|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 141 to 160 of 178 Records
-
1980 (1) TMI 38 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... and daughters-in-law could be brought to tax under s. 10 of the E.D. Act, 1953 ? The Supreme Court pointed out that this case stood on a stronger footing than the case of Kamlavati 1979 120 ITR 456, which was dealt with earlier in the judgment. In other words, what is apparent from the judgment of the Supreme Court is that when once the donee took possession of the property, s. 10 would not be attracted even if later on the donee brought the amount into the firm in which the deceased donor was a partner because the enjoyment would not be referable to the gift at all. The question of the donee becoming a partner in the firm was not found to be relevant. So long as the benefit and enjoyment cannot be traced to the terms of the gift made by the deceased, the deceased would be excluded from enjoyment, so that s. 10 would not apply. The result is that the question referred to us is anwered in affirmative and in favour of the accountable person. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1980 (1) TMI 37 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ained a clerical error regarding the assessment year mentioned as 1963-64, instead of 1964-65, it cannot be said that any useful purpose will be served by answering the question against the assessee and remanding the case to the I.T. authorities for further enquiry regarding the genuineness of the firm. Taking a conspectus of the circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal rightly directed the I.T. authorities to register the firm for the year 1964-65. The question regarding the delay raised before the two Tribunals by the revenue is without any substance, because there already existed an application, dated January 31, 1963, on the record. Clerical errors have normally been considered as sufficient ground for condoning the delay in filing an application. On the aforementioned grounds, we answer the question referred to us in the affirmative and against the revenue. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the parties are left to bear their own costs.
-
1980 (1) TMI 36 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Charitable Purpose ... ... ... ... ..... AC were equally relevant for deciding this issue. It would have been worthwhile for the Tribunal to have considered the decisions of the Supreme Court in the case of P. N. Krishna Iyer v. CIT 1969 73 ITR 539 and in the case of Raj Kumar Singh Hukam Chand v. CIT 1970 78 ITR 33, before deciding this matter. As the Tribunal has not recorded any clear finding on the various relevant aspects which had to be considered before any conclusion could be reached as to the taxability of the salaries in the hands of the HUF, it is not possible for us to answer this question either way. The Tribunal should now reconsider the matter and arrive at conclusion after considering all the factual matters involved in the controversy. The second question has, as such, to be left unanswered. We, accordingly, answer the first question in the affirmative and return the second question unanswered. The department is entitled to costs which are assessed at Rs. 200 and the counsel fee at the same figure.
-
1980 (1) TMI 35 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Charitable Purpose ... ... ... ... ..... instances, the suggestion made by the association contributed to road safety, so that the association served the needs of the society at large and not merely of the motorists. The case would, therefore, fall within the scope of the general principle enunciated in the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Andhra Chamber of Commerce 1965 55 ITR 722, which has been reaffirmed in the latest decision mentioned above. The assessee would, thus, be an association established for the advancement of objects of general public utility. As it has been found that the assessee did not carry on any activity for profit and as the profit motive is not the dominant object of the assessee-association, it has to follow that the assessee-association would fall within the scope of the exemption under s. 11. The result is that the first question is answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. Both the questions are answered accordingly. There will, however, be no order as to costs.
-
1980 (1) TMI 34 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Development Allowance, Reassessment ... ... ... ... ..... ce was designed was to allow the replanting of tea bushes in cases where the assessee grew tea and also manufactured it. If the assessee merely grew tea and did not manufacture them, the income earned by it by the sale of green tea is not likely to come into the process of assessment under the Central Income-tax Act. The legislature cannot be taken to have intended to give a benefit which is not likely to come within the purview of an assessment under the Central enactment. Therefore, it is necessary to construe the word and only as a conjunctive and not as a disjunctive. Growing tea and manufacturing it are cumulative conditions. In the present case, there is no dispute about the fact that the assessee did not manufacture any tea and, therefore, it is not eligible for the allowance granted under s. 33A. The second question has, therefore, to be answered in the affirmative and in favour of the revenue. The revenue will be entitled to its costs. Counsel s fee Rs. 500 one set.
