|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 221 to 240 of 284 Records
-
1991 (8) TMI 64 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Change Of Law, Furnishing Inaccurate Particulars Of Income, Penalty ... ... ... ... ..... t is the satisfaction of the Income-tax Officer that default has been committed by the assessee which would attract the provisions relating to penalty. The crucial date, therefore, for the purpose of penalty is the date of initiation of proceedings by making a reference to the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner. This submission of learned counsel for the Revenue is not borne out from the language used in the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1970, or in the amendment itself. We are, therefore, unable to accept the same. Lastly, learned counsel for the Revenue urged that acceptance of the assessee s interpretation will result in avoidance of penalty. That may be so, but the operation of the Act has to be judged not by the object which Parliament had in mind but by the words which it had employed to effectuate the legislative intent. For the reasons given above, we answer the reference (reframed by the Division Bench of this Court) in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.
-
1991 (8) TMI 63 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Firm Registration ... ... ... ... ..... nce in the property, since she continued to be a member of the family, the unit of ceiling area was to be computed as per the provisions of the Ceiling Act. We, therefore, hold that the Tribunal committed an error in coming to the conclusion that the self-acquired property of her deceased husband, which had devolved on the assessee, became the property of the joint Hindu family. We hold that the one-half share in the separate property of Deviprasad M. Mehta which devolved on his widow, i.e., the assessee, by virtue of sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Act of 1937, became her absolute property on the coming into force of section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, and, therefore, the income from such property was assessable in the hands of the assessee. We, therefore, answer question No. 1 in the negative and in favour of the Revenue and question No. 2 in the affirmative and in favour of the Revenue. The reference stands disposed of, accordingly, with no order as to costs.
-
1991 (8) TMI 62 - DELHI HIGH COURT
False Averments In Writ Petition, Service Of Notice Of Reassessment ... ... ... ... ..... notice under section 17 of the Wealth-tax Act and because he was so authorised, the petitioner filed a return of wealth in response to the said notice. We further find that the assessments were completed by the Wealth-tax Officer under section 16(1) and without any further inquiry. Full particulars with regard to the shareholding of the petitioner were not indicated in either of the two returns, namely, for the years 1973-74 or 1974-75. For the year 1974-75, the name of the company of which the shares were held were not indicated, nor was it mentioned as to what is the basis of showing a figure of Rs. 20,000 as being the value of the shares. The petitioner had not, therefore, disclosed the primary or material facts either for the assessment year 1973-74 or 1974-75. For the aforesaid reasons, this writ petition is dismissed. In view of the false averments deliberately made by the petitioner in respect of the assessment year 1973-74, we impose compensatory costs of Rs. 5,000.
-
1991 (8) TMI 61 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Firm Registration ... ... ... ... ..... constituted under an instrument of partnership in section 26A of the Income-tax Act include not only firms which have been created by an instrument of partnership but also those which may have been created by word of mouth but have been subsequently clothed in legal form by reducing the terms and conditions of the partnership to writing. In any event, in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Wazid Ali s case 1988 169 ITR 761, the view that no registration of the firm can be made for a portion of the financial year, as taken by the Calcutta High Court in Kejriwal s case 1969 71 ITR 463, stands impliedly overruled. In this view of the matter, we hold that the assessee-firm was entitled to registration for the period from December 28, 1971, to November 6, 1972, under the deed of partnership dated December 28, 1971. The question is, therefore, answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. The reference stands disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.
