|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 161 to 180 of 240 Records
-
1993 (1) TMI 83 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Import Policy for Registered Exporters, 1985-88 ... ... ... ... ..... he facts and circumstances of the case, in our judgment, the proper order would be to reduce the redemption fine and the penalty to 50 of what was levied by the Additional Collector. It is required to be stated that while admitting the appeal, the Division Bench of this Court had directed that the appellants should pay 50 of the redemption fine and personal penalty and for the remaining 50 , bank guarantee should be furnished. It is not in dispute that the appellants have paid 50 of the redemption fine and the penalty. In our judgment, such payment is sufficient in the facts and circumstances of the case. 7. Accordingly, appeal is partly allowed and while upholding the order passed by the Additional Collector and the learned Single Judge, the amount of redemption fine and penalty is reduced to 50 of the amount levied by Additional Collector. The bank guarantee furnished by the appellants stands discharged. In the circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs.
-
1993 (1) TMI 81 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Port Charges - Liability to pay ... ... ... ... ..... rities are to be refunded to the owner. It is, therefore, obvious that the contention of Shri Patel that the Act does not provide for liability of the owner to pay the charges is without any substance. In our judgment, the trial Judge was in error in concluding that the defendants are not liable to pay the charges demanded by the Port Trust. As the defendants did not dispute about the quantum of amount demanded by the Port Trust, the appellants are entitled to the decree as sought. 8. Accordingly, appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment and decree dated December 12, 1989 passed by learned Single Judge in Short Cause Suit No. 394 of 1979 is set aside and the following decree is passed - The defendants are ordered and decreed to pay to the plaintiffs a sum of Rs. 1,58,345.10 with interest thereon at the rate of 12 per annum from the date of the suit till realisation. The defendants shall also pay the costs of the suit. The respondents shall pay the costs of the appellants.
-
1993 (1) TMI 79 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the duty of excise in respect of Tariff Item Nos. 18A(ii), 18(III)(ii) and 18E is to be levied and collected on the weight of the unsized yarn and not on the basis of the weight of the sized yarn?
Held that:- J.K. Cotton Mills will be applicable to all types of cases under Items 18-I, 18-III and 18E. The result is that all the aforesaid writ petitions are accepted and the impugned show cause notices are quashed.
-
1993 (1) TMI 77 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the interest of a partner in partnership assets is to be treated as movable property or both movable and immovable depending on the character of the property for the purposes of section 17 of the Registration Act?
Held that:- The award read as a whole makes it absolutely clear that the arbitrators had confined themselves to the properties belonging to the two firms and had scrupulously avoided other properties in regard to which they did not reach the conclusion that they belonged to the firm. On a correct reading of the award, we are satisfied that the award seeks to distribute the residue after settlement of accounts on dissolution. While distributing the residue the arbitrators allocated the properties to the partners and showed them in the schedules appended to the award. We are, therefore, of the opinion that on a true reading of the award as a whole, there is no doubt that it essentially deals with the distribution of the surplus properties belonging to the dissolved firms. The award, therefore, did not require registration under section 17(1) of the Registration Act. Appeal allowed.
-
1993 (1) TMI 76 - SC ORDER
Company, Surtax ... ... ... ... ..... any contention suggesting that the reasoning in the said judgment suffers from infirmities. It is as important that the law be certain as it is that it be correct. These appeals are, accordingly, dismissed, but without any order as to costs.
-
1993 (1) TMI 75 - SC ORDER
Foreign Income, Relief On Foreign Income ... ... ... ... ..... ar Rao, learned counsel for the appellant. We find no reason to take a view different from the one which commended itself to the High Court. The appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.
-
1993 (1) TMI 74 - SC ORDER
Depreciation, Registered Firm ... ... ... ... ..... s court in Garden Silk Weaving Factory v. CIT 1991 189 ITR 512. For the reasons stated in and following the said pronouncement, these appeals are dismissed, but without any order as to costs.