-
1980 (1) TMI 33 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e with an eye on the realisation of profits from the sale of property and was, therefore, not an adventure in the nature of trade. The case on facts bears no resemblance to the case on hand. Having considered the totality of the circumstances we are of opinion that the purchase of land and the sale thereof as plots during the relevant years constituted an adventure in the nature of trade and the profit from sales was liable to be taxed in each year as business income. For the reasons given above, we answer the questions as below Question No. 1 The land at the time of purchase was agricultural land but it was sold in plots for building purposes and the income from sales was assessable to tax as business income. Questions Nos. 2 and 3 The surplus amounts realised from the sale of plots constituted income from an adventure in the nature of trade and not return of capital investment. The amounts were taxable as business income of the assessee. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
1980 (1) TMI 32 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Business Expenditure ... ... ... ... ..... 1 ITC 125 (Bom) that an expenditure incurred by the company as under-writing commission pal in connection with an issue of preference shares by the company was of capital nature. Referring to this decision the Supreme Court pointed out in India Cements Ltd. v. CIT 1966 60 ITR 52, at page 61, that though the Bombay High Court was wrong in relying, for arriving at this conclusion upon the case of Texas Land and Mortgage Company v. Holtham 1894 3 TC 255 (QB), the conclusion itself was correct. It was pointed out that obtaining capital by the issue of shares was different from obtaining amounts by the issue of debentures. It is thus clear that the expenditure incurred by an assessee-company in its attempt to raise additional share capital for the company would be capital in nature. We, therefore, answer the question referred to us in the negative and against the assessee. As the assessee has failed he will pay the costs of the reference to the respondent, which we fix at Rs. 300.
-
1980 (1) TMI 31 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Charitable Trust, Exemptions ... ... ... ... ..... . In the present case, the moment the credit entries had been made in the name of the trust, the amount, subject-matter of the gift, would be deemed to have been put in possession of the buyer as the firm henceforth would be holding money only as a debtor or on behalf of and for the benefit of the trust. The fact that the amount has been shown as recoverable in the balance-sheet of the trust would further show that the parties had agreed to the arrangement that the amount shall be allowed to remain with the firm till it was demanded and paid to the trust. We are fortified in our view by another Division Bench decision of this court in Balimal Nawal Kishore v. CIT 1966 62 ITR 669 (Punj) and the Supreme Court decision in CED v. Kamlavali 1979 120 ITR 456, where a gift of The cash made through debit and credit entries in the accounts books was upheld. Consequently, the question in both the references referred to above is answered in the affirmative. No costs. DHILLON J.-I agree.
-
1980 (1) TMI 30 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Rectification, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... use. As jewellery even for personal use has been excluded from the exemption, the assessee cannot now turn round and say that they are wearing apparel and, therefore, there is a debatable issue. We have to look into the record to see if there is a debatable issue. The assessee cannot at this stage create a fresh dispute, and rely on it as a debatable point outside the scope of rectification. We, therefore, see no merit in the contention of the assessee. The question referred to us is, therefore, answered as follows The provisions of s. 35 of the W.T. Act could be invoked to apply the amended provisions of s. 5(1)(viii) of the W.T. Act for the assessment years 1968-69 and 1969-70 as there was a mistake apparent from the record in the order of the AAC. The result is that the Tribunal would have to direct the AAC to amend his order or by itself amend the order of the AAC, after following the proper procedure. The Commissioner will be entitled to his costs counsel s fee Rs. 500.
-
1980 (1) TMI 29 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Law Applicable To Penalty Proceedings, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... e of the Commissioner, the aforesaid question of law has been referred for the opinion of this court. In Addl. CWT v. Smt. Manjuladevi Muchhal 1979 119 ITR 43, a Division Bench of this court has held that the non-filing of the return on the 30th June of the corresponding year is a complete default and not a continuing default and the law for the purpose of penalty that would be applicable will be the law in force on such date and not one which has been brought into force on April 1, 1969. We respectfully agree with the view taken in the said decision. In the present case, the returns for all the five years became due before April 1, 1969, and, therefore, the penalty was rightly held imposable under the provisions of s. 18(1)(a) of the Act as it stood prior to its amendment on April 1, 1969. As a result of the discussion aforesaid, our answer to the question referred to us is in the affirmative and against the department. There shall be no order as to costs of this reference.
