Case Laws |
Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 1967 1967 (6) This
|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 21 to 34 of 34 Records
-
1967 (6) TMI 14
One deceased, executed a deed of wakf, and thereby created a charitable trust - income of the wakf - exempt from taxation under the provisions of s. 4(3)(I)
-
1967 (6) TMI 13
Order under s. 13 of the IT Act - penalty - Whether the information collected by the department was disclosed to the assessee and he was afforded an opportunity as directed by this court and whether there is any material which could form the basis of the impugned order - Held, no
-
1967 (6) TMI 12
Assessee-company, which was a resident private limited company during the relevant previous year but had been converted into a non-resident public limited company before the date of the annual general meeting at which the accounts of the previous years were adopted - justification of the order passed by ITO under s. 23A(1)
-
1967 (6) TMI 11
WTO was justified in including in the total wealth of the assessee, the amount of representing the probable amount of compensation receivable by the assessee from the Govt
-
1967 (6) TMI 10
Bad debts - permissible deduction - section 10(1) or 10(2)(xi) ... ... ... ... ..... onetheless they are unrealised. Nothing has been stated to show that subsequently at any rate, they were realised. In some of the cases, subsequent realisations have been taken as indicating that the debts were realisable. In this case, nothing has been stated as to whether these debts were realisable or realised. On the facts set out in the statement of the case, we have no hesitation in accepting the contention of the learned advocate for the assessee that the assessee could not do more than what he had done to recover these debts (short of filing a suit, which in law he cannot do) and that be had every reason to write them off as debts which are not recoverable. The attempt by the Income-tax Officer to get confirmation of the existence of the debts and their irrecoverability supports the case of the assessee. Our answer to the question, therefore, is in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee, with costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 250. Question answered in the affirmative.
-
1967 (6) TMI 9
Principles of commercial trading and commercial expediency - expenditure incurred - section 10(2)(xv)
-
1967 (6) TMI 8
Penalty for late submission of return - imposition of penalty was justified ... ... ... ... ..... oning, once proceedings under section 34 are reopened by applying the procedure referred to therein, in the course of which it is discovered that the assessee had made a deliberate omission, either with respect of the original assessment or in the return filed under section 34, it cannot be said that the omission or default has been condoned merely because the subsequent return has been accepted by the income-tax authorities. We see no distinction between the two cases. The actual result of the assessment has nothing to do with the question whether a return as furnished by the assessee has concealed any particulars of the income or furnished inaccurate particulars thereof. These observations apply with full force to the facts of the present case and we are of the view that the question must be answered in the affirmative and against the assessee, with costs. In the particular circumstances of the case, Advocate s fee is fixed at Rs. 150. Question answered in the affirmative.
-
1967 (6) TMI 7
Cess paid under the Bengal Cess Act, 1880, by an assessee carrying on the business of manufacturing pig iron, cast iron and iron and steel goods from the ores recovered from its mines - amounts paid by the appellant as cess to the Govt. of Bihar are not permissible allowances in the computation of the income of the assessee
-
1967 (6) TMI 6
Assessment year not correctly prescribed in the notice for reassessment - notice of reassessment is not valid
-
1967 (6) TMI 5
Gift Tax Act, 1958 - amounts relinquished in favour of the sons by the assessee - it amount to gifts within the meaning of section 4(c) of the GT Act, are also gifts within the definition of section 5(j) of the Expenditure-tax Act - therefore,items are exempt from expenditure-tax
-
1967 (6) TMI 4
Assessee-company - mutual benefit society - members who contributed to the profits and the participants in the distribution of profits are not identical and there was no question of mutuality - exemption cannot be granted
-
1967 (6) TMI 3
Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in view of section 10(4) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the sum of Rs. 11,906 paid on account of road and education cesses was an allowable expenditure under section 10(2)(xv) of the said Act - Held, no
-
1967 (6) TMI 2
Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the ITO had failed to exercise the discretion vested in him u/s 23(4), before refusing registration and/or renewal of registration of the assessee-firm and in granting registration to the assessee-firm - Held, yes
-
1967 (6) TMI 1
Termination of service - sum paid to the assessee may not be an amount spent wholly and exclusively for business purposes of the employer of the assessee and may not be deductible under s. 10(2)(xv) of the Act but that along would not make the sum an item of income in the hands of the assessee
|
|