-
1991 (8) TMI 60 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Assessment, Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... and Sons v. CIT 1981 129 ITR 488 (MP) K. U. Srinivasa Rao v. CWT 1985 152 ITR 128 (AP) Imam (H. S.) v. CIT 1988 171 ITR 214 (AP) and CIT v. Damoh Co-operative Marketing Society Ltd. 1984 145 ITR 572 (MP). Question No. 1 has, therefore, to be answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. As regards the question of limitation, Explanation 1 in section 153 is clearly applicable. Once it is held that the provisions of section 144B could be invoked, then the period of limitation has to be computed by applying the said Explanation and, according to Explanation 1(iv), the period of 180 days within which the assessment can be completed commences from the date on which the Assessing Officer forwards the draft order. It is admitted that, in the present case, the assessment was completed within the said period of 180 days and, therefore, question No. 2 as well has to be answered in favour of the Revenue. There will be no order as to costs. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1991 (8) TMI 59 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
In Whose Hands To Be Assessed, Income ... ... ... ... ..... law arises for our consideration in this reference. In any case, we do not see any reason to disturb the finding recorded by the Tribunal in this reference. In the result, we answer the question referred to us for our opinion, in the affirmative and against the assessee. Reference answered accordingly with no order as to costs. Before parting with this reference, we may mention that the Tribunal ought to have made separate references for each of the assessment years under reference. In other words, it should have made four references. We, therefore, direct that this common reference should be split up and there will be four separate references. We, therefore, direct that a separate reference will be registered for each assessment year. Reference for the assessment year 1972-73 shall be I. T. R. No. 109 of 1979 while references for the subsequent years shaft be registered and numbered as I. T. R. Nos. 109A, 109B and 109C of 1979. Office shall take necessary action accordingly.
-
1991 (8) TMI 58 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Appeal To AAC, Assessment ... ... ... ... ..... epends upon the nature of the appellate authority s order. Section 251(1)(a) cannot be construed as a statutory bar against the competence of the assessing authority to make a fresh order of assessment in the absence of a remand order under all situations. The power given to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to refer back the case to the assessing authority is only an aspect of the appellate power given to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. In the facts of the instant case, the assessing authority was fully within his competence to make an order of assessment in pursuance of the proceedings initiated by him earlier since his earlier order made in pursuance of the return filed by the legal representative of the deceased partner was entirely without jurisdiction. The assumption in the questions that the Income-tax Officer had became functus officio is not legally sound. The common answer to the questions referred, therefore, is in the affirmative and against the assessee.
-
1991 (8) TMI 57 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Power Under Chap. XX-C ... ... ... ... ..... t least hearing is to be given to the party who is likely to be affected by the order proposed to be passed and the order passed without giving an opportunity of being heard would be in flagrant violation of the rules of natural justice. The above principle laid down by the Division Bench squarely applies to the facts of this case. On this ground also, the impugned order has got to be set aside. In the result, the writ petition will stand allowed and the impugned order is quashed. Normally, I would have been inclined to remit the matter to the first respondent for a fresh hearing. But, taking note of the fact that the statutory time limit had run out for the first respondent to make a pre-emptive purchase, a direction is issued to the first respondent to issue a no objection certificate to the petitioner under Chapter XX-C of the Act in consonance with the principles laid down by Kanakaraj J. in Naresh M. Mehta v. Appropriate Authority 1991 188 ITR 585 (Mad). Costs Rs. 1,000.
-
1991 (8) TMI 56 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Firm, Previous Year ... ... ... ... ..... ecision of the Supreme Court in Esthuri Aswathaiah s case 1966 60 ITR 411, the assessee could not have divided its previous year into two accounting years. It is, however, open to the assessee to have its previous year as adopted by the firm during the earlier year or exercise an option to change it to be in accordance with its system of accounting. Exercise of option is a deliberate act, fully conscious of what is being done in the instant case, the assessee prepared its accounts for the two periods only because of the terms of the new deed of partnership that came into existence in April, 1980, and the technical dissolution of the earlier firm. The concept of change of previous year under section 3 of the Income-tax Act was not at all thought of by the assessee and, therefore, it cannot be held that it had exercised its option one way or the other. Consequently, we answer the question referred to us in the affirmative and against the Revenue References answered accordingly.
-
1991 (8) TMI 55 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Advance Tax, Penalty ... ... ... ... ..... fficacy and the assessee was under an obligation to file his estimate of income and pay the advance tax accordingly under section 212(3A) as the tax demanded under section 210 was far lower and section 212(3A) operated on the situation. A mere inaccuracy in the notice of demand under section 210, it was held, would not vitiate it. As the findings stand, in the instant case, the Income-tax Officer was not aware of the assessment order made by another Income-tax Officer in respect of one of the firms and thus was not in a position to amend his order made earlier under section 210(1). The assessee was presumed to have known his share in the total income of the said firm therefore, we are of the view that the assessee was obliged under section 212(3A) to file his estimate of the total income and pay the appropriate advance tax. The levy of penalty under section 273(1)(c), therefore, cannot be held as incorrect. The question is answered in the affirmative and against the assessee.