-
1980 (1) TMI 28 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Developement Rebate, Rectification ... ... ... ... ..... s own cases. just as an unqualified person could carry on such a radiological institute and have the benefit of development rebate, similarly a professional person who carries on such an institute as a commercial activity would be entitled to development rebate. The Tribunal has, in the present case, given a finding that the assessee has been carrying on the business as a commercial activity. In view of this and in the light of the above reasoning, we would answer the first question in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. The second question raises the point as to whether there was a mistake apparent from the record. Learned counsel for the Commissioner took quite some time before us in arguing this matter. This clearly goes to show that the point is a debatable one and, therefore, it is not a mistake apparent from the record. The result is that the second question is also answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1980 (1) TMI 27 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Developement Rebate ... ... ... ... ..... ss is set up and in setting up the machinery is installed in one year and used in another. So long as the first part of the provision is satisfied in the present case, we consider that the assessee would be eligible for the grant of development rebate and it is unnecessary for us to go into the second part and whether the assessee is eligible for the development rebate next year on the view that the assessee had brought into use the machinery in the next year. The second part of the provision is an additional concession and is not to be understood as if it cuts down or restricts the first part. In view of the finding in the present case that the machinery was kept ready for use in that year and could have been used but for the strike, we are satisfied that the assessee is eligible for the development rebate. The result is, the question referred to us is answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. The assessee will be entitled to its costs. Counsel fee Rs. 500.
-
1980 (1) TMI 26 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Priority Industry Tax Relief ... ... ... ... ..... of the argument there was some debate as to whether this particular passage would have validity after the judgment of the Supreme Court in 1978 113 ITR 84 (Cambay Electric Supply Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT). In the context of the pronouncement of the Supreme Court, the view taken by this court that the profits and gains must arise from the specific activities or business of generation of electricity may have to be reconsidered. As attributable to is wider than derived from , the relief is not confined only to the profits of the priority industry strictly so called. It would have a wider ambit. However, the conclusion arrived at in that case is unexceptionable because the character of the interest is different from the character of the income attributable to the priority industry. The result is that in so far as the interest income was concerned, the Tribunal acted erroneously in granting the relief. The questions are answered accordingly. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1980 (1) TMI 25 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Question Of Law ... ... ... ... ..... was the case in Manasvi 1972 86 ITR 557 (SC) that a device had been deliberately adopted by the assessee for the purpose of concealing his income. In our opinion, Anwar Ali s case 1970 76 ITR 696 (SC) ought to be followed here, as was actually done. D. M. Manasvi v. CIT has no application. A penalty was also imposed on the assessee under s. 273(a) on the ground that the assessee had filed his advance tax estimate knowing it or believing it to be untrue It is not disputed before us that this second penalty was consequential. As the assessee could not anticipate the addition of Rs. 14 lakhs to his income he could not file an advance tax estimate in conformity with the requirements of law. It cannot, therefore, be said that he filed his advance tax estimate knowing it or believing it to be untrue. In our opinion, the Tribunal was right in refusing to refer the questions raised by the revenue to this court as no questions of law arose. The applications are, therefore, dismissed,
-
1980 (1) TMI 24 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
High Court, Notice, Reassessment, Writ ... ... ... ... ..... as recorded by respondent No. 1 were otherwise valid, the conditions for reopening the said assessment under the provisions of the new Act were fulfilled. The impugned notice having been issued in or about March, 1969, was received by the appellant on the 20th March, 1969, which was within 16 years from the end of the relevant assessment year, which expired on the 31st March, 1953. Thus, in our opinion, it could not be said that the impugned notice was barred by time and the respondent No. 1 had, therefore, no jurisdiction to issue the notice on that account. On the view that we have taken it is not necessary to go into the question whether the time-limits fixed for reopening of an assessment were pure questions of limitation or were jurisdictional facts or conditions precedent or whether the court should go into that question in a writ petition or not. The appellant succeeds in this appeal and the appeal is, therefore, allowed. There will, however, be no order as to costs.
