 7,07,250, as determined by the first appellate authority, which would be in accordance with law except that instead of the amount of Rs. 50,000 as cost of the structure, the figure arrived at by the Tribunal at Rs. 75,000 should be substituted. Thus, it would be that the taxable capital gains would be Rs. 6,82,250 (Rs. 7,07,250-Rs. 25,000), to be precise. Question No. 2 is answered 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, as required by law.
-
1996 (9) TMI 61 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Actual Cost, Assessment Year, Profits Chargeable To Tax, Purchase Tax, Raw Material, Sales Tax
-
1996 (9) TMI 60 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Capital Gains, State Financial Corporation ... ... ... ... ..... ifferent as the question was relating to the amount paid by the assessee to discharge the encumbrance and in the context whether it was incurred for improvement of the asset. In Salay Mohamad s case 1994 210 ITR 700 (Ker) the question was of deductions in computation of the capital gains with reference to the amounts not diverted at source by overriding title. The situation before us is entirely different. Similarly, in Idiculla s case 1995 214 ITR 386 (Ker), this court was concerned with the situation of deductions. We have before us the basic question as to whether capital gains arise on undisputed factual matrix. For all these reasons, we answer question No. 1 in the affirmative, against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. We decline to answer questions Nos. 2 and 3 in view of our reasoning. 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.
|
