|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 281 to 300 of 305 Records
-
1994 (12) TMI 25 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Amalgamating Company, Chargeable Profits, Company Surtax, Computation Of Capital, General Reserve, Previous Year
-
1994 (12) TMI 24 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
A Firm, High Court, Territorial Jurisdiction ... ... ... ... ..... h the aid of undisclosed income (B) The petitioner shall file necessary undertaking before this court as well as before respondent No. 3 to the effect that the petitioner would pay income-tax, if required to be paid on the value of the said gold ornaments, if it is added to the income of the petitioner or respondent No. 4 and (C) The petitioner and respondent No. 4 shall file affidavits before respondent No. 3 stating that the seized gold ornaments belong to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner and respondent No. 4 would file affidavits before respondent No. 3 on or before January 3, 1995, stating that the seized gold ornaments belong to the petitioner. Mr. Thakore, learned counsel, submits that the operation of the impugned order be stayed for a period of ten days. However, considering the fact that the interests of the Revenue is fully protected by the bank guarantee encashable by the respondent-authorities, this request is rejected.
-
1994 (12) TMI 23 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Advance Tax, Compulsory Deposit Scheme, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... able with interest thereon at any time after the expiry of five years from the end of the year in which the deposit had been made. Repayment could be made earlier also in case of genuine hardship. On a consideration of the above provisions of the Compulsory Deposit Scheme, 1963, it is clear that the amount standing to the credit of the assessee in the Compulsory Deposit Scheme Account falls within the expression property of every description movable or immovable used in section 2(e) of the Act. It does not fall in any of the exclusions specified therein. That being the position, there is no reason as to why the amount standing to the credit of the assessee under the Compulsory Deposit Scheme Account should not be treated as an asset within the meaning of section 2(e) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. In the premises, we answer question No. 2 referred to us in the negative and in favour of the Revenue. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.
-
1994 (12) TMI 22 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Assessment Year, Cash System, Mercantile System, Provision For Gratuity ... ... ... ... ..... for his own convenience that the assessee decided to claim deduction of the amount of gratuity that might be payable to its employees in future. The assessee himself having reversed its decision and written back the provision, no liability enforceable in law survived. In view of the above, we are of the clear opinion that the Tribunal was right in holding that the provisions of section 41(1) of the Act are attracted to the facts of the present case, and the amount of Rs. 1,19,564, which was written off in the year under consideration and credited to the profit and loss account of the assessee for the said assessment year, being the provision for gratuity liability claimed and allowed as deduction in the assessment year 1972-73, has to be added as the assessee s income in the year under consideration. The question referred to us is, therefore, answered in the affirmative and in favour of the Revenue. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, we make no order as to costs.
-
1994 (12) TMI 21 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Accrual Of Income, Income Tax Act, Supreme Court ... ... ... ... ..... actually in the subsequent year. Thus, the deduction was allowed by the court not because of mere future liability or matching liability, as learned counsel has urged before us, but because, in fact, such payment was made by the assessee in that case though the payment was made in the following year. In other words, without making actual payment, the debit was not permitted. In the present case, the assessee-company wants to keep the amount but wants to treat it as otherwise than a trading receipt on the basis that it would be liable in the future to make payment of the said amount. The Supreme Court has not permitted this method. It will thus be seen that the legal position as well as authority are totally against the assessee in the facts and circumstances of the case. The view of the Tribunal was thus erroneous. We, therefore, answer the reference in the negative, i.e., in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. In the circumstances, however, no order as to costs.
-
1994 (12) TMI 20 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Assessment Year, House Rent Allowance, Income Tax Act, Law Applicable To Assessment, Retrospective Effect
-
1994 (12) TMI 19 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
High Court, Income Tax Act, Offences And Prosecution, Taxing Statutes ... ... ... ... ..... ent for 15 days. Accordingly, before depositing the fine as ordered, the respondents in each one of these cases shall (i) furnish a statement of the alleged actual amount of deposit or loans as the case may be (ii) names and addresses of the concerned partners and their liability to pay the same and (iii) their share of contribution to the total amount. A copy of this statement shall be furnished to the complainant for verification and thereafter after hearing the complainant the same shall be accepted by the court. In the result, all these criminal revision applications are partly allowed. The impugned orders imposing sentence of fine on the partners of the firm are hereby ordered to be quashed and set aside. So far as the accused firms are concerned, they are directed to pay the fine equal to the amount of loan or deposit in question on or before March 31, 1995. The amount of fine to be deposited by each of the accused firms as stated in detail in the respective complaints.
