|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 301 to 320 of 339 Records
-
1997 (10) TMI 39 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Business Expenditure, Gratuity, Meaning Of Paid ... ... ... ... ..... 74-75? The first question, as reframed, is answered in the affirmative and against the Revenue. (b) Second question.---The second question is answered in the affirmative and against the Revenue. (c) Third question.---In view of the answer to questions Nos. 1 and 2, it is unnecessary to answer the third question as it relates to the assessment year 1973-74. (d) Fourth question.---The fourth question is answered in the affirmative and against the Revenue. (e) Fifth question.---Though the question refers to electricity bond, it must be taken to refer to the electricity bonds which are the approved securities. The fifth question is also answered in the affirmative and against the Revenue. (f) Sixth question.---The question does not arise out of the order of the Appellate Tribunal. (g) Seventh question.---Since the point was not argued, the question is answered in the negative and against the Revenue. However, in the circumstances of the cases, there will be no order as to costs.
-
1997 (10) TMI 38 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Business Expenditure, Curing Of Coffee, Expenditure On Foreign Travel, Wives ... ... ... ... ..... travel of its employee and the wife of the employee, and not the wife of its own partner or director. It was under these circumstances, the Tribunal took the view that when the assessee permitted such travel, in the absence of contrary evidence, it has to be taken that the wife of the chief executive had to undertake the travel for business purpose. On the basis of the above factual finding entered by the Tribunal, we do not find any merit in the contention raised by the Revenue that the Tribunal had committed an error in not following the dictum laid down by the Madras and Gujarat High Courts in the decisions referred to above. We, therefore, answer question No (i) in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. We decline to answer question No. (ii), in view of our answer to question No. (i). A copy of this judgment, under the seal of this court and the signature of the Registrar, shall be forwarded to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench.
-
1997 (10) TMI 37 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Depreciation, Motor buses ... ... ... ... ..... ted at that point of time reads as under Motor buses, motor lorries and motor taxies used in a business of running them on hire. Therefore, if the assessee is doing the business of plying motor buses/motor lorries/motor taxies, then he is entitled to 50 per cent of depreciation. The paramount consideration is that he must be doing the business of running them on hire. An owner who holds a transport fleet of buses on permits for hiring them, then he will be doing a transport business and will be entitled to depreciation. Likewise, if the owner uses motor lorries for goods carriage as a regular business, then also he is entitled to depreciation. Similarly, if the owner is doing the business of giving his motor cars on hire as taxies, then also he will be entitled to get the depreciation to the extent of 50 per cent. Therefore, the view taken by the Tribunal appears to be well justified. We, therefore, answer both the questions in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.
-
1997 (10) TMI 36 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Offences And Prosecution, Question Of Fact, Powers Of High Court ... ... ... ... ..... its, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, manda mus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari, or any of them, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III and for any other purpose. It would indicate that the writs can be issued only against any person or authority referred to in article 226 of the Constitution of India including the Government, but this cannot be exercised against a court of law. As rightly argued by learned counsel, the wording of this article is that to any person, or authority, including in appropriate cases any Government , excludes the judicial forum. Therefore, I fully agree with learned counsel that these petitions under article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot be directed against the proceedings before the Judicial Magistrate, viz., Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Economic Offences). Therefore, the writ petitions are not sustainable and are dismissed accordingly, with costs of Rs. 1,000 in each petition.
-
1997 (10) TMI 35 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Actual Payment, Bonus, Law Applicable ... ... ... ... ..... the Tribunal. The Tribunal allowed the appeal by holding that the provisions of section 43B(b) were not applicable and the provision was actually made and they were told that the Labour Court had ordered them to pay the bonus. Therefore, the Tribunal allowed the claim of the assessee and set aside the orders passed by the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). In fact clause (c) of section 43B of the Income-tax Act came to be inserted for the first time with effect from April 1, 1989. Therefore, it was not in existence at that time and clause (b) was not applicable, because the bonus did not fall in the extended expression of the fund for the welfare of the employees and, accordingly, the Tribunal permitted the deduction. We have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and are of the opinion that the view taken by the Tribunal is justified. Accordingly the reference is answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee.
