Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 1968 1968 (9) 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 41 to 60 of 89 Records

• 1968 (9) TMI 49 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
  

  Partnership admitting the limited company as a partner - assessment re-opened, as capital gain to the firm by the sale escaped taxation - Whether any capital gains within the meaning of s. 12B of the IT Act, 1922, could be said to arise by the transaction involving transfer of investment held by the assessee-company, admission of the company as a partner in the assessee-firm and issue of shares of the company to public - Held, yes

  ---

• 1968 (9) TMI 48 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
  

  Estate Duty Act, 1953 - property - levy of estate duty

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... that clause 8 did not confer any estate or interest in the deceased such as would enable him to dispose of the settled properties in such manner as he liked. We must accordingly hold that the deceased was not competent at the time of his death to dispose of the settled properties and the settled properties did not fall the mischief of section 6. Our answer to the question referred to us therefore is that the value, as on the death of the deceased, of the properties settled by the deceased under the settlement dated 27th January, 1951, was liable to inclusion in the principal value of the estate of the deceased as property passing under section 12(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, while the value of the property settled by Bai Jasud under the said settlement was not liable to inclusion in the principal value of the estate of the deceased as property deemed to pass on his death either under section 6 or section 12 of that Act. There will be no order as to costs of the reference.

  ---

• 1968 (9) TMI 47 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  

  Plaintiff, owner of the property - compensation under provision of s. 17 of Madras Revenue Recovery Act, 1864

  ---

• 1968 (9) TMI 46 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
  

  Estate Duty Act, 1953 - Whether the release deed executed by the deceased was correctly held to constitute a disposition in favour of a relative, within the meaning of section 27(1) read with Explanation 2 to section 2(15) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 - Held, no

  ---

• 1968 (9) TMI 45 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
  

  Gift - liability to gift-tax

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... acts clearly show that they were admitted as partners for consideration, the consideration being that with their experience gained by them as employees they would attend to the business of the firm, no remuneration would be payable to them as was being done till then, they would share not only in the assets but also in the liabilities of the firm and they would also participate in the future losses of the firm, if any. We are therefore of the view that even if there was a transfer by the assessee of his 19 nP. share in the firm to Mohanlal Karnaji and Govindlal Karnaji--- a matter on which we do not express any opinion---the transfer was not without consideration in money or money s worth and there was therefore no gift by the assessee to Mohanlal Karnaji and Govindlal Karnaji which would attract the liability to gift-tax under the Act. Our answer to the question referred to us therefore is in the negative. The Commissioner will pay the costs of the reference to the assessee.

  ---

• 1968 (9) TMI 44 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
  

  Assessee appealed to AAC against an order of assessment but not questioned the decision of IT on the point decided. AAC has not considered that point in his order - further appeal to Tribunal - assessee was not entitled to question the decision of the officer on the point in an appeal to the Tribunal against the order of the AAC - further, tribunal was not entitled to allow the assessee to agitate this question under the guise of granting leave under r. 11 of the IT (Tribunal) Rules, 1963 -

  ---

• 1968 (9) TMI 43 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
  

  Assessee, employee - contributions made to the pension scheme of company - entitled to any exemption u/s 15(1) of the IT Act, 1922

  ---

• 1968 (9) TMI 42 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  

  Rebates on the undistributed profits of the company - ITO passed orders under section 23A(1) by which the entire undistributed profits were deemed to have been distributed as dividends to the shareholders. As a consequence, the assessment orders were reopened under section 34 with the result the rebates granted earlier were withdrawn - action of ITO is justified

  ---

• 1968 (9) TMI 41 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  

  Estate Duty Act, 1953 - liability of Rs. 5,548 claimed as a deduction from the value of the properties of the Hindu undivided family in which the deceased had one-third share - claim is disallowed under section 46(1)(a) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953

  ---

• 1968 (9) TMI 40 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
  

  Estate Duty Act, 1953 - value of the trust properties - chargeability to estate duty

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... tate or 65 of the share referable to Jarbanoo can be said to have been passed on the death of Mary. We have already indicated in the course of this judgment that qua 50 of the trust fund referable to the property brought in by Mary, section 12 is applicable and, therefore, 50 of the trust fund referable to property brought in by Mary must be deemed to have passed on Mary s death. As regards the remaining 50 , by operation of section 5 of the Act, only 65 of that 50 representing jarbanoo s share in the trust corpus can be said to have passed on Mary s death and out of the entire corpus, 50 representing Mary s share plus 32 1/2 (65 of the 50 share of Jarbanoo) can be included in the value of the state of the deceased. We, therefore, answer the question referred to us as follows The entire value of the trust properties is not chargeable to estate duty but only 82 1/2 thereof is chargeable to estate duty. In the special circumstances of this case, there will be no order to costs.