-
1991 (8) TMI 54 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Exemptions, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... of the building and then it should be allocated amongst the partners indicating the nature of assets and liabilities allotted to the share of the partner and the net wealth of the partner is to be determined by including the share so allotted, and only thereafter, the deduction under section 5(1)(iv) should be allowed, i.e., deduction should be allowed under the above section in the hands of the assessee-partner and not in the hands of the firm. We have extracted the relevant portion of the judgment of the Division Bench of this court in Tarachand Agarwalla 1989 180 ITR 234 as we do not find any scope to take a different view. As in the present three references, the same question is involved, we hold that both the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Tribunal rightly allowed the claim of the assessee in rejecting the contention of the Revenue. For the reasons stated above, we answer all the questions in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. No order as to costs.
-
1991 (8) TMI 53 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Reassessment, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... r as per para 4 of his order dated April 9, 1987. The Tribunal said that Thus, there being no finding by the Appellant Assistant Commissioner whether initiation of proceedings under section 17(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act were validly made the matter should go back to him to record finding on the above issue. It will, therefore, be clear that the Tribunal has not recorded categorical finding as to whether the initiation of the proceedings under section 17(1)(a) was valid or not or whether the Wealth-tax Officer had jurisdiction in the matter. The matter has only been remanded and we are of the opinion that the entire question is open before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and no question of law for the opinion of this court, as sought to be referred to this court which has been extracted in the earlier part of this order, arises in the present case. Consequently, we find no merit in any of the reference applications and they are hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.
-
1991 (8) TMI 52 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Appeals, Penalty, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... evy any penalty. Apart from this, there is no other effect consequent on the order of the Commissioner under section 18(2A) so far as the jurisdiction of the Wealth-tax Officer is concerned in the matter of imposition of penalty. A contrary view has, however, been taken by our court in Amrik Singh v. CWT 1988 170 ITR 656, where it was held that, in proceedings for penalty initiated under section 18(1)(a) of the Act, where the Wealthtax Officer gives effect to the order of the Commissioner passed under section 18(2A) on the application made before the Commissioner by the assessee, such order of the Wealth-tax Officer is not appealable.We are clearly bound by the judicial precedent provided by our own court and, with respect, we also prefer the view expressed therein. Both the questions referred are, consequently, answered in the negative, against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. This reference is disposed of accordingly. There will, however, be no order as to costs.
-
1991 (8) TMI 51 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... sfers of immovable properties transferred prior to September 30, 1986, as they are covered by section 269Q of Chapter XX-A of the Income-tax Act. The result is that these writ petitions deserve to be allowed and the order of reference made by the Competent Authority that the valuation of these properties be done by the Valuation Officer deserves to be quashed and the notices, annexure 2 and annexure 4, issued in consequence thereof by the Valuation Officer in both these Writ Petitions No. 1384 of 1981 and No. 1383 of 1981, deserve to be quashed. In the result, these writ petitions are allowed, the order of reference made by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, Jaipur, dated March 16, 1981, and the consequential notices issued by the Valuation Officer bearing annexures 2 and 4 in both these writ petitions, i.e., Writ Petitions Nos. 1384 of 1981 and 1383 of 1981 are hereby quashed. Both these writ petitions stand disposed of, accordingly, on merits with no order as to costs.
-
1991 (8) TMI 50 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Penalty, Revision, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... 1970-71. The Commissioner of Wealth-tax ordered the waiver of penalty, vide his order dated October 27, 1987, for the assessment year 1970-71, and declared the petition of the assessee as infructuous relating to the year 1969-70 as the Wealthtax Officer had already waived the penalty for the said assessment year. Annexures PX and PY on this record (which we understand have become final) are the copies of the applications filed by the assessee and orders passed thereon by the Commissioner of Wealth-tax. Since the penalty levied under section 18(1)(a) of the Act for late filing of return has been ordered to be waived, the order of the Commissioner of Wealth-tax passed under section 25(2) of the Act on January 16, 1979, for the relevant assessment years which gives rise to the questions of law referred to this court for opinion is rendered infructuous and cannot be said to be in operation. The questions of law referred to this court are, therefore, returned unanswered. No costs.