-
1997 (10) TMI 34 - PATNA HIGH COURT
Tax Deducted At Source, Liqour, Whole Sale ... ... ... ... ..... 44AC of the Act has been made effective from April 1, 1991. Therefore, for the purposes of transactions which had taken place prior to that day, the purchase price in such cases will include the excise duty as well. Therefore, the petitioners are certainly required as per the provisions of section 44AC of the Act to collect tax at the rate of 15 per cent. of the total purchase price, including the excise duty, cost of labelling, bottling, etc., plus surcharge at the rate of 12 per cent. on the tax so collected. Thus, having regard to the Bench decisions, which we have just noticed, there appears no merit in these cases. The authorities are quite justified in holding that wholesalers in liquor are required to collect tax at the rate of 15 per cent. of the total purchase price, including excise duty, etc., plus surcharge of 12 per cent. on the tax so collected with respect to the sales in question. In the result both the writ applications are dismissed, as devoid of any merit.
-
1997 (10) TMI 33 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Firm, Registration, Liquor Business ... ... ... ... ..... tion can be refused to a partnership firm under section 185(1) of the Income-tax Act on the ground that the person or persons holding licence to run a business in liquor had constituted such firm by adding more persons as partners without permission from the competent authority under the Punjab Excise Act and the Rules framed thereunder. A similar question was examined by this court in CIT v. Jagdish Chand Walia and Co. 1998 234 ITR 595 (I. T. R. No. 93 of 1984) decided on September 29, 1997, and it has been held that a partnership firm constituted by a licensee together with non-licensee partners to run a liquor business cannot be treated to be a genuine firm under section 185(1) of the Income-tax Act inasmuch as there was a breach of rule 7 of the Punjab Liquor Licence Rules, 1956. Following the aforesaid view, question No. 1 is answered in the negative and question No. 2 in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the Department and against the assessee in all the three years.
-
1997 (10) TMI 32 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Reference, Estimated Sales, Enhancement, Question Of Law, Survey ... ... ... ... ..... nt. Certain other variations were also explained but, in the absence of the books of account, the Assessing Officer declined to agree and preceded to make the addition of Rs. 2,26,931, on account of variation in balances. A bare perusal of the above extracted portion of the order of the Tribunal shows that it has not at all gone into the correctness of the enhanced additions made by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Therefore, the question sought to be raised by the Revenue deserves to be adjudicated by this court. Accordingly, we direct the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, to draw up a statement of case and refer the following question of law to the High Court Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in deleting addition of Rs. 17,57,239 enhanced by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ? The Tribunal is also directed to remit the record of the case to this court.
-
1997 (10) TMI 31 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Income, Sugar Manufacture, Molasses Storage Fund, Molasses Storage Tank Fund ... ... ... ... ..... t there was a diversion of income by overriding title. The question referred to us proceeds on the basis that the amount set apart should be excluded as revenue expenditure. But, the proper question would be whether the amount set apart should be excluded from the total income by diversion of income by overriding title. Accordingly, we reframe the question in both the cases as under Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the amount set apart towards the molasses storage fund account and molasses storage tank fund account should be excluded from the total income ? Inasmuch as the point raised in the question reframed by us is covered by the decision of this court in the case of CIT v. Salem Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd. 1998 229 ITR 285 following the said decision we answer the question of law referred to us and as reframed by us in the affirmative and against the Revenue. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1997 (10) TMI 30 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Agricultural Income Tax, Assessment, HUF, Partition, Condition Precedent, Prior Assessment ... ... ... ... ..... members of the family in the family arrangement. That sort of a line of enquiry has not at all been made by him. Without recording a finding on that aspect, it is not possible or plausible for us to dispose of all these matters. In this view of the matter, we are rather impelled to set aside the orders of the Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, Chepauk, Madras 600 005, setting aside the orders of the Agricultural Income-tax Officer, Dindigul, in respect of the assessment years, viz., 1985-86, 1986-87 and 1987-88, pertaining to all the assessees, viz., G. Subbaraj, Sasikala and minor Tamil Selvan, and remand the matters back to the Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, Chepauk, Madras 600 005, for fresh-disposal according to law in the light of the observations we have made as above. We are greatly indebted to Mr. C. V. Rajan, learned junior standing counsel (Income-tax) for the able assistance rendered by him. All the tax case revisions are thus disposed of. No costs.
