|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 60 of 76 Records
-
1974 (2) TMI 59 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... are distinguishable from the facts in Gill and Co. (P.) Ltd. v. Commercial Tax Officer 1973 31 S.T.C. 336. In Gill and Co. s case(1), there was an earlier order of assessment which had been quashed by the court on the ground that there was no provision to pass the said order. Later on, the Legislature amended the law by validating the assessment order and removing the infirmity pointed out by the court with retrospective effect. The result was that the order of assessment revived and became enforceable. But, in these cases, no validation of assessment orders was possible as the assessment orders themselves became defective only on account of the retrospective amendments of the Karnataka Act and the Central Act and the defects had to be removed by appropriate rectification before making a demand of the tax in question. 7.. Therefore, the notices of demand which are impugned in these petitions are hereby quashed. However, there will be no order as to costs. Petitions allowed.
-
1974 (2) TMI 58 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Amalgamation, Principles for interpretation of statutes ... ... ... ... ..... of S.B. Mukherjee for the petitioners. I find no impediment in sanctioning the scheme and also making an older for dissolution as asked for in prayer (e) of the petition. I have also not appreciated the attitude of the Company Law Board unless it is said that, on a pure question of law, the objection has been raised in this application having regard to the fact that the Central Government has already approved the transfer of shares of the petitioner No. 1 to the petitioner No. 2 on the condition of getting the scheme of amalgamation sanctioned by a competent court. After such approval on such condition it is very strange to raise objection at the time of getting the sanction of the scheme of amalgamation from the court by the petitioners. However, having considered the questions very carefully, I am making the following order. There will be an order in terms of prayers (a), (b), (c ), (d), (e) and (f ). The petitioner to pay costs to the Company Law Board assessed at 15 G.Ms.
-
1974 (2) TMI 49 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Custody of company’s property, Winding up - Powers of liquidator, Applications how made, Summons for directions to be taken out by official liquidator, Sale to be subject to confirmation by court, Procedure at sale
-
1974 (2) TMI 48 - HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Oppression and mismanagement. ... ... ... ... ..... cordance with law and in the light of the observations made above. The interim order dated 27th October, 1967, will continue subject to the modification that the appellant will be paid his arrears of salary due from 17th April, 1970, till today at the rate of Rs. 1,500 per month. The managing director will continue to pay the salary to the appellant at the same rate of Rs. 1,500 per month thereafter. The appellant will retain his position of technical adviser but will not inflict his technical advice upon the managing director or upon the affairs of the company. The managing director will have discretion to ask for the technical advice of the appellant and then alone he will give his technical advice. Mr. Hiranand Sharma, who was elected as the third director of the company in pursuance of the orders of the learned company judge under appeal before us, will continue. It will be desirable if the company petition is disposed of expeditiously. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1974 (2) TMI 46 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Winding up - Suits stayed on winding-up order ... ... ... ... ..... of certain applications and matters to be heard in the manner provided therein and prescribe a general procedure for the other applications and matters in clause (b) of each rule. An application under section 446(2) of the Act falls squarely under clause (b) of rule 11 and clause (b) of rule 12. It cannot be said that the non-mention of such an application in rule 11(a) necessarily leads to the conclusion that an application claiming recovery of amount from a debtor necessarily amounts to a suit. In my opinion, in view of the provisions in clause (b) of sub-section (2) of section 446, a claim by a company can be made by an application and the present claim made by the official liquidator is covered by that provision. The application for the adjudication and recovery of that claim, therefore, falls under article 1(d) in Schedule II of the Court Fees Act and the court-fee of Rs. 13 has been correctly paid. The issue is decided against the respondents with no order as to costs.
-
1974 (2) TMI 31 - ITAT JABALPUR
... ...
