|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 101 to 120 of 177 Records
-
1978 (4) TMI 77 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Law Applicable, Retrospective Effect, Wealth Tax Penalty ... ... ... ... ..... the expression default continued used in cl. (i) of s. 18(1) mean that every month the assessee does not file the return, he commits a fresh default ? I think the answer must be in the negative because s. 14(1) enjoins on the assessee an obligation to file his return by the 30th June of the corresponding year of assessment. By reading s. 14(1) in conjunction with s. 18(1)(a), it cannot be said that the non-filing of the return by 30th June of the corresponding assessment year amounts to commission of a fresh default every month thereafter. After careful consideration of the whole matter, I am of the considered view that the omission of an assessee to file a return on the due date completes his default as on that date and does not render it a continuing default. Consequently, the penalty can be imposed on him only on the basis of law which stood on that date. I, accordingly, answer all the questions in these three references in favour of the assessees and against the revenue.
-
1978 (4) TMI 76 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Any Remuneration, Business Expenditure, Income Tax Act, Question Of Fact ... ... ... ... ..... ITR 268. All that the Supreme Court laid down was that in the facts and circumstances of that case, no evidence had been furnished by the assessee on any of the points indicated which according to the Supreme Court were relevant in deciding the issue. A number of other decisions have been cited at the Bar as follows (a) Reform Flour Mills (Pvt.) Ltd. v. CIT 1978 115 ITR 598 (Cal), (b) Sri Krishna Tiles and Potteries (Madras) P. Ltd. v. CIT 1973 90 lTR 439 (Mad), (c) CIT v. Raman and Raman (P.) Ltd. 1977 110 ITR 747 (Mad) and (d) CIT v. India Carbon (P.) Ltd. 1977 106 ITR 107 (Gauhati). It is not necessary for us to go into detailed consideration of these decisions. The relevant principles of law are well settled and have to be applied in the facts and circumstances of each case. For the above reasons, we accept the contentions of the assessee and answer the question in the negative and in favour of the assessee. There will be no order as to costs. C. K. BANERJI J.--I agree.
-
1978 (4) TMI 75 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Business Expenditure ... ... ... ... ..... sehold expression, and the same would get impressed in the minds of the readers of the reports in the newspapers and other advertisement media. Further, as submitted on behalf of the assessee and accepted by the Appellate Tribunal, the holding of the tournaments by the D. C. M. Group provides opportunities to the employees of the mills to participate and also to witness such tournaments, and thus operate as an amenity provided for the recreation of the employees. The furnishing of such amenities would go a long way to help the business of the assessee. We, therefore, agree with the view taken by the Appellate Tribunal and hold that the expenditure incurred by the assessee in organising football and hockey tournaments, was an allowable deduction under s. 10(2)(xv) of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922. We accordingly answer the question referred in the affirmative. In the circumstances of the case, the parties are directed to bear their own costs. Question answered in the affirmative.
-
1978 (4) TMI 74 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Sugar Factory ... ... ... ... ..... , that in the former the price is paid in money, whilst in the latter it is paid in goods .......... The presence of money consideration is an essential element in a transaction of sale. If the consideration is not money but some other valuable consideration it may be an exchange ......... but not a sale. Here, so far as the immovable properties are concerned, consideration was the immovable property belonging to the other while in the transaction relating to movables the predominant intention was to get and receive the price. It is evident that the one transaction was of sale while the other was of an exchange. We, therefore, answer the questions referred to as follows 1. The transactions were two, one pertaining to movables and the other pertaining to immovables. 2. In the affirmative in favour of the assessee and against the department. 3. In the affirmative in favour of the department and against the assessee. In view of the divided success, we make no order as to costs.
-
1978 (4) TMI 73 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Income Tax Act, Salary To Employee ... ... ... ... ..... panies Act, 1956, and, therefore, it is an illegal agreement. He also argues that the salary of the assessee cannot be treated as a tax-free salary in view of the illegality of the said agreement. Accordingly, he submits that both the questions should be answered in the negative. But the income-tax law is not concerned with illegality, if any, tainted with the earning of any income and, therefore, the contentions of Dr. Pal must fail. And in view of the law stated in the cases, namely, R. B. D. D. Datar v. CIT 1952 21 ITR 558 (Nag), Tokyo Shibaura Electric Co. Ltd. , CIT 1964 52 ITR 283 (Mys), North British Railway Company v. Scott 1923 8 TC 332 (HL), Hartland v. Diggines 1926 10 TC 247 (HL), CIT v. C.WT. Steel (No. 1) 1972 86 ITR 817 (Ker) and CIT v. L G. Mackintosh 1975 99 ITR 419 (Mad), cited by Mr. Suhas Sen, learned counsel for the revenue, we answer both the questions in the affirmative and in favour of the revenue. There will be no order as to costs. GUHA J.--I agree.