-
1997 (10) TMI 29 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Minor, Accumulated Income, Accumulated Corpus, Trusts ... ... ... ... ..... inclusion and, therefore, the question of inclusion of the value of the contingent interest cannot be regarded as an aspect of the question. The Appellate Tribunal has recorded a finding that there is no asset at all which was liable to be included in the net wealth of the assessee. In view of the clear findings of the Tribunal, we are of the view that since the question was not raised before the Tribunal, it is not necessary to consider the question whether the contingent interest should be regarded as an asset and what would be the value of the contingent interest. We do not find any infirmity in the order of the Appellate Tribunal that the sum of Rs. 30,945 is liable to be deleted from the total wealth. Accordingly, we are of the view that the second question referred to us is liable to be answered against the Revenue. In the result, we answer both the questions of law referred to us in the affirmative and against the Revenue. However, there will be no order as to costs.
-
1997 (10) TMI 28 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Business Income ... ... ... ... ..... en as a loss of stock and the reserve created for the purpose will be allowed as a deduction to the extent of the deficiency written off. The finding of the Tribunal, as already is that the assessee has not established the loss of stock in the year of account and the assessee can claim the amount as a deduction after the Departmental enquiry finally settled as to how the loss arose and how much was the loss. In view of the specific finding of the Appellate Tribunal that loss has not arisen in the year of account, we are of the opinion that the earlier decision of this court in North Arcot District Co-operative Supply and Marketing Society Ltd. v. CIT 1987 165 ITR 623, squarely applies to the facts of this case. We do not find any reason to differ from the reasoning given by this court in the earlier decisions. In this view of the matter, we answer the question of law referred to us in the affirmative and against the assessee. But, however, there will be no order as to costs.
-
1997 (10) TMI 27 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Deemed Gift ... ... ... ... ..... be not bona fide at all. This court has granted its approval and sanctioned the arrangement. However, in so far as the applicability of section 4(1)(a) of the Act is concerned, the Tribunal has recorded a clear finding, that the value of the properties on the basis of the life expectancy of the assessee was based on actuarial valuation and that was also approved by this court. Hence, it cannot be said that the transfer was made for inadequate consideration. We are of the view that the finding of the Tribunal regarding the applicability of section 4(1)(a) of the Act as well as section 4(1)(c) of the Act is arrived at on the basis of the materials on record and the finding of the Appellate Tribunal is purely a finding of fact. We are of the view that no question of law arises out of the order of the Appellate Tribunal. In this view of the matter, we answer both the questions of law referred to us in the negative (sic) and against the Revenue. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1997 (10) TMI 26 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Income From Other Sources, Loans ... ... ... ... ..... on hundi papers but when the essential characteristic of hundi was absent was considered by the decision of this court in CIT v. Paranjothi Salt Co. 1995 2 11 ITR 141. This court has held that where the document contained a clear and categorical promise and undertaking to pay those who had made available the amounts, together with interest on and from the date on which the amounts were repayable (it does not) satisfy the requirements of hundis, the provision of section 69D of the Act are not applicable. It is already seen that on the facts of the case, both the Appellate Tribunal as well as the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) have held that the instruments were only promissory notes and not hundis and, therefore, we are of the view that the Tribunal was right in deleting the addition made under section 69D of the Act. In this view of the matter, we answer the question referred to us in the affirmative and against the Revenue. However, there will be no order as to costs.
-
1997 (10) TMI 25 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Rectification, Mistake Apparent From Record, Developement Rebate ... ... ... ... ..... e, when the mistake was not apparent and the nature of the question is such that it has generated so much of conflict of views among the various High Courts and when there is possibility of more than one view, we are of opinion that the Income-tax Officer was not justified in invoking the provisions of section 154 of the Act to rectify the mistake on the basis that the mistake was apparent on the face of the records. In the view we have taken that the Income-tax Officer has no jurisdiction to invoke the provisions of section 154 of the Act, it is unnecessary to consider the question on the merits of the case. We are, therefore, of the view that the conclusion of the Tribunal can be justified on the ground that the rectification made by the Income-tax Officer, for the assessment year 1972-73 was not justified in law. In this view of the matter, we answer the question of law referred to us in the affirmative and against the Revenue. However, there will be no order as to costs.
