Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 1970 1970 (1) This

Law	-- All -- GST Income Tax Benami Property Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy FEMA PMLA Service Tax Central Excise CST, VAT & Sales Tax Wealth tax Indian Laws
Court	-- Any -- Supreme Court SC Orders / Highlights High Court Appellate Tribunal Tribunal Appellate authority for Advance Ruling Advance Ruling Authority National Financial Reporting Authority Competition Commission of India ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY Commission Central Government Board DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court Commissioner / Appellate Authority Other
Citation	--Year-- 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982 1981 1980 1979 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1973 1972 1971 1970 1969 1968 1967 1966 1965 1964 1963 1962 1961 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 1953 1952 1951 1950 Upto 1949 - -Volume- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -
Landmark	Nil - N/A Referred in >= 3 Cases Referred in >= 4 Cases Referred in >= 5 Cases Referred in >= 10 Cases Referred in >= 15 Cases Referred in >= 25 Cases Referred in >= 50 Cases Referred in >= 100 Cases
Order by	TMI Citation Date of Decision

Advanced Search Options

Case Laws

Showing 41 to 60 of 63 Records

• 1970 (1) TMI 23 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
  

  U.P. Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1948 - Husband and wife owned separate lands - whether they hold the lands as an association of individuals - since land was held independently, mere fact that they lived together and cultivated the land jointly does not make them an association of individuals

  ---

• 1970 (1) TMI 22 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
  

  Reopening of assessment - validity - department would be justified in making the reassessment on the basis of the decision of the Supreme Court - it is not necessary for the ITO to disclose the reason for issuing the notice if the assessee challenges the existence or validity of the reason in a proceeding under Article 226 of Constitution of India

  ---

• 1970 (1) TMI 21 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
  

  Sub-partnership - mode of assessment of share of partner

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... into. Moreover, this is evidence of a positive nature, whereas the evidence relied upon against the agreement is, in a sense, of a negative nature. The latter evidence is negative because what is sought to be relied upon is the absence of a reference to the agreement in the three subsequent mill-partnerships and the nature of the said joint declaration. The Tribunal was, therefore, right when it said that this evidence is overwheliming to support the contention of the two assessees that there was such an agreement. We, therefore, answer question No. 1 in the affirmative (sic). As regards question No. 2, it is really a question which would arise in the alternative to question No. 1 and only in the event of question No. 1 being answered in the negative. Inasmuch as we have answered question No. 1 in the affirmative, question No. 2 does not survive for being considered or answered and we, therefore, do not consider or answer the same. The respondent to pay the applicant s costs.

  ---

• 1970 (1) TMI 20 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
  

  Assessee carries on banking business in foreign country - Whether the Tribunal erred in law or acted without evidence in holding that all or any of the various items constituted remittance of profits to the taxable territories within the meaning of section 4(1)(b)(iii) of the Indian Income-tax Act

  ---

• 1970 (1) TMI 19 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
  

  Interest on borrowed capital - deduction claimed in respect of the interest paid under section 10(2)(iii)

  ---

• 1970 (1) TMI 18 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
  

  Section 10(5A) - Agreement for termination of the contract - compensation received for termination of sole distributorship - agreement made between the assessee-firm and the importers was not an agreement of agency - receipt on account of the compensation is not taxable

  ---

• 1970 (1) TMI 17 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  

  New Industrial Undertaking - entitlement to relief under section 15C

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... o be deducted therefrom in order to arrive at the taxable profits. Once again, in computing the profits or gains of the industrial undertaking, section 10 has to be applied and the taxable profits and gains have to be computed by deducting the unabsorbed depreciation referable to the industrial undertaking from the total profits and gains of the undertaking. After arriving at this figure, that portion of it which does not exceed six per cent. of the capital employed will have to be exempted from tax. It, accordingly, involves the notional deduction of the unabsorbed depreciation more than once, but in effect such deduction is effected only once in ascertaining the taxable profits of the composite business. Thus the reckoning of the profits of the new unit by the Income-tax Officer has been rightly approved by the Tribunal. In this view the question has to be answered in the negative and against the assessee with costs. Counsel s fee Rs. 250. Question answered in the negative.

  ---

• 1970 (1) TMI 16 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
  

  Liquidation of company - Proceedings for reassessment of escaped income-tax - ITO alone has exclusive jurisdiction to make reassessment and to determine the tax liability - therefore, it is held that leave of winding up court is not necessary -

  ---

• 1970 (1) TMI 15 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
  

  Garnishee Proceedings - Protective Assessment

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... and any such notice can be issued only on a debtor of the taxpayer, namely, of Dunichand Sons and Co. By treating some other firm as the benamidar of the assessee-firm or of the partners of the assessee-firm the Income-tax Officer is not entitled to issue notices under section 226(3) on persons who might owe or hold money for and on behalf of the firm held to be the benamidar. The issue of the impugned notices do not seem to be justified by the provisions of section 226(3) and must, therefore, be quashed. In the view I have taken, it is not necessary to deal with the constitutional validity of section 226(3) and I do not express any opinion thereon. The rule would, accordingly, be made absolute. The impugned notices and all, proceedings thereunder would be quashed and the respondents Nos. 1, 2 and 3 would be directed to forbear from giving any effect to the said impugned notices. There would be no order as to costs. The operation of this order would be stayed for four weeks.