-
1980 (1) TMI 23 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Jurisdiction To Assess, Search And Seizure ... ... ... ... ..... the time-limit for finalisation of the assessment after the seizure by the I.T. authorities is ninety days. The petitioner, in order to delay the finalization of the case, before the expiry of ninety days, tried to stall the proceedings by filing these applications. When a legal right is vested in a person by the statute, mala fides attributed to him in the exercise of that right do not have much scope for argument. In view of the above discussion, as the provisions of s. 124(4) of the Act were violated and the objection of the petitioner regarding the question of the jurisdiction was not decided by the Commissioners concerned, the order, annex. W , dated 2nd of May, 1967, is vitiated and is hereby quashed. The writ petition is accepted and the Commissioners concerned shall decide the matter of jurisdiction and then the revenue shall decide the matter of s. 132(5) afresh in accordance with law. With these observations, the writ petition is accepted with no order as to costs.
-
1980 (1) TMI 22 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Income, Perquisite ... ... ... ... ..... nd 1969-70 were not perquisites under the provisions of s. 2(24)(iv) of the I.T. Act, 1961, and, therefore, the amounts could not be assessed as the income of the assessee ? In these cases, the Tribunal will have to go into the question whether there has been any benefit obtained by the assessee. If a finding is reached with reference to them that they were perquisites, the matter will have to be considered in the light of all the facts and in accordance with our decision in CIT v. P. R. Ramakrishnan 1980 124 ITR 545 (Mad) and the observations made herein. The result is that the questions in T.C. Nos. 865, 116, 124, 161 of 1976 and 68 to 70 of 1977 are answered in the negative and in favour of the revenue. The Tribunal will go into the question of quantum. As regards the other references the matter will be considered by the Tribunal in the light of all the facts and, therefore, the references are returned unanswered. There will be no order as to costs in all these tax cases.
-
1980 (1) TMI 21 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Cash Credits ... ... ... ... ..... referable to the undisclosed income of the very known or disclosed source, namely, the business, whose income had already been estimated. The ITO held that the cash credits represented income from undisclosed sources. This finding was not set aside either by the AAC or by the Tribunal. The Tribunal seems to assume that once the business income is estimated, the unexplained cash credits would be covered by the income so estimated. This assumption is not warranted by law. Without setting aside the finding of the ITO that the cash credits represented income from undisclosed sources, the Tribunal was not justified in holding that the amount of Rs. 15,300, which was added as income from undisclosed sources, was covered by the intangible additions made to the income of the assessee. For all these reasons, our answer to the question referred to us is in the negative and against the assessee. In the circumstances of the case, the parties shall bear their own costs of this reference.
-
1980 (1) TMI 20 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Charitable Purpose ... ... ... ... ..... ities of an association of this kind would reach the cross section of the public. In fact, as pointed out by the Tribunal, the facility for authoritative weighment of bullion and jewellery for a nominal charge of Re. 1 is a great benefit to the general public. The promotion of standards of behaviour of the bullion merchants towards the general public also subserves the public good. Thus, the activities of the assessee fall within the scope of the main part of the definition of s. 2(15). It is not a case where the assessee can be brought within the scope of the words not involving the carrying on of any activity for profit . There is no profit motive and whatever profit has been derived is only incidental. In the light of these findings of the Tribunal, which are not in dispute, the claim for exemption by the assessee has to succeed. The questions referred in both the references are answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1980 (1) TMI 19 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Reserves, Surtax ... ... ... ... ..... that in respect of the bad and doubtful debts, the reserve has been created by appropriation of the profits. How far this aspect impinges on the concept of reserves has not been examined. The Tribunal has first to decide whether there has been any creation of the reserves and whether the reserves would qualify for consideration under the C.(P.) S.T. Act. In the absence of a finding on these aspects, we have to return the reference unanswered and the Tribunal will go into the question de novo in the light of all the facts and in accordance with law. It may be pointed out that the company itself has given up this manner of adjustment of the stock-in-trade for the year ended March 31, 1970 (relevant for the assessment year 1971-72) and later when M /s. Fraser and Ross became the auditors in the place of M/s. Ferguson and Co. The Tribunal will take into account all these aspects. The reference on the first question is thus returned unanswered. There will be no order as to costs.
....
|