-
1978 (4) TMI 72 - PATNA HIGH COURT
Change In Constitution Of Firm, Firm Registration, Income Tax Act ... ... ... ... ..... the firm, thereby infringing upon the property rights of the partners as enshrined in Part III of the Constitution, learned counsel for the department gave this point up, in view of the express language of sub-cl. (a) of cl, (1) of art. 226 of the Constitution as it stands after the Forty-second Constitution Amendment Act, 1976. In the result, therefore, this application is allowed. The order of the ITO (respondent No. 3) as contained in his order dated the 27th October, 1971 (annexure 1), refusing to recognise the renewal of the registration of the petitioner-firm, must be held to be wholly illegal and is hereby quashed. All necessary incidental and consequential reliefs flowing from the other legal provisions of the Act must be made available to the petitioner-firm and the entire proceedings in Certificate Case No. 20/71-72/19 and 84/73-74, pending before respondent No. 4, must as a necessary corollary be held to be illegal and quashed. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
1978 (4) TMI 71 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Agricultural Land, Capital Gains ... ... ... ... ..... ew that the Tribunal should be directed to reconsider the whole question afresh in the light of the important principle, that once it was proved to be agricultural land it shall be presumed to retain its character as agricultural land until it was proved that there was a change in the character of the land. In considering the further question the Tribunal shall also rely on the adangal extract and the certificate issued by the Deputy Tahsildar. But, we are of the view that it is not necessary to prove that the entirety of the land had been converted into non-agricultural land. Even if a portion of the land is converted into non-agricultural land, that portion will have to be taken out of the benefits of agricultural land for the purpose of capital gain . In the circumstances, we cannot answer the question and, therefore, direct the Tribunal to go into the matter afresh in accordance with law under s. 260(1) of the Income-tax Act. The parties shall bear their respective costs.
-
1978 (4) TMI 70 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Error Apparent On Face, Rate Purpose, Representative Assessee, Total Income ... ... ... ... ..... judicial functions by the ITO in making the assessment. s. 119 contemplates administrative directions or instructions that may be issued from time to time by the authorities as mentioned in sub-section (3) as also in other sub-sections. The ITO has to act judicially or quasi-judicially in the assessment proceedings and any direction by any higher authority as to the manner in which such proceedings are to be disposed of would be interference with the judicial or quasi-judicial functions of the ITO. If the ITO acts in accordance with such directions and disposes of assessment proceedings accordingly, his orders will be liable to be set aside on that ground. No other point has been argued on behalf of the appellants in this appeal. For the reasons aforesaid, the appeal is dismissed, but there will be no order for costs. Let the operation of this judgment remain stayed for a period of four weeks from date, as prayed for on behalf of the appellants. D. C. CHAKRAVORTI J.--I agree.
-
1978 (4) TMI 69 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Advance Payment, Assessment Order, Income Tax Act ... ... ... ... ..... ere may be other provisions of law which enable the departmental authorities to ask the ITO who has not taken action under those sections after an order of regular assessment is passed to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. It may also be possible for the ITO himself even now to pass an order under s. 217 in accordance with law after giving reasonable opportunity to the assessee concerned to make his representations including those failing under r. 40 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. But s. 263 cannot be invoked because one of the conditions precedent for invoking the jurisdiction under that section is the existence of an order made under s. 217 in a proceeding before the ITO which is prejudicial to the revenue and in each of these cases there is no such order in existence. The action taken in each of these cases by the Commissioner was, therefore, a premature one. In the result, the questions referred to us in these cases are answered in the affirmative. No costs.
-
1978 (4) TMI 68 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
A Firm, A Partner, Income Tax Act, Legal Representative ... ... ... ... ..... This argument has some weight. But in their Lordships opinion it must give way to the consideration that a person on death undoubtedly ceases to carry on business. It was said in Hunter (Inspector of Taxes) v. Dewhurst 1932 16 TC 605 (HL) that you cannot vacate an office better than by dying in it . It appears to their Lordships that on death a person does vacate his office, and, equally, that on death a person ceases to carry on a business which he had been carrying on previous to death. The above observations of the Privy Council demolish to a great extent the argument of Mr. Pal that death cannot be construed as discontinuance of business, profession or vocation under s. 25(3) of the Act. For the above reasons, we are of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to relief under s. 25(3) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, as claimed. We, therefore, answer the question in the negative and in favour of the applicants. There will be no order as to costs. SEN J.--I agree.