  ---

• 1970 (1) TMI 14 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
  

  Applicability of section 23A - provisions of section 23A of the Act were applicable to the case, inasmuch as the assessee company had declared no dividends in the years in question, but the order of the Tribunal setting aside the assessments under section 23A was correct in view of its finding on the question of losses in the earlier years

  ---

• 1970 (1) TMI 13 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
  

  IT Act Of 1922 - IT Act Of 1961 - Income escaping assessment - notice u/s 148

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... n the instant case is likely to exceed rupees one lakh, I must hold that the decision of the Supreme Court is on all fours with the facts of the present case. Consequently, it must be held that since the right to reopen the proceedings was barred under the old Act before the new Act came into force, it could not be revived by the new Act. As such the notice under section 148 of the Act, which is impugned in the present case, must be held to be illegal and invalid and must be struck down. In the result, this application succeeds and the rule is made absolute. There will be a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Income-tax Officer, the respondent No. 1, to forthwith recall, cancel and withdraw the notices dated the 5th March, 1966, and the 8th March, 1966, issued under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and a writ in the nature of prohibition restraining the respondents from giving effect to the notices in any manner whatsoever. There will be no order as to costs.

  ---

• 1970 (1) TMI 12 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
  

  Claim for deduction under section 10(1) and section 10(2)(xv) - amount expended was in fact expended to earn profits - deduction allowed

  ---

• 1970 (1) TMI 11 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
  

  Assessee purported to transfer a sum from his account to the account of his son, the donee - gifts were accepted by the donees, and the firm had accepted the transaction - transfer was effected by debiting the assessee`s personal account in the books of the HUF by the sum and crediting the same amount in the personal account of his son - held that, assessee had made a valid gift

  ---

• 1970 (1) TMI 10 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
  

  Computation of net wealth - provision for payment of income-tax and super-tax in respect of assessments not completed till the respective valuation dates - such amount is deductible in computing the net wealth of the assessee

  ---

• 1970 (1) TMI 9 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
  

  Inclusion of income from dividend in assessee`s total income

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... assessee had not exercised any option in the present case. This is a question of fact which cannot be permitted to be raised for the first time in this reference. It does not arise out of the order of the Tribunal, and was admittedly not raised at any stage before the income-tax authorities. Option is given by the above-quoted statutory provision to the assessee and not to the department. The assessee having exercised the option, the department had no way out except to assess the dividend income, in the income relating to the assessment year 1954-55 in the income-tax return for which year the assessee had returned the income. We are, therefore, unable to find any force in the submissions made by Mr. Awasthy. For the foregoing reasons, we would answer the question referred to above in the negative, i.e., in favour of the assessee. The costs of the assessee, which are fixed at Rs. 250, shall be borne by the revenue. MEHAR SINGH C.J. -I agree. Question answered in the negative.

  ---

• 1970 (1) TMI 8 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
  

  Seizure - order of retention of the books and documents - validity

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... uments advanced on behalf of the revenue fail. In the result, it must be held that since the approval of the Commissioner in the present case was not communicated to the petitioner, the order for retention of the books and documents beyond the period of 180 days was not validly and properly made under section 132(8) of the Act. In that view of the matter, it must follow that there has been no valid retention of the books and documents in compliance with the provisions of section 132(8) of the Act beyond the 22nd February, 1966. In the result, this application succeeds and the rule is made absolute. There will be a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to forthwith return to the petitioner all the books, documents, papers and things seized from premises No. 62, Bentinck Street, Calcutta, 3 Bysak Dighi Lane, and 14/1, Hariram Goenka Street, Calcutta. The respondents would, however, be at liberty to proceed according to law. There will be no order as to costs.

  ---

• 1970 (1) TMI 7 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
  

  Mysore Agricultural Income Tax Act - By virtue of the proviso to part I of the Schedule a person who derived agricultural income from 5 acres or less of areca garden is not chargeable to tax. The petitioner did not derives - agricultural income from 3.31 acres of areca garden - Since the petitioner derives agricultural income from 13.27 acres of areca garden although his interest therein is 1/4th share, he does not fall within the proviso to Part I of the Schedule to the Act

  ---

• 1970 (1) TMI 6 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
  

  Mysore Agricultural Income Tax Act - notice of demand - case of petitioner is that before issuing a notice of demand, they were not served with a notice of the assessment and also that an opportunity contemplated had not been afforded to them before making the assessment - held that assessment is not valid

  ---

• 1970 (1) TMI 5 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
  

  Mysore Agricultural Income Tax Act - notice of demand of the same date issued by the Agricultural Income-tax Officer - petitioner's application u/s 67 for composition of the agricultural income-tax was granted - previous order of composition had been set aside - petitioner is exempt from regular assessment to tax by virtue of the provisions of sub-s. (6) of s. 67 - notice of demand are quashed

  ---

• 1970 (1) TMI 4 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
  

  Sums paid by the assessee to solicitor and advocates in respect of the preparation of agreements and the suits - Whether the claim of the applicant to deduct the sum paid has been rightly rejected in the assessments of the applicant - Held, no

  ---

1234