|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 161 to 180 of 195 Records
-
1987 (12) TMI 35 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Refund - Duty paid under mistake of law - Writ jurisdiction ... ... ... ... ..... lector immediately directed refund of so much amount as was permissible under Section 11B. The refusal to refund remaining amount was due to bar of limitation. It is being accepted now. Therefore, the department cannot be said to have committed any default for which it should be directed to pay interest. Ratio in Dulichand Shree Lal is not very helpful. Compulsive payment or payment under threat of action has not been pleaded or established. Collection became without authority of law after it was found to be covered in the notification, exempting clearance for home consumption. The collection, therefore, was not bad initially. In the circumstances there appears no justification to direct payment of interest. 8. In the result this petition succeeds and is allowed. A direction is issued to opposite parties to refund the duty collected during 1983-84 and 1984-85 on clearance for home consumption after deducting the amount already paid. The petitioner shall be entitled to costs.
-
1987 (12) TMI 34 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Paper - Manufacture - Adjudicating - Refund - Duty collected without authority of law ... ... ... ... ..... peal. 6. Shri Sathe urged that the learned Single Judge directed the Department to make refund of duty collected as a result of the order dated February 16, 1981 but did not give any directions in respect of duty paid prior to that date. It is open for the respondents to approach the Department by making requisite refund application and as the duty recovery was without any authority of law, the Department would be bound to repay the same. As the respondents have not filed any cross-appeal or cross-objections to the judgment delivered by the learned Single Judge, it is not permissible to give any directions in that connection in the present proceedings. The respondents have also not stated in the petition as to the period from which the duty was paid and in respect of which clearances said duty was paid. All this would require investigation by the Department and that exercise is not possible in the present proceedings. 7. Accordingly, appeal fails and is dismissed with costs.
-
1987 (12) TMI 33 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Refund - Duty collected without the authority of law ... ... ... ... ..... ger in dispute that the duty was recovered without any authority of law and it would be most inequitable to direct the petitioners to furnish Bank guarantee merely because the Revenue may consider to approach the Supreme Court. Mr. Desai, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, submits that the Department should be directed to make the refund within a stipulated period and, in my judgment, the request is proper and the Department should refund the amount within a period of three months from the date of the decision. 9. Accordingly, I will make the rule absolute in terms of prayer (a)(i) and (a)(iii) and part of prayer (b) commencing from the words and compelling them to refund till the end of the prayer. I will direct the respondents to make the refund within a period of three months from the date of the order. 10. The papers now be placed before the Division Bench for passing the final orders. Cost of hearing before me to be determined by the Division Bench.
-
1987 (12) TMI 32 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the two Proclamations of Emergency were validly issued or not ?
Whether each of the said Proclamations had ceased to be in force at the expiration of two months from the date on which each of them was issued as the resolutions of the Houses of Parliament approving each of them had not been published in the Official Gazette?
Held that:- The resolutions of the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha approving the two resolutions have been duly published in the official reports of the two Houses of Parliament. This ought to meet the contention of the petitioner that any public Act or resolution which affects public life should be given due publicity. We also hold that the production of the Lok Sabha Debates and of the Rajya Sabha Debates containing the proceedings of the two Houses of Parliament relating to the period between the time when the resolutions were moved in each of the two Houses of Parliament and the time when the resolutions were duly adopted amounts to proof of the said resolutions. The court is required to take judicial notice of the said proceedings under section 57 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. We are, therefore, of the view that the two Proclamations of Emergency were kept in force by virtue of the resolutions passed by the Houses of Parliament until they were duly revoked by the two Proclamations which were issued by the Vice-President acting as President of India in the year 1977. Since the two Proclamations of Emergency were in force when the House of the People (Extension of Duration) Act, 1976 (Act 30 of 1976), was passed, its validity cannot be questioned. The Lok Sabha passed the Finance Act, 1976, during the extended period of its duration and, therefore, the validity of the Finance Act, 1976, also cannot be questioned. In view of the foregoing, this petition should fail and it is accordingly dismissed.
-
1987 (12) TMI 31 - SUPREME COURT
Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the finding of the Tribunal based on the ratio of the case decided by the House of Lords in Lynall v. Inland Revenue Commissioners [1971 (7) TMI 155 - House of Lords Court] and basing the valuation of the shares of Bakubhai and Ambalal Ltd., London, on its balance-sheet as at March 31, 1963, instead of March 31, 1964, is bad in law ?
Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in accepting the valuation of the shares as returned by the assessee and deleting ₹ 27,360 added by the Gift-tax Officer, under section 15(3) of the Gift-tax Act, 1958 ?
Held that:- The correct principle of valuation applicable to a given case is question of law.
But the matter is already two-and-a-half decades old. The gift was in the year 1964. The total gift-tax as now assessed is ₹ 5,661. Upon a fresh determination of the value of the shares adopting the somewhat intricate processes inherent in the " profit-method " of valuation, the difference in the quantum of the tax might, perhaps, not be substantial. The magnitude of the mechanism for refixation of the value of the gifts and the difference in the quantum of the tax it might result in, do not bear a reasonable or sensible proportion. Having regard to the pecuniary involvement in the case, which is obviously small, we think we should not expose the parties to a fresh round of litigation.
In this view of the matter, we think the appellant should be content with the declaration of the law on the matter, without disturbing the valuation made by the Tribunal and approved by the High Court, though the principle adopted is not supportable in law. We, therefore, decline to interfere in the matter. The valuation is, therefore, left undisturbed.
-
1987 (12) TMI 30 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... ew of decision of this court in CIT v. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation 1986 1 SCR 570 ; 1986 159 ITR 1 and hence the appeal will stand dismissed. There will be no order as to costs. Appeal dismissed.
-
1987 (12) TMI 29 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Search And Seizure ... ... ... ... ..... formation and they should assure and reassure themselves about the truthfulness and correctness of information before taking any action violating the privacy of a citizen. There is nothing in this case to show mala fides on the part of the departmental authorities nor was it argued for the petitioner but if grater care had been taken, then the abortive bid made by the Department against the petitioner, would have been averted. When the bank accounts were not precisely disclosed and when information about rupees twenty lakhs was nothing but a guesswork of the informer, the Director of Inspection should have put his foot down on that and should not have endorsed the action suggested by the Assistant Director. BY THE COURT For reasons stated in our separate orders, this petition succeeds and is allowed. The authorisation warrant issued by the Director of Inspection under section 132(1) and the restraint order under section 132(3) are quashed. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
1987 (12) TMI 28 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Assessment Order ... ... ... ... ..... -86 and pass such other further order or orders as this hon ble court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case and render justice. The respondent seems to have stipulated for the payment of taxes due for the grant of certified copy asked for by the petitioner. This is not proper. The respondent is directed to grant the certified copy to the petitioner as asked for by him within a week s time from today. This writ petition is ordered in the above terms. No costs.
-
1987 (12) TMI 27 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Change Of Law, Penalty ... ... ... ... ..... stant Commissioner of Wealth-tax had no jurisdiction to impose penalty under section 18(1)(c) of the Wealth-tax Act after the amendment of section 18(3) with effect from April 1, 1976, by the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975. Relying on the two decisions cited by learned counsel for the assessee as aforesaid, we hold that the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner had no jurisdiction to levy penalties and hence his penalty orders were illegal and without jurisdiction when the proceedings to levy penalties under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for the relevant assessment years were initiated by the Income-tax Officer before April 1, 1976, but the reference to the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner under section 274(2) of the Act was made by the Income-tax Officer after April 1, 1976. Accordingly our answer to the question of law under reference is in the affirmative and against the Department. Reference answered accordingly. The parties shall bear their own costs of this reference.
-
1987 (12) TMI 26 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... resaid, an estimate was made. It does not appear to us that in view of the material on record, the estimate was unreasonable. An estimate is not expected to be mathematically accurate. In any estimate, there is always an element of guess. It cannot be said that the estimate was made without any material whatsoever though the materials available were scanty. We also take note of the fact that the taxable amounts involved are not substantial. In one year, 80 of half of Rs. 31,380 and in the other year, 80 of half of Rs. 26,475 would be taxed as royalty. We are not inclined to prolong the proceedings and initiate a detailed enquiry by remanding the matter. For the above reasons, we answer question No. 1 referred to us in the negative and in favour of the Revenue. Learned advocate for the assessee did not press question No. 2 and as such we refrain from answering the same. The reference is disposed of accordingly. There will be no order as to costs. SHYAMAL KUMAR SEN J.-I agree.