-
1978 (4) TMI 67 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Assessment Proceedings, Rectification Proceedings ... ... ... ... ..... d to an opportunity to create a reserve so long as the assessment proceedings are not over. The Act does not specify any period of time within which the relevant entry should be made. Even if the entries are made during the pendency of the assessment proceedings, they are entitled to be taken into consideration. The Tribunal has found that the rectification proceedings are part of the assessment proceedings. This finding has not been challenged by asking for a reference. We, therefore, need not go into that question. If rectification proceedings are treated as part of the assessment proceedings, the position is clear, namely, till the conclusion of the rectification proceedings the assessee was entitled to an opportunity to create a reserve. We are, hence, satisfied that the Tribunal took a correct view of the law. The questions are accordingly answered in favour of the assessee and against the department. The assessee will be entitled to costs which are assessed at Rs. 200.
-
1978 (4) TMI 66 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Capital Gains, Capital Receipt ... ... ... ... ..... of the total holding of its shares. (c) Prior to their sale the shares had been held for a fairly long period. The facts found by the Tribunal have not been challenged. In view of the law laid down in the decisions considered above, it cannot be said that there was no material before, the Tribunal to come to the conclusion that the assessee was not carrying on business as a dealer in shares. Such a conclusion cannot be said to be perverse in view of the evidence before the Tribunal. In any event, the findings of the Tribunal have not been challenged as perverse. It is not for this court in reference to re-appreciate evidence so as to take a different view on facts. For the reasons as stated above, we answer the question in favour of the assessee by saying that the amount realised by the assessee on the sale of the said shares was assessable, if at all, as capital gains. In the facts and circumstances of this case, there will be no order as to costs. C. K. BANERJI J.--I agree.
-
1978 (4) TMI 65 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
In Good Faith, Income Tax Act, Powers Of Commissioner, Waiver Of Penalty And Interest ... ... ... ... ..... s income and concealed the same is immaterial. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the ground on which the Commissioner of Income-tax rejected the application filed by the petitioner for the reduction of interest is not tenable in law. The discussion made above would show that the Commissioner of Income-tax rejected the application filed by the petitioner without apprising himself of all the relevant facts. Under these circumstances he has to be asked to decide the application filed by the petitioner afresh after having regard to the relevant consideration and in the light of the observations made above. In the result the writ petition succeeds and is allowed. The orders of the Commissioner of Income-tax dated 17th September, 1976 (annexure 25), and 4th September, 1975, are quashed. The Commissioner is directed to decide the application of the petitioner afresh in accordance with law and in the light of the observations made above. The petitioner is entitled to the costs.
-
1978 (4) TMI 64 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Mercantile System, Sales Tax, Trading Receipt ... ... ... ... ..... efore, for an assessee who was maintaining accounts under the mercantile system of accounting the liability has arisen and if the assessee has estimated his liability, that liability the assessee is entitled to deduction. In the instant case, both the members of the Tribunal have found that the assessee had a liability to pay the amount collected on account of sale tax. No one has challenged the correctness of this finding. The method of accounting of the assessee is admittedly mercantile. Therefore, it is clear that the assessee was entitled to claim a deduction of the amount collected by it from its customers on account of sales tax. No doubt, the sum initially formed part of its trading receipt, but in the ultimate assessment it had to be allowed as a deduction. For the reasons as stated above we answer the question referred to us in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. In the facts and circumstances there will be no order as to costs. C. K. BANERJI J.--I agree.
-
1978 (4) TMI 63 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Business Expenditure, Income Tax Act ... ... ... ... ..... ication and the Tribunal was right in having allowed the assessee s claim for deduction. Counsel for the revenue raised before us a certain point which has not been raised at all before any of the authorities below. It was argued that the expenditure incurred is a capital expenditure and not a revenue expenditure and, therefore, was not deductible under section 37 of the Act. This aspect of the matter has not received any attention at all from the Tribunal and has not been discussed by it or, for that matter, by any of the authorities below. The question is one which does not arise out of the order of the Tribunal, and we must decline to deal with this question or to answer it. In the result, we answer the question referred in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the department. We make no order as to costs. A copy of this judgment under the seal of the court and the signature of the Registrar, will be communicated to the Tribunal, as required by law.
