Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 301 to 310 of 310 Records
-
1995 (7) TMI 10 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Appeal To Supreme Court, Assessment Notice, Charitable Trust, High Court, Income Tax Act, Income Tax Proceedings, Notice Of Reassessment, Reassessment Notice, Wealth Tax Act
-
1995 (7) TMI 9 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Banking Company, Capital Gains, Computation Of Capital, Cost Of Acquisition, Income Tax ... ... ... ... ..... come operative the corresponding amounts would be transferred from the rebated interest account to the profit and loss account. Therefore, the amount accumulated in the rebated interest account could not be treated as liabilities even though for the purpose of preparation of the balance-sheet they are included in the liabilities side. The assessee paid income-tax on this account. According to the decisions cited supra, this kind of sticky loans are income of the assessee. Therefore, there is no question of excluding this amount while ascertaining the cost of acquisition. In the instant case, the question is whether this kind of sticky loan can be included in the cost of acquisition. The answer is yes. Accordingly, the order passed by the Tribunal in holding that sticky loan should not be excluded while ascertaining the cost of acquisition is in order. Thus, we answer the question referred to us in the affirmative and against the Department. No costs. Counsel s fee Rs. 1,000.
-
1995 (7) TMI 8 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Advertisement, Publicity And Sales Promotion, Business Expenditure, Salary And Perquisites ... ... ... ... ..... een introduced into the market and its uses are established, giving of free samples could only be as a measure of sales promotion and advertisement and would thus be hit by sub-section (3A). As in this case there is a finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) and confirmed by the Tribunal that the expenditure was incurred to test the efficacy of the drug, the expenditure would be within the ambit of bare minimum to carry on the business. For these reasons, it has to be held that the expenditure on physicians samples distributed to doctors is outside the scope of sub-section (3A) of section 37 of the Act. Therefore, the appellate authority, as well as the Tribunal are right in directing the exclusion of the expenditure on free samples supplied to the doctors in working out disallowance under section 37(3A) of the Act. Accordingly, the reference is answered in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The reference is answered accordingly. No costs.
-
1995 (7) TMI 7 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Ejusdem Generis, Taxing Statutes ... ... ... ... ..... re also of the opinion that books and manuscripts may be possessed by an advocate or a lawyer and are not covered by the words tools and instruments mentioned in clause (x). The law books of a lawyer enable him to acquire knowledge of law for carrying on his profession. They cannot, however, be termed as his tools and instruments as may be typing machines, fax machines, computers, etc., used in carrying on the profession. We are clearly of the opinion that books and manuscripts which are separately mentioned in clause (xii) cannot, by implication, be included in clause (x) under the words tools and instruments , as in its ordinary meaning books and manuscripts are not included in those words. For the reasons aforesaid, the two questions referred are answered in the negative, against the Department and in favour of the assessee by holding that the law books in the library of an advocate would be covered by section 5(1)(xii) and not section 5(1)(x) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957.
-
1995 (7) TMI 6 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Assessing Officer, Capital Gains, Failure To Disclose Material Facts, Transfer Of Property ... ... ... ... ..... hat in order to assume jurisdiction for initiating proceedings under sections 147 and 148 beyond the period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year the condition precedent is that the Assessing Officer must have reason to believe that the escapement of income chargeable to tax has arisen on account of failure or omission on the part of the assessee to disclose truly and fully all material facts necessary for his assessment for that assessment year. As the condition precedent for assuming jurisdiction beyond the period of four years is not existing in the present case, the issuance of the impugned notice in our opinion, suffers from inherent lack of jurisdiction and deserves to be quashed. Apart from the above, we are also satisfied on the facts of this case that this is a case of mere change of opinion. Accordingly, the petition succeeds. The impugned notice, annexure L , dated December 21, 1994, is quashed. Rule is made absolute with no order as to costs.
-
1995 (7) TMI 5 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Criminal Court, Reason To Believe, Territorial Jurisdiction ... ... ... ... ..... proceed further. As a matter of fact it could have completed the proceedings pending before it. There was no prohibitory order in existence. So far as Writ Petition No. 2155 of 1990 is concerned, the same is dismissed. The assessment order having been passed the custody of the cash in question is not required to be given to the officer issuing the warrant. In Writ Petition No. 2063 of 1990 a direction is given to hand over the cash to the parties after clearance is given by the assessing authority that all the liabilities have been met. Writ Petition No. 1689 of 1991 is dismissed. The assessing authority would be at liberty to apply the seized property to meet the demand raised by the assessing authority. So far as Writ Petition No. 1475 of 1990 is concerned the same is disposed of with the direction that the officer issuing the warrant would now complete the proceedings within the stipulated period in terms of section 132(5) of the Act. There would be no order as to costs.
-
1995 (7) TMI 4 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Law Applicable To Assessment, Tax At Source ... ... ... ... ..... ffect to. Accordingly, we hold that prior to the insertion of the Explanation to section 194A(1) with effect from June 1, 1987, mere crediting the amount of interest to the interest payable account or suspense account when the same was not credited to the payee s account did not attract the obligation to deduct tax at source under section 194A(1) on the amounts so credited to the interest payable account or suspense account and consequently no proceedings for breach of such provisions can be taken against the petitioner on that count. The petition is accordingly allowed and the notice dated June 25, 1985, issued by respondent No. 1 under section 201(1) read with sections 221 and 201(1A) of the Income-tax Act for the assessment years 1982-83 (exhibit-D) is quashed. Rule is made absolute. No order as to costs. We hold the reference incompetent and direct that the matter be placed before the appropriate Division Bench for appropriate orders on the appeal, in accordance with law.
-
1995 (7) TMI 3 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Appropriate Authority, High Court, Law Applicable, Movable Property, Purchase Of Immovable Property By Central Government, Territorial Jurisdiction
-
1995 (7) TMI 2 - PATNA HIGH COURT
Immovable Property, Limitation, Purchase, Consideration ... ... ... ... ..... ase of Shyam Investments v. Appropriate Authority 1995 213 ITR 82. I, accordingly, hold that the period of two months, engrafted in section 269UD(1) of the Act, would be reckoned in the case in hand from the date of the judgment of this court. In the circumstances, I quash the impugned order of the appropriate authority dated January 25, 1990 (annexure 4 of C.W.J.C. No. 879 of 1990), since the said order had been passed without affording reasonable opportunity to the affected parties. The statement that had been submitted in Form No. 37-I shall be treated as if it had been submitted on the date of delivery of the judgment in the present case. The appropriate authority is directed to redispose of the matter in accordance with the law, bearing in mind the observations and directions contained in the case of C. B. Gautam v. Union of India 1993 199 ITR 530 (SC). Both these applications are disposed of accordingly. There will be no order as to costs. DR. J. N. DUBEY J.---I agree.
-
1995 (7) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT
Special Court has no jurisdiction to sit in appeal over the assessment of the tax liability of a notified person by the authority or Tribunal or court authorised to perform that function by the statute under which the tax is levied. The Special Court has, therefore, no jurisdiction to determine whether or not any assessment of the tax liability of a notified person by the appropriate authority is bona fide or reasonable or justified or enforceable.
....
|