-
1987 (12) TMI 25 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Annual Value, Deduction, Income From House Property ... ... ... ... ..... same. In bringing about amendment with effect from April 1, 1985, the law recognised that an assessee is entitled to claim deduction by way of municipal taxes in respect of property, irrespective of the previous years in which the liability to pay such taxes was incurred by the owner according to the method of accounting regularly employed by him. The emphasis is, therefore, on the incurring of a liability by the assessee rather than on the actual payment. In our opinion, the effect of the amendment, with effect from April 1, 1985, is declaratory of the law as existing up to and including 1984-85. In that view, we hold that an assessee is entitled to claim by way of deduction, in the determination of his property income under section 23, the municipal taxes payable in respect of the property ...... the taxes levied during the respective accounting year under consideration. In view of our above finding, we answer the reference accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
1987 (12) TMI 24 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Appeal To Tribunal ... ... ... ... ..... o the appeal. The Tribunal will expedite the hearing of the appeal and dispose of it within two months from the receipt of the writ of this court. In the meantime, so far as the prosecutions launched by the Department being Criminal Case Nos. 213 and 214 of 1987, pending before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad, are concerned, the learned Magistrate will not pronounce the final order till the disposal of the appeal by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal will communicate the decision taken by it in the appeal to the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad, to enable him to proceed further in the matter. Rule is made absolute accordingly with no order as to costs. Before we part, we make it clear that since we have confined ourselves to the relief in paragraph 28(B) and (E) of the petition, it will be open to the petitioner to pursue such remedy as is available to it in so far as the Amnesty Scheme is concerned.
-
1987 (12) TMI 23 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Representative Assessee, Trust Whether Charitable, Trustee ... ... ... ... ..... ses. To support this conclusion, the decisions in the case of Trustees of Gordhandas Govindram Family Charity Trust v. CIT 1973 88 ITR 47 (SC) and in the case of Abdul Sathar Haji Moosa Sail Dharmastapanam 1973 91 ITR 5 (SC) had been relied upon. Clause 10 of exhibit P-3 gives to the managing trustee the final voice in all matters concerning the utilisation of the income and disposal of the trust properties. It is open to the managing trustee to utilise the entire income for the maintenance and meeting the needs of any of the relatives of the donor at the absolute discretion of the managing trustee. Besides, the individual shares of the persons on whose behalf the income is received are also indeterminate. We are, therefore, of the view that the conclusion arrived at and the reasoning adopted by the respondent in construing exhibit P-1 as not a charitable trust are valid and unassailable. We do not, therefore, see any merit in this writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed.
-
1987 (12) TMI 22 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Interest, Notice, Waiver Or Reduction ... ... ... ... ..... n 139 with delay, it will be a question merely of satisfying the relevant authority that there are circumstances calling for a reduction or waiver of the interest. If an opportunity to do so has not been made available to the assessee before the order levying interest is made, it will be open to the assessee to apply to the Income-tax Officer after such order has been made to show that a reduction or waiver of interest is justified. In the light of the above decision of the Supreme Court, we hold that it is not mandatory on the part of the Income-tax Officer to issue notice and afford an opportunity to the assessee, before levy of interest. It is sufficient if in opportunity is afforded to the assessee, to move for waiver or reduction of the interest payable even after the assessment is made. The decision of a learned single judge of this court in E.J. Peter and Co. v. ITO 1976 KLT 582, is also in accord with this view. There is no merit in this writ appeal. It is dismissed.
-
1987 (12) TMI 21 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Capital Gains On Purchased Goodwill, Depreciation ... ... ... ... ..... has to be utilised for payment of instalments. The court has not left any other course open to the receiver. The receiver has to make appropriation only in one manner and that is towards payment of instalments. The court has not thought it fit to retain any control about disbursements to be made out of the amount of rent and mesne profits to be realised by the receiver. Thus, the amounts which the receiver receives under the decree are required to be utilised for only one purpose, viz., payment of instalments. For all these reasons, it can be said that a charge has been created over rent and mesne profits to be realised from the mortgaged property in favour of the judgment creditors and the judgment-creditors cannot be said to be creditors of equal degree and the State dues cannot have priority over the right of the judgment-creditors. In the result, this revision application fails and is dismissed. Rule is discharged with no order as to costs. Interim relief stands vacated.