-
1991 (8) TMI 49 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
HUF, Literal Interpretation, Total Income ... ... ... ... ..... assessee, the income of his spouse and/or minor child can be included by applying section 64 of the Act. We are unable to accept the contention, that inasmuch as the income from the partnership firm has merged with the corpus of the Hindu undivided family, the said income from the partnership cannot be taken out while calculating the income of the individual members of the Hindu undivided family. We, therefore, reject the contention of learned counsel for the Revenue. For the reasons stated above, we hold that, by applying section 64 of the Act, income of the spouse and/or minor child of any individual in a firm carrying on business in which the individual is a partner in his representative capacity, such as karta of the Hindu undivided family, cannot be included while computing the income of such individual. In the result, we answer all the questions against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. The reference is answered accordingly. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1991 (8) TMI 48 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Agency, Export Market Development Allowance, Weighted Deduction ... ... ... ... ..... do, but the master has a further right to direct how the work is to be done. The words used in the section only indicate that the claim can be accepted if it is established that the assessee is maintaining, outside India, either a branch or office under his control or an agency understood in common parlance for the promotion of the sale outside India, of his goods, services or facilities. The commission paid by the assessee to the agents is the expense incurred by the assessee to maintain an agency outside India for the promotion of sale of the assessee s goods outside India. The assessee is, therefore, entitled to claim deduction in respect of the above payment under section 35B(1)(b)(iv) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. In the result, the question referred is answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. 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.
-
1991 (8) TMI 47 - PATNA HIGH COURT
New Industrial Undertaking ... ... ... ... ..... n of borrowed monies and debts and particularly long-term borrowings in the computation of the capital employed by a new industrial undertaking for the purposes of the tax exemption could not be said to be outside the rule-making authority conferred on the Central Board under section 80J(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and was a perfectly valid piece of subordinate legislation. In the above view of the matter, the Tribunal was not justified in law in directing the Income-tax Officer to include loans and borrowings in the capital employed for grant of relief under section 80J of the Act. Consequently, the question referred to this court is answered in the negative, i.e., against the assessee and in favour of the Department. In the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. Let a copy of this judgment be transmitted to the Assistant Registrar, Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna, in terms of section 260 of the Act. B. C. BASAK C. J. -I agree.
-
1991 (8) TMI 46 - PATNA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... nal was not sustainable on the ground that the finding of fact is based on irrelevant materials or that the finding of fact has been arrived at by ignoring the relevant materials. Nothing has been placed on record to show that the finding of fact of the Tribunal is perverse in the sense that, on the facts of the case, no reasonable man can arrive at a finding at which the Tribunal has arrived. In this view of the matter, the finding of the Tribunal appears to be a finding of fact and no question of law arises out of the impugned order of the Tribunal for a reference under the provisions of section 256 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. In my view, the reference itself is incompetent and, accordingly, rejected. Under the circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs. Let a copy of this judgment be transmitted to the Assistant Registrar, Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna, in terms of section 260 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. B. C. BASAK C. J. -I agree.
-
1991 (8) TMI 45 - PATNA HIGH COURT
Exemptions, Industrial Undertaking, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... ion under section 5(1)(xxxii) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, in the case of the assessee relating to the assessment year 1974-75 ? Whether the exemption mentioned in section 5(1)(xxxii) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, extended to the land and building forming part of an industrial undertaking pertaining to the firm ? This court, on an elaborate consideration of the questions, by referring to the different authorities, has answered the said questions in favour of the assessee and against the Department. Relying on the aforesaid judgment of this court, it has to be held that the question referred in the present case has to be answered in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Department. In the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. Let a copy of this judgment be transmitted to the Assistant Registrar, Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna, in terms of section 260 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. B. C. BASAK C. J. -I agree.
....
|
