Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 1967 1967 (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 61 to 72 of 72 Records

• 1967 (1) TMI 12 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
  

  Firm - Managing director's remuneration - includibility in income of the HUF

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... nder an agreement whereby he was appointed treasurer of a bank. Remuneration received by the manager of the family for working as a treasurer was claimed to be income of the Hindu undivided family, because the properties of the family were furnished as security, but this court rejected, that claim. We see no analogy between a case in which the property of the Hindu undivided family is sought to be encumbered for obtaining a benefit which is essentially personal to the manager, and a case in which with the aid of the family funds the manager of the family is able to enter into a partnership and to earn allowance, which he would not otherwise have been entitled to receive. For the reasons given above we would answer the question referred in the affirmative and against the assessee. The assessee will pay the costs of this reference, which we assess at Rs. 250. Counsel s fee is also assessed at Rs. 250. The reference is answered accordingly. Question answered in the affirmative.

  ---

• 1967 (1) TMI 11 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  

  Whether the first respondent was correct in his view that depreciation was allowable under section 24(2) - Held, no - petition is allowed - order of the first respondent is set aside

  ---

• 1967 (1) TMI 10 - MYSORE HIGH COURT
  

  Mysore Agricultural Income Tax Act - Whether the proviso to s. 41(1) of the Mysore Agricultural Income-tax Act does or does not require a passing of a formal order by the Agricultural Income-tax Officer treating the assessee as in default and what the nature and the general contents of that order should be - Held, yes

  ---

• 1967 (1) TMI 9 - MYSORE HIGH COURT
  

  Tribuanl - power - jurisdiction to set aside the entire order of the AAC

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... e Appellate Tribunal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to examine the question of unaccounted stock afresh is beyond the appellate powers of the Tribunal. The direction for the examination of cash credits and bank deposits is beyond its jurisdiction, if it is to be regarded as a direction to treat them as a separate head for making additions, but may be regarded as within jurisdiction if it is construed as a direction to examine the same as evidence to lead assurance to the additions in respect of groundnut and groundnut oil and cake. The observation amounting in the circumstances to a direction that on a re-hearing of the appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner may make an order resulting in an enhancement of tax liability beyond the liability fixed by the Income-tax Officer, the original assessing authority, is beyond the appellate powers of the Tribunal. The assessee will have the costs of this reference. Advocate s fee Rs. 250. Question answered in the negative

  ---

• 1967 (1) TMI 8 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
  

  Estimation of income by ITO - consideration of facts - it is not possible to say that the estimate of income was arbitrary or capricious to justify holding that some error of law had been committed by the Tribunal in confirming the flat rate of 5% applied by the departmental authorities.

  ---

• 1967 (1) TMI 7 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
  

  Speculation Business - Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the business activities of the company, to wit, manufacture and sale of sugar and sale and purchase of gunnies, jute and mustard seeds constituted the same business within the meaning of s. 24(2) of the IT Act, 1922 - Held, no

  ---

• 1967 (1) TMI 6 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
  

  Assessment Proceedings - Orders made under sections 35(8) and 35(7) - legallity

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... he delay. In these circumstances, the delay has not been explained and cannot be condoned and the petitioners application must fail on that ground. In considering the question of delay in the light of the arguments advanced by the learned counsel, we have incidentally considered the questions arising on the merits of the case also to a certain extent. We may, however, like to make it clear that our consideration and examination of the said question was not intended to be full and exhaustive, but only incidental and tentative as was necessary for the purpose of determining whether the petitioners case could be said to fall in the category of cases where the orders complained of reveal a patent lack of jurisdiction on the part of the authority making it so as to entitle the petitioners to have the said orders quashed and set aside on a writ application irrespective of the question of delay. The result, therefore, is that the petition fails and the rule is discharged with costs.

  ---

• 1967 (1) TMI 5 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
  

  Assessment of net wealth - status - HUF - deed of gift was an absolute gift and in respect of properties covered by the deed of gift, the assessee must be assessed in his capacity as an individual

  ---

• 1967 (1) TMI 4 - MYSORE HIGH COURT
  

  Assessment - status - HUF - assessee is not entitled to claim that he should be assessed as a HUF

  ---

• 1967 (1) TMI 3 - MYSORE HIGH COURT
  

  Whether,the act of throwing the self-acquired property of the assessee into the common hotch-pot of the HUFof which he was the karta, with the intention of abandoning his rights in that property and then dividing it unequally between his wife and sons amounted to a gift within the meaning of the term 'gift' as defined in the Gift-tax Act - Held,no

  ---

• 1967 (1) TMI 2 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
  

  Amount recieved as sales tax for transactions effected - Whether the sum of Rs. 24,341 was liable to tax under s. 41(1) - Held, no

  ---

• 1967 (1) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT
  

  Nothing seems to have been done by the concerned ITO to ascertain the amounts refundable to the firm or its partners - Whether order of the Board of Revenue was valid - it was directed to the concerned ITO to complete his enquiry in regard to the amounts refundable to the appellant-firm or its partners

  ---

1234