... ... ..... recorded a finding in his order under s. 185 that he appellant rsquo s claim for registration was in order and granted registration to the appellant for 1966-67. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the Addl. CIT did not have any material to set-aside this considered order of the ITO by invoking his revisional jurisdiction under s. 263 of the Act and that the order of the Addl. CIT cannot be sustained. 14. Since the orders of the Addl. CIT for the three subsequent asst. yrs. 1967-68, 1968-69 and 1969-70 are only consequential of his orders passed under s. 263 in the year assessment 1966-67, they also cannot be sustained for the reasons set out above. We, therefore, reverse the order of the Addl. CIT passed under s. 263 for all the four asst. yrs. 1966-67 and restore the orders of the ITO passed under s. 185(1)(a) of the Act granting registration and continuation of registration respectively to the appellant firm in the said years. 15. In the result, the appeals are allowed.
-
1974 (2) TMI 30 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Natural justice - Prosecution ... ... ... ... ..... at all in the gold that it must be of foreign origin. One of the points put against the appellant is that on chemical test, 99.91 purity was found in the gold and that such purity can normally be found only in foreign gold. Even if it is true, it cannot be said that the appellant knew that the gold mixed in the alloy was foreign gold. It might be that he got gold from others and the gold might have passed through several persons, and, therefore, it cannot be said with any amount of certainty that the gold contained in the alloy was contraband gold, especially when there is no indication at all in the gold itself. I am, therefore, of the view that the prosecution has not made out the offence against the appellant even under Section 135 (b) (ii) of the Customs Act. The conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant under this section are also set aside. 17.In the result, the appeal is allowed and the appellant is acquitted. The fine amounts, if paid, will be refunded to him.
-
1974 (2) TMI 29 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Interest And Penalty, Penalty For Delay In Furnishing Return ... ... ... ... ..... of the Act. No provision of the Act has been brought to our notice which says that the two levies are alternative and not cumulative. When the Act does not state that where there is a levy under section 139, no penalty can be levied under section 271(1)(a) of the Act, the Income-tax Officer is competent to levy the penalty. That is also the view taken by the Andhra Pradesh High Court in T. Venkata Krishnaiah and Co. v. Commissiner of Income-tax. We are in respectful agreement with the opinion of the Andhra Pradesh High Court on the said question. Before the Madras High Court, the constitutional validity of the provision for levy of penalty when interest is charged was challenged in Express Newspapers (P.) Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer The challenge was repelled and the constitutional validity of the provisions of section 271(1)(a) was upheld. Accordingly, we answer the question referred in the affirmative and against the assessee. No costs. Question answered in the affirmative.
-
1974 (2) TMI 28 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Gift Tax, Partner In Firm, Question Of Fact ... ... ... ... ..... a direct link between the gift and the carrying on of the business satisfying the first requirement of the section and the purpose, design, the plan, and what is sought to be achieved was certainly a continuance of the business and the proper management of the business. In all the circumstances, the gift and the taking of the partner were bona fide acts done for the purpose of the business. The section must inevitably apply and the exemption should have been granted. In the light of the above, we answer the first question referred to us in the affirmative, that is, against the assessee and in favour of the department and the second question in the negative, that is, in favour of the assessee and against the department. We direct the parties to bear their respective costs. A copy of this judgment under the seal of the High Court and the signature of the Registrar will be sent to the Appellate Tribunal as required by sub-section (1) of section 260 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
-
1974 (2) TMI 27 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Article 14 Of The Constitution, Dispose Of, Income Tax Act ... ... ... ... ..... dge and common report and all that it requires a building contractor to do is to furnish prescribed particulars within the stipulated time limit on the pain of penalty with a view to detecting evasion of tax. Such a provision is clearly incidental or ancillary to the power to levy tax because the power to enact a provision for preventing evasion of tax is always an incidental power. In fact, the challenge levelled to the impugned provision on the ground of legislative incompetence has not even been pressed in the present case. In these circumstances, in our opinion, it could hardly be contended that the impugned provision being not incidental or ancillary to the main power to tax income which is conferred by the Act, it has no nexus with the statute in question. These were the only arguments which were urged before us at the hearing of the petition and since there is no merit in any of them, the petition fails and is dismissed. Rule discharged with costs. Petition dismissed.
