Case Laws |
Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 1966 1966 (2) This
|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 61 to 71 of 71 Records
-
1966 (2) TMI 11
Whether the Tribunal misdirected itself in coming to the conclusion that it was the same business on the facts stated in its order - Held, no
-
1966 (2) TMI 10
Application for refund - limitation ... ... ... ... ..... e ground that the rights stood abrogated by the Finance Act, 1950. The position in the instant case is different, for no law has been made abrogating any obligations devolving under article 295 with respect to the assessment years in question. Yet another point raised on behalf of the respondents is that the writ petition should be dismissed on the ground of delay. In my opinion, the delay has been sufficiently explained in the writ petition, which shows that the appellants were bona fide following up the matter in the Rajasthan High Court. In any case, I am not inclined to throw out the petition on this ground in the circumstances of this case. In the result, this appeal must be allowed, and a direction in the nature of mandamus issued on the respondents to carry out their obligations and refund the sum of Rs. 2,352 to the appellants. Having regard, however, to the circumstances of the case, I leave the parties to bear their own costs. S. S. DULAT J.- I agree. Appeal allowed
-
1966 (2) TMI 9
Petition under article 226 of the Constitution asking for a writ or an order in the nature of mandamus restraining the respondents from giving effect to the notices issued by the 1st Tax Recovery Officer under rule 73 of the Second Schedule to the Income-tax Act, 1961.
-
1966 (2) TMI 8
Revenue seeking to include the income of his minor sons in the total income of the petitioner - proceedings taken under the provisions of s. 16(3)(a)(ii) of the old Act of 1922 are in truth and effect proceedings for assessment - held that the cases are covered by the saving provision of s. 297(2)(a) of the Act of 1961.
-
1966 (2) TMI 7
Order passed by Tax Recovery Officer - jurisdiction ... ... ... ... ..... tisfied that the defaulter, with the object or effect of obstructing the execution of the certificate, had dishonestly transferred, concealed or removed his properties, and also that he had the means to pay the arrears or some substantial part thereof and refused or neglected or had refused or neglected to pay the same, and passed an order for the arrest of the defaulter and his detention in civil prison. In view of the above discussion, we think that the Tax Recovery Officer was justified in taking that action. Our learned brother, Mr. Justice Jaganmohan Reddy, accepted the finding of the Tax Recovery Officer and refused to exercise the discretion vested under article 226 of the Constitution and we do not think that there is anything wrong to call for our interference in this appeal. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed with costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 250. The appellant should surrender himself, as per his undertaking given in this court on December 23, 1965. Appeal dismissed.
-
1966 (2) TMI 6
Whether on proper interpretation of the agreement dated July 31, 1956, between the British India Corporation and the appellant-company, the letters of K and the letters of the managing director, the sum of ₹ 43,333 retained by the British India Corporation and adjusted by it to the credit of S & Co. was the assessable income of the applicant-company - Held, Yes
-
1966 (2) TMI 5
Reopening of the assessment of the assessee for this assessment year by issuing notice under s. 34(1)(a) - action taken under s. 34(1)(a) was valid
-
1966 (2) TMI 4
Non-resident purchasing goods from Japan through firm in Bombay and selling them through Bombay firm to purchaser at Aden - Tribunal was justified in holding that the sales in respect of the transactions referred to above took place in the taxable territories and the entire profit in respect thereof arose in the taxable territories
-
1966 (2) TMI 3
Company formed for acquiring and cultivating or leasing out lands - held that assessee was not a dealer in tenancy rights - salami receipts or any portion thereof are not business income - so not chargeable under the IT Act.
-
1966 (2) TMI 2
Search - indiscriminate seizure of all articles books and accounts without consideration - search and the seizure, in the circumstances, must be held to be illegal as being arbitrary and an abuse of power
-
1966 (2) TMI 1
Director given share of the profits for rendering services - compensation received by the director for releasing the right to share of profits on sale of the concern - held that it is capital receipt and not a revenue receipt - litigation expenses incurred in relation to the legal action for recovery of the monies from the other party were not deductible
|
|