-
1994 (12) TMI 18 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Agricultural Land, Income Tax Act, Question Of Law ... ... ... ... ..... es. In our view, the explanation cannot be accepted as the land was not actually used for agricultural purposes for the appellant or his parent. The appellant has also not shown that the land was purchased for the use of agricultural purposes . The said finding recorded by the Tribunal is a finding of fact. Once the land in question has not been proved to have been used for agricultural purposes the benefit of section 54B was rightly not given to the petitioner, hence, we do not find that the said question arises in this case. However, we do feel that the following question arises for consideration by the Tribunal Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the Tribunal was justified in disallowing the loss of Rs. 1,92,106 claimed on account of damage of the goods ? The Tribunal is, therefore, directed to draw up a statement of the case and refer the aforesaid question for the opinion of this court. The present application is partly allowed. Costs on parties.
-
1994 (12) TMI 17 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Assessment Year, Change In Previous Year, Financial Year, Income Tax Act, Public Limited Company
-
1994 (12) TMI 16 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Enduring Advantage, Expenditure Incurred, Revenue Expenditure ... ... ... ... ..... y, having regard to the business realities. In a given case, the test of enduring benefit might break down...... It was held in the above case The purpose of the outlay , its intended object and effect , considered in a commonsense way, having regard to the business realities, are more relevant factors for determining whether a particular outlay is capital or revenue. In a given case, if the situation so requires, the test of enduring benefit might even break down under the weight of these considerations. Applying the above principles to the facts of the present case, we are of the clear opinion that the expenditure incurred by the assessee was a revenue expenditure and not an expenditure of capital nature and the Tribunal was justified in holding so and allowing the deduction to the assessee in the computation of its income on account thereof. In view of the above, the question referred to us is answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. No order as to costs.
-
1994 (12) TMI 15 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Income Tax Act, Taxing Statutes ... ... ... ... ..... rinciple of beneficial or liberal interpretation cannot be applied to stretch or pervert the clear language of an enactment. Principles or rules of interpretation are not rules of law. They serve as guides in the interpretation of provisions of law which are vague or ambiguous. They are merely aids to construction or interpretation of statutes and should not be treated as masters. They can be discarded or ignored, if the facts and circumstances so require, and new rules of interpretation may be evolved as and when necessary to meet new or unique situations. Having regard to the above discussion and the reasons set out above, we are of the clear opinion that the assessee-company is not entitled to development rebate on the basis of the special provision contained in section 16(c) of the Finance Act, 1974. The question referred to us is, therefore, answered in the negative and in favour of the Revenue. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, we make no order as to costs.
-
1994 (12) TMI 14 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Income Tax Act, Taxing Statutes ... ... ... ... ..... ct. The power to assess or reassess such income or recompute the loss or depreciation allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned conferred by section 147 of the Act, when exercised, cannot be interpreted to mean an assessment under section 143 or section 144 of the Act, as the case may be, depending upon the extent of co-operation extended by the assessee. By reason of section 148 of the Act, the other provisions of the Act are made applicable for making an assessment or a revised assessment, as the case may be, under section 147 of the Act. But, from that, it is not possible to infer that where an assessment or revised assessment is made under section 147 of the Act, it is one falling under section 143 or section 144 of the Act, as the case may be. In the light of the foregoing discussion, the question referred to us is answered in the negative and in favour of the Revenue. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.
-
1994 (12) TMI 13 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Firm Consisting, Income Tax Act, Two Partners, Withdrawal Of Development Rebate ... ... ... ... ..... guished on the same being taken over by and vested in the firm of Asmaco Plastic Industries , there was transfer of the said machineries by the assessee-firm to the firm of Asmaco Plastic Industries within the period of eight years of acquisition or installation thereof by the assessee-firm within the meaning of section 34(3)(b) of the Act. Merely because two of the partners in the firm of Asmaco Plastic Industries have been the same as in the assessee-firm, it was neither a case of mere admission of a new partner in the assessee-firm, nor of the firm of Asmaco Plastic Industries being another unit of the assessee-firm. In the facts of the case, we hold that the development rebate on the said machineries earlier allowed to the assessee-firm was justifiably withdrawn. We find no infirmity in the order passed by the Tribunal in this regard. We answer the question in the affirmative, that is, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
1994 (12) TMI 12 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Income Tax Act, Investment Allowance ... ... ... ... ..... t the fact that calcined petroleum coke was a different commodity and was of little consequence. Reference may also be made in this connection to the decision of the Supreme Court in State of Tamil Nadu v. Mahi Traders 1989 73 STC 228, where it was held that the entry hides and skins covers all hides and skins, whether raw or dressed. In the light of the above discussion and following the ratio of the decisions of the Supreme Court referred to above, we are of the clear opinion that carbon dioxide manufactured by the assessee is nothing but a product of carbon and hence falls within item No. 25 of the Ninth Schedule to the Act. The assessee would, therefore, be entitled to investment allowance under section 32A(1) of the Act in respect of machinery used in the business of manufacture of the same. Accordingly, the question referred to us is answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. This reference is disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
1994 (12) TMI 11 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Development Allowance, Expenditure Incurred, Weighted Deduction ... ... ... ... ..... were of the opinion that the items in question did not qualify to be termed as plant . The assessee is aggrieved by the above finding. According to him, all those items constitute plant . We have considered the submission of the assessee. We, however, find it difficult to accept the same for two reasons. First, the character of an item is essentially a question of fact in regard to which the finding of the Tribunal is final unless it is held to be perverse. Second, even if some of the items were used in carrying on the business, they were used more as a part of the premises or place upon which the business was carried on. They more appropriately satisfy the premises test . Hence, these items cannot qualify as plant . In view of this opinion of ours, we answer question No. 2 in the negative, i.e., against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. This reference is disposed of accordingly. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we make no order as to costs.