-
1974 (2) TMI 26 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Provisional Assessment ... ... ... ... ..... Lastly, Mr. Pal on behalf of the respondent, contends that when the petitioner submitted to the jurisdiction by recording no objection to the assessment proposed, he is not entitled to dispute the same. The records indicate that the petitioner was not appearing himself but appearing through his brother on a notice being issued under section 135. On my findings made hereinbefore the Income-tax Officer had no jurisdiction whatsoever to proceed under section 155 and that being the position, any amount of consent could not have conferred such jurisdiction on the Income-tax Officer. Therefore, I find no substance in this contention of Mr. Pal. On the conclusions as above, this application succeeds. The rule is made absolute. The impugned orders and the demand are hereby quashed. Let a writ in the nature of certiorari do issue incorporating the above direction. There will be no order for costs. Let the operation of this order remain stayed for a period of six weeks from this date.
-
1974 (2) TMI 25 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Allowable Expenditure, Business Expenditure ... ... ... ... ..... stamp duty, registration fees, lawyers fees, etc., and claimed the amount as business expenditure. The Supreme Court held that the amount spent was not in the nature of capital expenditure and was laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the assessee s business and was therefore allowable as a deduction under section 10(2)(xv) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The act of borrowing money was incidental to the carrying on of the business, the loan obtained was not an asset or an advantage of an enduring nature, the expenditure was made for securing the use of money for a certain period, and it was irrelevant to consider the object with which the loan was obtained. We, accordingly, answer the question referred to us in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the department. The assessee would be entitled to costs which we assess at Rs. 200. The fee of the learned counsel is assessed in the same figure. Question answered in the affirmative.
-
1974 (2) TMI 24 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Assessment Year, Best Judgment Assessment, Law Applicable ... ... ... ... ..... lete or unsatisfactory or as in the instant case he failed to produce the excise register before the Income-tax Officer. Excise register is not a part of the account books and, as such, failure on the part of the assessee to produce such a register may not amount to fraud or gross or wilful neglect on his part. Unfortunately, the Tribunal has not applied its mind to this aspect of the case even though the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax did record a finding on this point. We, therefore, cannot answer the second question unless the Tribunal records its finding first. The Tribunal shall now record the necessary finding on the second question while disposing of the case under section 260 of the Income-tax Act. In the end while we answer the first question in the negative, in favour of the department and against the assessee, we return no answer to the second question, which shall now be decided by the Tribunal. In the circumstances, we make no order as to costs.
-
1974 (2) TMI 23 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Land Appurtenant, Original Assessment ... ... ... ... ..... y to the value of the taxable gift which is alleged to have escaped assessment, would not, in our opinion, constitute information . It would not amount to instructive knowledge concerning the taxable gift on the basis of which the requisite belief which would justify the opening of a concluded assessment, can be formed. In view of the foregoing conclusion, we are of the opinion that in the present case there was no information in the possession of the Gift-tax Officer in consequence of which he could have reason to believe that any taxable gift had escaped assessment and, therefore, the condition precedent to the exercise of jurisdiction under section 16(1)(b) was not satisfied. We, accordingly, allow the petition and make the rule absolute by quashing and setting aside the notice dated February 15, 1972, issued by the Gift-tax Officer against the petitioner under section 16(1) of the Act. The respondent will pay the costs of the petition to the petitioner. Petition allowed.