  ---

• 1968 (9) TMI 39 - KERALA HIGH COURT
  

  Levy of surchage on the salary portion of assessee's total income - validity

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... d super-tax are chargeable by deduction at source were not treated like salary income. The question of ascertaining the legislative intent for the purpose of construction arises only when the language employed in the particular provision is ambiguous or lacks in clarity. In our view, the language employed in sub-section (2) of section 2 of the Finance Act, 1964, does not suffer from any such defect. There is also the principle that a taxing statute has to be construed in favour of the subject, when a question of construction arises due to want of clarity or due to ambiguity in the language employed therein. We are, therefore, unable to accede to the contention of the learned counsel for the revenue. In the result, we answer the question referred to this court in the negative and in favour of the assessee. The parties will bear their own costs. A copy of this judgment will be forwarded to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal as required by section 260 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

  ---

• 1968 (9) TMI 38 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
  

  By means of Trust deeds jewellery was settled on the Trustees for the purpose of meeting the marriage expenses of two brothers and the sister of the settlor - trust deed contained a clause that after meeting the expenses of the marriage, the balance, was to be handed over to the wives of the brothers or the sister - said trust deeds were revocable after a period of six years - Can the jewellery so settled be treated as the wealth of the settlor - Held, No

  ---

• 1968 (9) TMI 37 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
  

  Estate Duty Act, 1953 - Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 60,000, standing to the credit of the account of the deceased's brother, in the firm of M/s. Shantilal C. Kapadia, was correctly included in the principal value of the estate of the deceased - Held, yes

  ---

• 1968 (9) TMI 36 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
  

  Expenditure Tax Act, 1957 - assessee incurred expenditure on publication and distribution of educative and informative literature on the subject of emotional liberation between the people of India and Kashmir - held that such expenditure is exempt

  ---

• 1968 (9) TMI 35 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
  

  Assessee's wife, a social worker associated with various organisations engaged in social welfare had incurred expenditure for attending some meetings of these institutions - assessee's wife had dedicated her life to such social work and hence the same amounted to occupation and expenditure incurred for attending the meetings is not taxable expenditure of the assessee

  ---

• 1968 (9) TMI 34 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  

  Assessee sold a property and invested the sale consideration in another property after one year from the payment of the sale price but within one year of execution of sale deed - assessee was entitled to the benefit u/s 12B(4)(b)Indian Income Tax Act, 1922

  ---

• 1968 (9) TMI 33 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  

  Super-tax levied on the profits withheld by the assessee in excess of the permissible limits under section 23A - whether a sum donated by the assessee-company to Nachimuthu Industrial Association would form part of the total income, and if so, whether distribution of a larger dividend than that declared would be unreasonable - donations to charity by the assessee-company can not be regarded as proper outgoing eligible for deduction

  ---

• 1968 (9) TMI 32 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
  

  All the oral and documentary evidence produced by the assessee-HUF to support its claim of a partial partition in the family was rejected by the Tribunal mainly on suspicion and conjecture - action of tribunal is not justified

  ---

• 1968 (9) TMI 31 - KERALA HIGH COURT
  

  Credit entries found in account boooks - income from undisclosed sources - held that there was no substantial reasons to right the assessee's explanation and draw the inference that the amounts found with him constitute income

  ---

• 1968 (9) TMI 30 - KERALA HIGH COURT
  

  Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950 - rejection of accounts - Whether the Tribunal was justified in rejecting the yield of pepper returned by the assessee and confirming the estimated assessment of the yield by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner - question referred in these cases is answered in the negative and in favour of the assessee

  ---

12345