-
1987 (12) TMI 20 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Capital Gains On Purchased Goodwill, Depreciation ... ... ... ... ..... cquisition of that goodwill would represent the income chargeable under the head Capital gains . Counsel for the Revenue submits that the amendments to the relevant provisions which came into effect on April 1, 1988, are clarificatory of the law as it always has been and should be regarded as applicable at all material times, and, where the cost of acquisition was unknown, it should be taken to be nil, and the capital gains computed accordingly. Likewise, the cost of improvement, he says, must in all cases be taken to be nil. This is a matter which does not arise from the present question, and we express no view upon it. Accordingly, we answer question No. 1 in the affirmative, that is, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. We direct the parties to bear their respective costs in this tax referred case. A copy of this judgment under the seal of the High Court and the signature of the Registrar shall be forwarded to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench.
-
1987 (12) TMI 19 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... edule of List I to the 7th Schedule to the Constitution. They also relied upon the Supreme Court decision in C. .4. Abraham v. ITO 1961 41 ITR 425, in support of their conclusion that penalty was only an additional tax and nothing more. Learned counsel for the Department has also relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in Vrindavan Goverdhan Lal Pittie v. Union of India 1986 160 ITR 318, in which the validity of section 18(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, providing for penalty in filing the return of wealth was upheld. In the light of the decisions of several High Courts referred to above which have upheld the validity of the provisions of section 140A(3) of the Act, which I choose to follow, the writ petitions have to be dismissed for the same reasons. Even on facts, the reason for the failure to pay advance tax put forward by the assessee, namely, that there was confusion about the status, cannot be accepted. Therefore, the writ petitions are accordingly dismissed.
-
1987 (12) TMI 18 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
Notice, Reassessment ... ... ... ... ..... dition for the initiation of the proceeding that the reasons which induced the Commissioner to accord sanction to proceed under section 34 must also be communicated to the assessee. Section 34 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, which came up for consideration in the above case is in pari materia with section 147 of the present Act. Therefore, the said observation would equally apply when the Income-tax Officer exercises his jurisdiction under section 147 and, consequently, it must be held that the Income-tax Officer did not commit any error of law in not communicating the reasons to the assessee. The second submission of learned counsel is also devoid of any merit. In the result, the writ petitions fail and are accordingly dismissed. The interim orders staying further proceedings in the matter of assessment are vacated. Since the matter has been unduly delayed in this court, the Assessing Officer may expedite the hearing of assessment proceedings. K. P. MOHAPATRA J.-I agree.
-
1987 (12) TMI 17 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Interest On Refund ... ... ... ... ..... express or implied prohibition in section 244 of the Act that interest shall not be paid on interest collected under section 220(2) of the Act. If the interest collected under section 220(2) of the Act also becomes refundable along with other amounts on the passing of an order in appeal and section 240 envisages refund of such amount, the interest refunded is also eligible to interest under section 244 of the Act. The Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding, on a reference to sections 220(2), 240 and 244 of the Act, that refund of the interest collected under section 220(2) is an amount coming within the purview of section 240 and so eligible for the interest contemplated by section 244(1) of the Act. We, therefore, answer the question referred to us in the affirmative, against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. A copy of this judgment under the seal of this court and the signature of the Registrar shall be sent to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench.
-
1987 (12) TMI 16 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Firm, Income From Undisclosed Sources ... ... ... ... ..... d deserves acceptance. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the judgment dated February 1, 1984, delivered by the learned single judge in Writ Petition No. 982 of 1980 (Praveen D. Desai v. ITO 1984 149 ITR 187) is set aside and the order dated April 12, 1979, passed by the Income-tax Officer under section 179 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is upheld, but subject to the direction that the Income-tax Officer would redetermine the amount of arrears of tax due from the company after hearing objections to be filed by the respondent within four weeks from today and bearing in mind that the respondent would not be liable for arrears of tax due for the assessment year 1961-62. The Department is also directed to enforce the order personally against the respondent only in case the amount of arrears of tax cannot be realised in the proposed auction to be held on December 21, 1987, or on any adjourned date thereafter. In the circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs.
....
|
