Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 1967 1967 (11) 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 21 to 40 of 61 Records

• 1967 (11) TMI 98 - SUPREME COURT
  

  Whether in pursuance of this power of revision the Deputy Commissioner could direct a further inquiry under rule 14-A made under section 19 of Bombay Sales Tax Act of 1953?

  Held that:- Appeal dismissed. In the case before us, the turnover of the assessee now sought to be taxed in the revisional proceedings did not escape liability to tax under the orders of the Sales Tax Officer and, on the other hand, was actually taxed by him, which imposition of tax was set aside in appeal. Consequently, the Sales Tax Officer could not possibly take proceedings under section 11A in respect of that turnover.

  For these reasons, we hold that the proceedings initiated by the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax against the appellant are not incompetent and the High Court was right in refusing the writ sought by the appellant.

  ---

• 1967 (11) TMI 96 - SUPREME COURT
  

  The Explanation to section 2(g) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act (1 of 1959) is not ultra vires the Legislature.

  Whether any part of the Explanation (1) to section 2(n) is ultra vires the Legislature does not fall to be determined in this case, for, we are of the view that the transactions of the respondent-Society fell within the substantive part of the definition of the expression "sale", and on that account those transactions are taxable under the Madras General Sales Tax Act (1 of 1959).

  The appeals must therefore be allowed, and the petitions filed by the Society dismissed. In view of the order passed by this Court on August 12, 1965, when leave was granted to appeal to this Court, the appellant will pay costs of these appeals to the respondent.

  ---

• 1967 (11) TMI 94 - SUPREME COURT
  

  Whether the transactions in the present case are sales or contracts of agency is a mixed question of fact and law and must be investigated with reference to the material which the appellant might be able to place before the appropriate authority. The question is not one which can properly be determined in an application for a writ under Article 226 of the Constitution - Appeal dismissed.

  ---

• 1967 (11) TMI 67 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
  

  Enforcement of orders of courts

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... Act. That decision, therefore, does not lay down anything contrary to what I have stated earlier. In S. Natarajan v. V. Narasimha Ayyangar AIR 1930 Mad. 74 this question was left open by the Bench. It observed We do not propose to decide the question, in what manner, in the event of an application being made to the High Court, is the order to be enforced, by direct action or by its being transmitted to the Tanjore court ? That is a point which does not arise at present . That decision, therefors, is not helpful. Since I am in respectful agreement with the Madras decision in In the matter of the Indian Companies Act AIR 1927 Mad. 271 and no decision contra has been brought to my notice, I would hold that the learned District Judge was right in holding that the District Court had the necessary jurisdiction to enforce the order transferred to it by this court. I can find, therefore, no valid reason to interfere The appeal, therefore, fails and is dismissed. No order as to costs.

  ---

• 1967 (11) TMI 66 - IN THE CHANCERY DIVISION
  

  Winding up - Circumstances in which a company may be wound up

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... that it is advisable that I would say on it at this stage of the conflict between the parties. The second matter to mention is the company s insolvency. Insolvency in connection with a winding-up petition means inability to pay debts as they fall due and not a deficiency of assets as compared with liabilities. Indeed, insolvency in that sense, of inability to pay debts as they fall due, clearly appears from Mr. Mann s own affidavits. The evidence of such insolvency of both companies is altogether so conclusive to my mind that I do not propose to analyse or particularise it, especially as I do not rely on it for my conclusion but come to my conclusion despite it. My conclusion, therefore, is, in the case of each company, for the reasons which I have given at length, that the plaintiffs are entitled to the injunctions which they claim, untif trial or further order unless, of course, the parties, by chance, consent to agree to treat this motion itself as the trial of the action.

  ---

• 1967 (11) TMI 56 - HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
  

  Associations and partnerships exceeding certain numbers – Prohibition of

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... he signature by an agent on his behalf is invalid . made the observation relied upon by Sri Gupta. It will therefore be seen that the passage relied upon by Sri Gupta does not even remotely purport to support his contention. Thus, for the reasons stated above, I am of the opinion that as the number of persons constituting the partnership in question exceeds 20, in all the three years with which we are concerned in this reference, the Income-tax Officer was right in treating it as invalid under section 4(2) read with section 4(3) of the Indian Companies Act, and in refusing registration to it under section 26A of the Income-tax Act, I would, therefore, in agreement with Jagdish Sahai J., answer the question referred to this court in the affirmative. Let the papers of this case be returned to the Bench concerned with the answer proposed above. By the court The question is answered in the affirmative. The assessee shall pay the costs of the department which we assess at Rs. 400.