-
1994 (12) TMI 10 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Development Allowance, Expenditure Incurred, Weighted Deduction ... ... ... ... ..... red wholly and exclusively on-- (vii) travelling outside India for the promotion of the sale outside India of such goods, services or facilities, including travelling outward from, and return to, India. From a plain reading of this clause, it is clear that it deals with expenditure incurred on travelling outside India for the purposes mentioned therein, i.e., travelling outward from and return to India and not vice versa. It does not deal with expenses incurred on travelling from abroad to India. In the instant case, the expenditure in question was incurred on travelling of Mr. W. P. Kirkwood from Cleveland to Bombay and back. This expenditure evidently does not fall within sub-clause (vii) of clause (b) of section 35B of the Act. The Tribunal was, therefore, not justified in holding that the assessee was entitled to weighted deduction in respect thereof. In the premises, we answer the question referred to us in the negative and in favour of the Revenue. No order as to costs.
-
1994 (12) TMI 9 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Arbitration Award, Capital Expenditure, Firm Consisting, Revenue Expenditure ... ... ... ... ..... the assessee to become the sole owner of the business hitherto run in partnership with him. It was not a payment made for the purpose of protecting the business as contended by the assessee and described in the cash book of the assessee. Such payment, in our view, cannot be regarded as a revenue expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of running the business. In truth and substance, it is in the nature of capital expenditure, because the real purpose of this payment was to acquire the interest of the said Mr. E. F. Mehta in the business of the said firm, which was a profit-yielding asset. The said payment was, therefore, a payment for acquiring a profit-yielding asset and consequently in the nature of capital expenditure which is not allowable as a deduction under section 37 of the Act. Hence, we answer the question referred to us in the affirmative and in favour of the Revenue. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, we make no order as to costs.
-
1994 (12) TMI 8 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Association Of Persons, House Property ... ... ... ... ..... since the expression belong would include cases where an interest less than full ownership exists, exemption under section 33(1)(n) would be admissible in respect of a house belonging to the firm. We fail to understand why, despite its above opinion which was communicated to all concerned by its circular, a stance contrary to and inconsistent with that view has been taken in a similar controversy arising under the Wealth-tax Act. In our opinion, the above view, applies mutatis mutandis to interpretation of section 5(1)(iv) of the Act. For the reasons set out above, we are of the clear opinion that the assessee-Hindu undivided family was entitled to exemption under section 5(1)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, in respect of the house properties of Messrs. Mohatta Bros. Property and Co. as a co-owner. Hence, the question referred to us is answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we make no order as to costs.
-
1994 (12) TMI 7 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Business Expenditure, Compensation On Termination, Revenue Expenditure, Revenue Receipt, Surtax Liability, Tax Liability, Weighted Deduction
-
1994 (12) TMI 6 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Arbitration Award, Capital Expenditure, Firm Consisting, Revenue Expenditure ... ... ... ... ..... nt. The vacancy allowance should be at five per cent. The value of the land should be taken at Rs. 1,00,000 per ground. Thus, the Tribunal directed the Income-tax Officer, to recompute the value of those two properties on the basis of the above findings and reassess the shares of each of the assessees. The reasons given by the Tribunal for arriving at the abovesaid conclusions are cogent and convincing. No contra materials were produced before us to vary the conclusions arrived at by the Tribunal as stated above. Therefore, we are unable to interfere with the valuation fixed by the Tribunal in respect of the abovesaid properties in the case of all the assessees in the assessment years under consideration. In that view of the matter we answer the question referred to us in the case of all the assessees in all the assessment years under consideration in the affirmative and against the Department. However, there will be no order as to costs. Counsel s fee is fixed at Rs. 1,000.
....
|