-
1974 (2) TMI 22 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
New Industrial Undertaking, Rectification Proceedings, Relief In Respect ... ... ... ... ..... aken the view that the relief contemplated under section 84 can be allowed to an assessee only if a claim is made in that behalf in the return filed by him and in the absence of such a claim if the Income-tax Officer does not allow rebate it cannot be said that there is any mistake apparent on the face of the record which the Income-tax Officer can be asked to rectify later on. In that case also the assessee had not made a claim in the return for rebate under section 84 and the assessee tried to get the relief subsequently by making an application under section 154 of the Income-tax Act. This court held that the assessee was not entitled to do so. Following that decision we hold that, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, section 154, of the Income-tax Act was not applicable. We, accordingly, answer the question in the affirmative, in favour of the department and against the assessee. The Commissioner of Income-tax is entitled to costs which we assess at Rs. 200.
-
1974 (2) TMI 21 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Bad Debt, Previous Year ... ... ... ... ..... n had become bad in the relevant previous year is a finding of fact and, based as it is on relevant material, it cannot be questioned. Learned counsel for the department says that before the assessee can get deduction on account of bad debt, he must prove that the debt had become bad in the relevant accounting year. According to him this burden has not been discharged by the assessee and the Tribunal was wrong in allowing the claim of the assessee. No doubt, the debt remained due from the debtors for a long number of years and no steps were taken to recover them, but the fact that the assessee was able to realise a sum of Rs. 1,25,000 during the relevant previous year shows clearly that the debts had become bad in the relevant previous year itself and not earlier. We would accordingly answer the question in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the department. The assessee is entitled to costs which we assess at Rs. 200. Question answered in the affirmative.
-
1974 (2) TMI 20 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Advance Tax, Assessment Proceedings, Assessment Year, Failure To Send Estimate, Original Assessment
-
1974 (2) TMI 19 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Land Appurtenant, Original Assessment ... ... ... ... ..... ed with the correctness or otherwise of the view taken by the Income-tax Officer because the rectification order is not under challenge. A point of limitation though taken in the petition was not pressed before us. This point will be open to the petitioner, if the petitioner is otherwise entitled to take this point before the authorities under the Act. We are only concerned with the question whether the mistake proposed to be rectified comes within the purview of section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and for the reasons indicated above we are of the opinion that the mistake proposed to be rectified comes within the purview of section 154. In the aforesaid view of the matter this appeal is allowed. Judgment and order of the learned judge dated the 2nd of February, 1973, are hereby set aside and the application under article 226 of the Constitution is dismissed and the rule is discharged. There will be no order as to costs. SANKAR PRASAD MITRA C.J.--I agree. Appeal allowed.
-
1974 (2) TMI 18 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Previous Year ... ... ... ... ..... ct is the procedural part of that Act and not those parts of the Act which relate to the liability of an assessee. In these cases we are concerned with the liability of an assessee. Hence, no support can be derived by Sri Rajasekhara Murthy from the above provision. Therefore, the order passed by the Commissioner in respect of a sum of Rs. 1,75,000 said to have been borrowed on hundies, Rs. 9,000 traced to an unexplained suspense account, and Rs. 13,261 attributable to the undisclosed stock during the period prior to March 31, 1961, treating them as taxable in the assessment year 1962-63 should be set aside and it is accordingly set aside. The matter is now remitted to the Commissioner to pass a fresh order in the light of this decision and in accordance with law. It is, however, made clear that it is open to the authorities to take such steps as may be available to them in law regarding the above sums against the petitioners. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. costs.
-
1974 (2) TMI 17 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Transport Business ... ... ... ... ..... specting Assistant Commissioner to positively, pass a fresh order of penalty, the matter was left at large for the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner. Since, in our opinion, the view of the Tribunal, that it left the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner free to make a fresh order if he could make a valid order in law, was correct, it is, in our opinion, unnecessary to express a concluded opinion on the other question, whether the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner would have been bound to obey the direction of the Tribunal to pass a fresh order of penalty irrespective of the fact that by lapse of time he lost jurisdiction to make such an order. This other question has, in the circumstances, become merely of academic value. We, therefore, answer the question referred to us in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the department. The assessee will be entitled to costs, which are assessed at Rs. 200. The fee of the learned counsel is also assessed at the same figure.
|
