Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 1977 1977 (4) 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 101 to 117 of 117 Records

• 1977 (4) TMI 17
  

  Priority Industry, Total Income

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... his discretion in a particular way, it was open to the Tribunal to substitute its discretion for that of the Income-tax Officer. Hence, the question whether the Income-tax Officer had exercised his discretion properly, does not arise out of the order of the Tribunal. The first of the above questions cannot be said to arise out of the appellate order of the Tribunal. The answer to the second question is self-evident because the Tribunal has referred to the circumstances that the notice under section 143(2) was issued for February 21, 1969, and the other notice under section 142(1) for February 19, 1969, that the assessment was completed on February 24, 1969, and that all the proceedings were completed within a period of less than one month. Hence, it cannot be said that the Tribunal had no material to exercise its discretion in the way it has done. In the result this application is dismissed. But, in the circumstances of the case, we direct the parties to bear their own costs.

  ---

• 1977 (4) TMI 16
  

  Business Expenditure, Capital Employed, Deduction From Profits And Gains, Industrial Undertaking

  ---

• 1977 (4) TMI 15
  

  Attributable To, Charitable Trust, Income Tax

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... e amount on such charitable purposes, then, the surplus income will have to be divided among the beneficiaries and to that extent there will be an assessment either in the hands of the trustees in their vicarious capacity or in the hands of the beneficiaries directly, in accordance with the respective shares. For the foregoing reasons we hold that the assessee is justified in his claim that the assessment should be made in the hands of the trustees only in a representative capacity in accordance with the provisions of section 8(1)(a) and the whole of the income cannot be clubbed in the hands of the trustee as if it is a single unit of assessment. We also find that the Tribunal has remanded the matter to the Agricultural Income-tax Officer and the Agricultural Income-tax Officer would work out the shares in accordance with the directions given above and make separate assessments. This tax revision petition is allowed accordingly in part and there will be no order as to costs.

  ---

• 1977 (4) TMI 14
  

  Assessment Proceedings

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... nsfer of his case, did not dispute his assessability to income-tax for the relevant years. By force of events such assessments would be time barred for no fault of the revenue unless appropriate directions are given by the court. We have not the least doubt in our mind that the present case is a fit one in national interest and, in the circumstances, to issue appropriate directions, the power in respect whereof has been expressly conferred on the court, authorising the Income-tax Officer, A Ward, Karimganj, to make assessment in respect of the relevant years referred to above. The appeal in the premises is allowed and the impugned order of transfer of the case of the appellant dated December 23, 1972, is set aside with the direction on the Income-tax Officer, A Ward, Karimganj, to make assessment on the appellant in respect of the assessment years 1970-71, 1972-73, 1973-74 and 1974-75. There will be no order for costs in the appeal in the circumstances. G. N. RAY J.-I agree.

  ---

• 1977 (4) TMI 13
  

  Income Tax, Law Applicable, Wealth Tax Act, Wealth Tax Penalty

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... hat the assessees should have filed their wealth-tax returns even without caring to ascertain their income-tax liability for the year. It may be mentioned that the Tribunal had held that there was no excuse whatever for the assessees to delay their wealth-tax returns a moment after the submission of their income-tax returns. It is on this footing that the Tribunal had held that the delay subsequent to June 2, 1969, cannot be excused as being for a reasonable cause. Having regard to all the circumstances of this case, we agree with the conclusion of the Tribunal that the period of unreasonable delay in filing the assessee s wealth-tax returns must be reckoned for purposes of penalty under section 18(1)(a)(i) of the Wealth-tax Act from the date of filing of their income-tax returns. In the result, the second question in these two references must also be answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. There will, however, be no order as to costs in both the tax cases.

  ---

• 1977 (4) TMI 12
  

  Income Escaped Assessment

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... and and that she was intending to use it as an agricultural land and that she was only waiting for a proper buyer who would buy for a good price. The Tribunal had before it the tests which this court had laid down and felt that the mere fact that it was put to agricultural use in the last two years will not by itself make the land, which was kept fallow or idle for a long period, " agricultural land ". The agricultural character of the land had changed after the assessee stopped cultivating it from the assessment year 1960-61. We are, therefore, of the view that having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal had correctly applied the tests laid down by this court and come to the conclusion that the land is not " agricultural land " so as to entitle the assessee to exemption by viture of section 2(e)(i) of the Act. The reference is accordingly answered in the affirmative, in favour of the revenue and against the assessee, with costs.

  ---

• 1977 (4) TMI 11
  

  Accounting Year, Business Expenditure, Mercantile System

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... n Contract Act do not help in arriving at a correct conclusion as, in the instant case, the considerations as to the implied contract would be wholly out of context. It follows, therefore, that the answers to the questions would all be in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. We are of the opinion that on the facts of the case, the assessee was entitled to claim as a deduction from its income the whole amount of Rs. 75,80,183 as interest payable on loans taken by it in the assessment year 1957-58. The second question is also answered in the affirmative. The liability of the assessee for payment of interest arose on May 14, 1957, when the assessee received the letter from the State Government informing the interest liability against the company payable to the Government. As regards the third question, we find that the quantum of interest payable by the assessee became ascertainable only on May 14, t957 and not before that date. We, however, make no order as to costs.