  ---

• 1967 (11) TMI 55 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB
  

  Winding up - Company when deemed unable to pay its debts, Cost and expenses payable out of assets in a winding-up by Court

  ---

• 1967 (11) TMI 52 - SUPREME COURT
  

  Articles of association - Regulations required in case of unlimited company, company limited by guarantee or private company limited by shares, Directors – Power of, Director – Interested, not to participate or vote in Board’s proceedings and Winding up – Company when deemed unable to pay its debts

  ---

• 1967 (11) TMI 50 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
  

  General provisions with respect to memorandum and articles - Effect of memorandum and articles, Charges – Registration of, Directors – Power of, Winding up – Suits stayed on winding-up order, Debts of all descriptions to be admitted to proof and Overriding preferential payments

  ---

• 1967 (11) TMI 32 - SUPREME COURT
  

  Whether section 476, or section 479 A of the Code applies to the instant complaint?

  Held that:- the proceedings under section 26A before respondent No. 1 must be treated as proceedings in a court for the purposes of section 195(1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Income-tax Officer, however, cannot be treated as a revenue court. Though, therefore, proceedings before the Income-tax Officer are judicial proceedings in a court and section 195(1)(b) applies, neither section 476 nor section 479A of the Code would be applicable. It was, therefore, not incumbent upon respondent No. 1 to follow the procedure laid down in either of these two sections. The first contention of Mr. Gupte, therefore, must fail.

  As regards second contention, the question raised by him would be one of evidence the appellants can raise it before the Magistrate trying the complaint. We, therefore, decline to go into that question. Appeal dismissed.

  ---

• 1967 (11) TMI 31 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
  

  Trust - validity of gift(shares) made to trust - entitlement of refund of tax deducted at source on dividends accruing on gifted shares

  ---

• 1967 (11) TMI 30 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
  

  Transfer of machinery to firm by sole partners at appreciated value - juristic person - mere fact that the assessee transferred its interest to the firm at an appreciated value does not make the assessee liable to pay tax

  ---

• 1967 (11) TMI 29 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
  

  Dividend paid to assessee in form of shares - ITO concluded that the total shares, received by the assessee were equivalent in terms of money to Rs. 2,44,526. Since the assessee had shown the value of the shares at Rs. 1,82,870 only he added back the difference of Rs. 61,656 to the assessee`s income as dividend - held that tribunal was right in excluding the sum of Rs. 61,656 from being assessed as an extra dividend income of the assessee

  ---

• 1967 (11) TMI 28 - KERALA HIGH COURT
  

  Travancore-Cochin Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1950 - assessment after partition of family - validity

  ---

• 1967 (11) TMI 27 - GOA HIGH COURT
  

  Whether a ship chartered by a non-resident time charterer which carries goods shipped at a port in India, and of which the time charterer is disponee owner, is liable to pay tax u/s 172 of the IT Act - Held, no

  ---

• 1967 (11) TMI 26 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
  

  Payments made by the assessee to nominees - held that payments were not capital expenditure -expenditure were incurred for carriage of business in a more facile and profitable manner -allowable as deduction u/s 10(2)(xv)

  ---

• 1967 (11) TMI 25 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
  

  Estate-Duty - delay in the filing of the appeal -Assessee became unconscious - Board was not justified in refusing to admit the appeal

  ---

• 1967 (11) TMI 24 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
  

  Indian Sale of Goods Act, 1930 - assessee-company is a dealer in jute in East Pakistan as well as in India - there was no unconditional appropriation of the goods by the buyer, as soon as they were placed on board the steamer on C.I.F. terms - unconditional appropriation, therefore, took place in India, notwithstanding the c.i.f. terms and the title to the goods passed to the buyers in India

  ---

• 1967 (11) TMI 23 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
  

  Assessee-company explained the losses on three considerations- because of abnormal conditions obtaining in the year 1947 due to raids, because of loss due to floods, and because of some of the timber having been washed down - Whether there was no material or evidence that the shortage claimed by the assessee-company is excessive or unwarranted

  ---

• 1967 (11) TMI 22 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
  

  Assessee preferred an appeal before the AAC and claimed deduction from the computation of the total income - held that tribunal was in error in holding that the assessee had no right of appeal before the AAC

  ---

1234