-
1997 (10) TMI 24 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Developement Rebate, Higher Rate ... ... ... ... ..... y under item No. (17) of the Sixth Schedule as well as item No. (17) of the Fifth Schedule to the Act. In so far as Tax Cases Nos. 1386 to 1388 of 1980 are concerned, the second question raised by the Revenue deals with the question of reassessment. Since we have upheld the order of the Appellate Tribunal on merits of the case, it is not necessary for us to render any answer to the second question of law referred to us in T. C. Nos. 1386 to 1388 of 1980. In fine, we answer the questions of law referred to us as under In T. C. No. 33 to 36 of 1982, the question of law referred to us is answered in the affirmative and against the Revenue. In T. C. Nos. 1386 to 1388 of 1980, the first question of law referred to us is answered in the affirmative and against the Revenue and the second question of law is not necessary to answer that question in view of the answer provided to the first question of law. However, in the circumstances of the cases, there will be no order as to costs.
-
1997 (10) TMI 23 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Business Expenditure, Disallowance ... ... ... ... ..... to the assessee to succeed in his attempt to get a deduction as claimed by him. Learned counsel for the Revenue has brought to the notice of this court the decision of the apex court in Upper India Publishing House P. Ltd. v. CIT 1979 117 ITR 569. In that case, the question referred to was whether a particular expenditure on rent is excessive and unreasonable or not. It was held that such question is a question of fact and does not involve any issue of law and, therefore, it could not be referred to the High Court for opinion. If the principles laid down in the case cited above are applied by way of analogy to the facts and circumstances of this case, we are of the opinion that there can be no reference for the opinion of this court with regard to the question of fact involved in the issue referred for our opinion. In view of the foregoing reasons, the question of law referred to us is answered in the affirmative and against the assessee. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1997 (10) TMI 22 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Representative Assessee, Trustee ... ... ... ... ..... ant trust deeds. When the beneficiaries are known to law, the provisions of section 164 of the Act are not attracted and the decision of the Commissioner of Income-tax directing the Income-tax Officer to assess the trust at the maximum rate invoking the provisions of section 164(1) of the Act cannot be regarded as correct in the eye of law. Following the earlier decisions of this court cited supra. we hold that there is no infirmity in the order of the Appellate Tribunal in holding that the beneficiaries cannot be regarded as non-existent at the time of the execution of the trust deed and the beneficiaries were known. Therefore, in this view of this matter, the questions of law referred to us in the instant cases are liable to be answered in the affirmative and against the Revenue. Accordingly, we answer both the questions in all the cases referred to us in the affirmative and against the Revenue. There will, however, be no order as to costs in the circumstances of the case.
-
1997 (10) TMI 21 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... sidered in such a manner that the tax need not be deducted at source or it should be only on the net interest that may be payable by the person required to deduct tax at source at the time of credit of the interest amount. It is made clear that we have dealt with a case of the tax liability to deduct tax at source arising at the credit of the interest, and we have not expressed any opinion on the question of payment of interest without prior credit of the interest and our answer to the question referred to us should be read in the light of the facts of the instant case of the credit of the interest and not to a case of payment. In this view of the matter, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal was not correct in holding that the assessee was justified in deducting tax at source on the net amount of interest paid to the recipient, Therefore, we answer the question of law referred to us in the negative and in favour of the Revenue. However, there will be no order as to costs.
-
1997 (10) TMI 20 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Estate Duty, Deduction ... ... ... ... ..... h of the deceased and it should be taken into account in determining the value of the estate. That apart, on the death of the employer, there is a termination of service of the employer and employee relationship in the eye of law, and it is only on the basis of the option of the new employer, the employees of the erstwhile employer continue in service, when the business is continued as a going concern. Certainly, at that point of time, the new employer would take into account the liability towards the gratuity that he may have to discharge in future, but the nature of the liability is such that it is a real and present liability which should go into the reckoning of the value of the business assets passing on the death of the deceased. We see no error in the order of the Appellate Tribunal holding that the gratuity liability is deductible. Accordingly, we answer the question of law reframed by us in the affirmative and against the Revenue. There will be no order as to costs.
....
|
