Case Laws |
Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 1966 1966 (10) This
|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 81 to 95 of 95 Records
-
1966 (10) TMI 15
Gift-tax - Whether the deed dated Dec. 23, 1957, executed by the assessee in favour of her son, S, constituted a transaction of gift under s. 2(xii) of the GT Act liable for assessment - Held, no
-
1966 (10) TMI 14
Cash credits - genuineness - reopening the assessment under s. 34 and notice was issued to the assessee under s. 34 - assessee did not fully and truly disclose all the material information necessary for the assessment - Sec. 34(1)(a) is applicable, not34(1)(b)
-
1966 (10) TMI 13
Firm - registration under s. 26A - partnership deed is silent as to the manner of distribution of losses among the partners
-
1966 (10) TMI 12
Rejection of books of accounts - genuineness of the cash book ... ... ... ... ..... st a share of profit. He, therefore, estimated the profit that should have been earned, if Rs. 28,200 had been invested by the assessee or Panna Lal on his behalf, at Rs. 10,000. When the matter was taken on appeal to the Tribunal, without there being any material to connect the assessee with the business carried on by Panna Lal, it was assumed that the assessee had a share in the profit resulting from the use of the said sum by Panna Lal in his business. There is not an iota of evidence to connect the assessee with the business of Panna Lal. Suspicion, however grave, can never take the place of proof. For the reasons given above, question No. 1 will have to be answered in the negative and in favour of the assessee. In this view of the matter question No. 2 does not require any answer. The reference is answered accordingly. The department will pay the costs of the assessee, which we assess at Rs. 200. Counsel s fee is also assessed at Rs. 200. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1966 (10) TMI 11
Whether, an appeal lay to the AAC - no appeal was taken to the Tribunal against the order of the AAC but the assessee had only made a miscellaneous application to the Tribunal - SC took the view that the order of the Tribunal was not one passed u/s. 33(4) and, consequently, no reference u/s. 66(1) or s. 66(2) could be entertained
-
1966 (10) TMI 10
Firm - registration ... ... ... ... ..... request is assessed in the status of a Hindu undivided family, but subsequently claimed that he should henceforth be assessed as an individual, he can neither be estopped, nor will the principles of res judicata apply and the admission made by the assessee will only be at best a piece of evidence to be considered in determining the true status of the assessee. In that case also the business could not be said to have started with any joint family fund nucleus, and the mere declaration in the return of income and assessments made in the status of Hindu undivided family was held not to convert the separate property of the assessee into joint family property. For the reasons given above, we would answer the question referred in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. The reference is answered accordingly. The department will pay the costs of this reference, which we assess at Rs. 250. Counsel s fee is also assessed at Rs. 250. Question answered in favour of the assessee.
-
1966 (10) TMI 9
U.P. Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1948 - agricultural income - income from the nursery - rental demand
-
1966 (10) TMI 8
Family Property - Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the proper status to be taken in the income-tax assessment of the assessee is individual or HUF
-
1966 (10) TMI 7
Accounting year - Whether the amount of Rs. 6,975, awarded by the Labour Appellate Tribunal in a subsequent year was allowable as a deduction in the assessment year in question - Held, no
-
1966 (10) TMI 6
ITO rejected application for renewal of registration relying upon cl. (4) of the partnership deed which provided for the share of the minor in the same proportion as the share of profits and losses of other partners and as such the deed was held to be contrary to law - assessee's appeal dismissed
-
1966 (10) TMI 5
Assessee not having disclosed the income in the asst. yr. 1946-47, it cannot be said that there was no omission or failure on the part of the assessee so as to attract s. 34(1)(b) - applicability of clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 34 - impugned clause will be applied
-
1966 (10) TMI 4
Tribunal is not justified in law in holding that the purchase and sale of cashew and the manufacture of tin containers constituted two different businesses because venture on tin cans was, the start with, ancillary or subsidiary to that of cashew-nuts until by a gradual shifting of emphasis, the former developed and the latter ended
-
1966 (10) TMI 3
Assessee is the author of a book - agreement with the Govt. of Kerala, whereby he undertook to print an edition of the book and supply the copies of that edition to the Govt. of Kerala - Tribunal was right in holding that the provisions of s. 12AA of the Act did not apply and that the income of the assessee was income from business
-
1966 (10) TMI 2
Refund - tax illegally collected - additional tax levied on the excess dividend declared by the company - High Court was right in directing the Commissioner to refund the amount of tax - department appeal dismissed
-
1966 (10) TMI 1
Validity of notice issued u/s 34(1)(a) - notice was issued validly and did not contravene the earlier orders of the High Court - appeal of department is allowed
|
|