Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 1997 1997 (9) This

Law	-- All -- GST Income Tax Benami Property Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy FEMA Law of Competition 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-- 2025 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 >= 2 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 461 to 468 of 468 Records

• 1997 (9) TMI 8
  

  The first batch of appeals was concerned with the power of rectification under section 154. In the assessment made under section 143 of the Act there had not been included in the assessee's income the amount of tax paid on behalf of the assessee by the ONCC to the Department - That tax paid was sought to be included by rectification - whether such an exercise of inclusion could be undertaken by way of rectification - In the second batch of appeals also the tax paid on behalf of the assessee was again under consideration but in a different light. The issue here was whether the tax paid on behalf of the assessee would be taken 100 per cent. as gains of business or profession (as would ordinarily be the case in the case of an ordinary citizen not engaged in oil exploration) or whether 10 per cent. of such tax would be taken as profits and gains of business, such tax paid being connected inextricably with the fees paid in regard to services rendered for oil exploration, or thirdly whether the tax paid on behalf of the assessee could at all be included in the profits and gains of the profession or business.

  ---

• 1997 (9) TMI 7
  

  In the instant case, the immediate source of the profit is sale of goods. The export of other goods is not even the second degree but it has to be traced to an even more remote degree. The import was of palm oil. The import was possible because of earlier export of goods at a loss. In the chain of sequence the earlier export would be four degrees away - hence assessee is not entitled to allowance of deduction in respect of profits derived by it on specified export sales

  ---

• 1997 (9) TMI 6
  

  Collaboration Agreement with foreign company for know-how - assessee was merely given a non-exclusive and non-transferable right of user of the technical information - High Court was justified in holding expenditures in question to be revenue nature.

  ---

• 1997 (9) TMI 5
  

  Whether on a proper interpretation of the terms and conditions of the 'leave and licence agreement' executed on October 19, 1963, the Tribunal was right in holding that the loss of ₹ 20 lakhs which had been deposited by the assessee with S pursuant to clause 17 of the said agreement, arose in the carrying on of the assessee's business and was incidental to it and was accordingly allowable as a business loss - Held, no

  ---

• 1997 (9) TMI 4
  

  Allegation of commission of an offence under section 276B, read with section 278B - Firm - on revision petition HC was not justified in holding that no substantive sentence could be imposed on the firm and in upholding the discharge of the other respondents - set aside the impugned order of the High Court upholding the discharge of the respondents and direct it to hear the revision petition filed by the appellant afresh in accordance with law

  ---

• 1997 (9) TMI 3
  

  Whether the subsidy received by the assessee-company from the Andhra Pradesh Government is taxable as revenue receipt or not - Mere setting up of the industry did not qualify an industrialist for getting any subsidy. The subsidy was given as help not for the setting up of the industry which was already there but as assistance after the industry commenced production - appeals by the Revenue are allowed

  ---

• 1997 (9) TMI 2
  

  Whether a reduction of share capital with the company paying a part of the capital by reducing the face value of its share, results in extinguishment of right in the shares held by the shareholder so that the amount paid on reduction of the share capital would be exigible to capital gains tax - Held, yes - HC was right in concluding that the appellant was liable to pay capital gains tax on the capital gain of Rs. 28,710 as a result of reduction in the preference share in Sarabhai Limited

  ---

• 1997 (9) TMI 1
  
  Issues:
  - Waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of service tax demanded from a stock broker.
  - Interpretation of Sections 66 and 67 of the Finance Act, 1994 regarding the liability of a stock broker to charge brokerage for service tax.
  - Application of Section 72 of the Finance Act in determining correctness of the accounts of the assessee.
  - Allegation of short-levied amount on account of improper rounding off of transaction amounts.
  
  Analysis:
  The judgment concerns a stock broker who sought waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of service tax amounting to Rs. 1,98,265.00 demanded for a specific period. The issue arose when the Superintendent of Central Excise, Service Tax Cell noted that the broker had not charged brokerage on certain transactions, leading to a tax liability calculation discrepancy. The applicant contended that as per Section 67 of the Finance Act, 1994, the taxable service value is based on actual brokerage collected, not on deemed brokerage. The applicant argued that the order was unsustainable under Sections 66 and 67 of the Act, requesting unconditional allowance of the Stay Petition.
  
  The opposing Revenue authority cited Section 72 of the Finance Act, allowing best judgment assessment when the officer doubts the accuracy of the assessee's accounts. The Revenue argued that the addition of 1% brokerage was justified due to the incomplete or incorrect accounts of the applicant. However, the Tribunal noted that the order did not explicitly reject the correctness of the accounts or provide a basis for mandating brokerage charges in all cases, thereby questioning the strength of the Revenue's case.
  
  The Tribunal analyzed the provisions of the Finance Act and agreed with the applicant's interpretation of Section 67, emphasizing the absence of a deeming provision for valuation of taxable service based on brokerage. Consequently, the Tribunal found merit in the applicant's argument and deemed the authorities' order incorrect. As a result, the Stay Petition was unconditionally allowed, and the appeal was upheld, setting aside the impugned order, except for the amount allegedly short-levied due to improper rounding-off, which had already been paid by the applicant.
  
  In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision centered on the correct interpretation of statutory provisions governing service tax liability for stock brokers, emphasizing the necessity for actual brokerage collection as the basis for taxation. The judgment highlighted the importance of adherence to legal provisions and the need for proper assessment of accounts under the Finance Act to ensure fair treatment of taxpayers.

  ---

1 ....2021222324