-
1978 (4) TMI 62 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Advance Tax, Revision By Commissioner ... ... ... ... ..... 8 111 ITR 231 (Cal) the Calcutta High Court also did not accept that in these circumstances the Income-tax Officer should be deemed to have exercised his discretion under rule 48(1) of the Income-tax Rules, 1922, and had waived interest. Dr. R. R. Misra, counsel appearing for the assessee, relied upon the decision in Shantilal Rawji v. M. C. Nair, IV Income-tax Officer 1958 34 ITR 439 (Bom) and S. A. L. Narayan Row v. Ishwarlal Bhagwandas 1965 57 ITR 149 (SC) in support of his argument mentioned above. Both the cases, in our opinion, are distinguishable. In none of them the question considered was about the scope of section 263 of the Act. For the reasons given above, question No. 2 is answered in the negative, in favour of the department and against the assessee. As, in our view, on the answer given to question No. 2, question No. 1 does not arise, we refrain from giving any answer to the same. The Commissioner of Income-tax is entitled to costs, which we assess at Rs. 200.
-
1978 (4) TMI 61 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Cash System, Total Income ... ... ... ... ..... ourt took while deciding the reference for the year 1964-65. We would, therefore, answer the question in the same manner for the year 1965-66 in favour of the department. In relation to the assessment year 1966-67, the position is entirely different. For this year, the accounting period ended on December 31, 1965. No payments were received at all during this year. On the other hand, it is in evidence that on April 10, 1965, the debtor-company repudiated the debt. Consequently, the ultimate finding that the assessee acted in response to the call of commercial expediency and sound business methods in changing over to the system of accounting in so far as the commission and interest receivable were concerned, cannot be said to suffer from any error of law. Consequently, from the year 1966-67, we would answer the question referred to us in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the department. In view of the divided success, the parties will bear their own costs.
-
1978 (4) TMI 60 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
High Court, Income Tax Act ... ... ... ... ..... jects a specific question of law raised in an application under s. 256(1) of the Act, the petitioner must apply to the High Court under s. 256(2) of the Act for an order directing the Tribunal to send the statement of the case with the said question and if he fails to do so, it is no longer open to him to argue on the said question before the High Court. The question referred by the Tribunal in our opinion is also very narrow and it does not admit the aforesaid plea of Mr. Ray which is not only a new plea but is not even its another aspect. In the premises, the contention of Mr. Ray that we should refer back this matter to the Tribunal for deciding whether there was a gift in favour of the HUF must fail and accordingly we answer the question in the affirmative and against the assessee as it is covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court in Pushpa Devi s case 1977 109 ITR 730 as rightly conceded by Mr. Ray. There will be no order as to costs. SUDHINDRA MOHAN GUHA J.--I agree.
-
1978 (4) TMI 59 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Patria Potestas ... ... ... ... ..... cising this overriding power, make only a partial partition of the family properties retaining jointness, also of himself, in the remaining properties. The contention of Shri Chitale, learned counsel for the assessee, cannot, therefore, be accepted. The result is that we answer the questions referred to this court as follows Answer to Question No. 1 --No. A Hindu father does not have a right to bring about a partial partition of the family properties among his sons inter se as part of his patria potestas and without the consent of his sons. Answer to Question No. 2 --Does not arise. Answer to Question No. 3 --No. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was not justified in allowing the claim for partial partition made by the assessee. Answer to Question No. 4 --Does not arise. The reference is answered accordingly in favour of the revenue and against the assessee. The assessee shall pay the costs of this reference. Counsel s fee Rs. 200, if certified.
-
1978 (4) TMI 58 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Non-resident Company ... ... ... ... ..... 8 (SC) could not be distinguished by Mr. Pal and if we apply the principles in the facts of the present case it has to be held that by the forgoing of the commission by the assessee on the supply to the head office no extra profit or income accrued in favour of the assessee. We note, however, that the parties all along did proceed under a misconception. In law there cannot be a valid transaction of sale between the branch office of the assessee in India and its head office in London. It is an elementary proposition that no person can enter into a contract with oneself. Debiting or crediting one s account cannot alter this legal position. If one unit of a business does not debit any commission to another unit of the same business then it is difficult to follow how any saving has been effected by the business. For the reasons given above we answer the question referred in the negative and in favour of the assessee. There will be no order as to costs. C. K. BANERJI J.-I agree.
....
|