  ---

• 1977 (4) TMI 10
  

  Income Tax Act, Original Order

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... trika Venkataswamy and Sons 1971 79 ITR 499, 501, wherein it was observed that the appellant could not ask the High Court to call for a statement of case on a question on which the Tribunal was not asked to submit a statement. Under s. 66(2) of the Act, the High Court may call for a statement of case if the High Court is not satisfied about the correctness, of the decision of the Tribunal refusing to state a case to the High Court. The High Court cannot obviously be satisfied that the decision of the Tribunal in not submitting a statement on a question is incorrect when the Tribunal was never asked to submit a statement of case on that question . In view of the above decision, there cannot be any doubt that the second question cannot be directed to be referred to the High Court as the same was not the subject-matter of the reference application before the Tribunal. In view of the foregoing discussion, the income-tax case is dismissed but, in the circumstances, without costs.

  ---

• 1977 (4) TMI 9
  

  Partnership Deed, Previous Year

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... ng it accordingly. Thus, it shows that the assessee has exercised the option in favour of a day round about Diwali day for closing its accounts and also that it has been, time and again without exception, assessed by the department accordingly. In such a case, there is no need to obtain the consent of the I.T. department to close its accounts on any particular day if it is round about Diwali day. By virtue of this option which has been fully demonstrated by the invariable practice and also on account of the fact that all along it has been so assessed by the department, it is clear that the need for securing the consent of the ITO under sub-sec. (4) of sec. 3 did not arise. So, the answer to the question is that the assessee is entitled to close its accounts on November 5, 1962, without the consent of the ITO under s. 3(4). The question is thus answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. The assessee will have its costs from the revenue. Advocate s fee Rs. 250.

  ---

• 1977 (4) TMI 8
  

  Business Expenditure, Income Tax Act, Industrial Undertaking

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... thereon. Hence, we see no reason why the roads which are built on the surface of the land could not be constituted as building so as to be entitled for depreciation. It is a matter of common knowledge that roads definitely depreciate. The extent of depreciation depends upon the nature of the roads, depending upon the material used for construction of roads such as concrete, black top, gravel or earth. Hence, we are of the opinion that depreciation can be allowed on roads and the direction given to the ITO to examine the nature of roads and grant depreciation in accordance with the I. T. Rules, is perfectly in order. Hence, we answer this in the affirmative and against the revenue. In the result, question No. 1 is answered in the affirmative and against the assessee, question No. 2 is answered in the affirmative and against the revenue and question No. 3 is answered in the affirmative and against the revenue. In the circumstances, we direct the parties to bear their own costs.

  ---

• 1977 (4) TMI 7
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... hat s. 44 does not apply to registered firms. I fail to see how this decision is of any assistance to the Revenue in the instant case. I am not concerned with registered firm or the dissolution thereof. I, therefore, hold that this decision is of no relevance to the instant case. The contention raised on behalf of the petitioner, therefore, succeeds. In the result, this application succeeds and the Rule is made absolute There will be a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to forthwith recall, cancel and withdraw the impugned notice dated the March 6, 1964, being No. (IV)(I)/R-701/A, under s. 274 read with s. 271 of the Act and directing them to forbear from giving effect to the said notice in any manner whatsoever. The respondents will, however, be at liberty to proceed according to law. There will be no order as to costs. Let the operation of this order be stayed for a period of six weeks from date. Any further stay must be obtained from the appeal court.

  ---

• 1977 (4) TMI 6
  

  Prosecution

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... t, which is the subject-matter of C.C. No. 5674 of 1976, has been filed. It is clear from the complaint produced before this court that the same is independent of the assessment order passed by the ITO of the Fourth City Circle dated March 28, 1974. It is well settled that there can be parallel proceedings both in civil and criminal courts. The proceedings before the income-tax authorities can be construed only as civil proceedings. Further the complaint launched is independent of the order passed by the ITO and the order of the ITO has been quoted incidentally in the complaint. The complaint, as it is, makes out a Prima facie case against the petitioners herein and, no doubt, it is for the complainant to establish the offences against the petitioners herein, before the Criminal court. As it is, there is no case made out for calling for the records and quashing the proceedings in C.C. No. 5674 of 1976. In these circumstances, this criminal miscellaneous petition is dismissed.

  ---

• 1977 (4) TMI 5
  

  Provisional Assessment - Whether penalty can be imposed on a garnishee for failure to pay in accordance with a garnishee notice - Notice cannot be held invalid - but penalty on assessee is set aside - Assessee's appeal is allowed in part

  ---

• 1977 (4) TMI 4
  

  Partnership Deed - When commission is paid to an employee, whether it is necessary that the employee should have rendered extra services - in order to claim the deduction under s. 36(1)(ii), it is not necessary that the commission should have been paid under a contractual obligation - Assessee's appeal is allowed

  ---

• 1977 (4) TMI 3
  

  Section 2(6A)(e) of 1922 Act, would be attracted at the time of advance of loan being made to the shareholder except for the specific provisions in s. 12(1B) - legislature has deliberately not made the subsistence of the loan on the date of the previous year a prerequisite for raising the statutory provisions - Therefore, even though the loan was not outstanding as of the year end, it should be treated as deemed dividend - Assessee's appeal is dismissed

  ---

• 1977 (4) TMI 2
  

  Foreign Company - Income Accruing or Arising in India - supply of technical information and know-how, technical management etc. - business connection - fee could not be gained to have accrued or arisen in India. Since it has not been established that some of the operations were carried out in India, in respect of which the income is sought to be assessed - Assessee's appeal allowed

  ---

• 1977 (4) TMI 1
  

  Diversion by Overriding Title - land taken on lease - effect of the condition in lease that 50% of the unearned increase in the value to be paid to the lessor at the time of transfer on the valuation of leasehold interest - market value of the interest where it is not encumbered by the lease deed should be reduced by 50% of the unearned increase in the value of the land on the basis of the hypothetical sale on the valuation date - Revenue's appeal dismissed

  ---

1 ....23456