-
1993 (1) TMI 73 - SC ORDER
Company, General Reserve, Reserves, Surtax ... ... ... ... ..... of 1977. Learned counsel state that the various issues arising in these appeals are covered against the appellant by one or the other of the earlier pronouncements of this court. This submission is placed on record and these appeals are dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1993 (1) TMI 72 - SC ORDER
Reassessment ... ... ... ... ..... submit that the point raised in the appeal is covered by the pronouncement of this court in CIT v. Sun Engineering Works P. Ltd. 1992 198 ITR 297 in which the judgment under appeal in the present case is referred to and approved. For the reasons contained in and following the said pronouncement, CIT v. Sun Engineering Works P. Ltd. 1992 198 ITR 297 (SC), this appeal is dismissed. No costs.
-
1993 (1) TMI 71 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Company, False Statement In Verification, Offences And Prosecution, Sanction For Prosecution ... ... ... ... ..... sought to be made liable for the contraventions alleged. Therefore, it cannot be said that there are no allegations of any contravention by the company itself which is necessary to make other accused persons liable. We reject this contention as well. In conclusion, we hold that accused No. 1 company cannot be prosecuted under sections 276C and 277 of the Income-tax Act and, therefore, the proceedings against accused No. 1 before the trial court are quashed. The proceedings against accused Nos. 1 to 4 are also quashed for the reason that the sanctioning authority, i.e., the Commissioner did not afford opportunity to the petitioners-accused persons of being heard before according sanction under section 279(1) of the Act. The quashing of these proceedings, however, does not come in the way of the sanctioning authority, the Commissioner, according sanction for their prosecution after giving them reasonable opportunity of being heard according to the principles of natural justice.
-
1993 (1) TMI 70 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Capital Gains, Goodwill ... ... ... ... ..... erated in a business does not give rise to a capital gain for the purposes of income-tax. The Tribunal had relied upon the judgment of this court in CIT v. Mohanbhai Pamabhai 1973 91 ITR 393. The said decision of this court was disapproved by the Supreme Court in Srinivasa Setty s case 1981 128 ITR 294. It may be stated that the decision in Mohanbhai Pamabhai s case 1973 91 ITR 393 (Guj) was affirmed by the Supreme Court in Addl. CIT v. Mohanbhai Pamabhai 1987 165 ITR 166. But that is on a different point. Therefore, following the judgment of the Supreme Court in Srinivasa Setty s case 1981 128 ITR 294, question No. 1 referred to us is answered in the negative. In the view that we have taken, no opinion is required to be expressed on questions Nos. 2 and 3. We, therefore, answer question No. 1 in the negative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. We refuse to answer questions Nos. 2 and 3. The reference is disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.
-
1993 (1) TMI 69 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... xt year, and he submitted that this is indicative of the fact that the said transaction was a genuine transaction and it was really the transaction of R. P. Shah. That also lends support to the view which we are about to take that the said transaction was really that of R. P. Shah and not that of the assessee. In our view, in view of the material on record, the entries made in the books of the assessee, acceptance of the return of R. P. Shah which disclosed the said amount of Rs. 21,685 as his income and the circumstance that in the very next year, this amount was in fact paid to R. P. Shah, it cannot be said that the assessee had concealed the said income. As we are taking this view, it is not necessary to consider the question whether establishment of mens rea was necessary before passing the order of penalty. For the reasons stated above, we answer the question referred to us in the negative, that is in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. No order as to costs.
-
1993 (1) TMI 68 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Additional Tax, Assessment, Return Disclosing Loss ... ... ... ... ..... me so further increased, the amount of tax payable under sub-section (1) is to be increased by an additional amount of income-tax calculated at the rate of 20 per cent. of the tax payable on such excess amount. In my opinion, the interpretation put by the Delhi High Court on the aforesaid provision in the case of Modi Cement 1992 193 ITR 91 is the correct interpretation and sub-section (1A) of section 143 admits of no ambiguity. In the present case, there is no dispute that not only the return showing loss was filed, but as a result of adjustments also the income has not further increased and there was no question of any additional tax being levied or charged. Consequently, I hereby allow this writ petition and issue a writ of certiorari quashing the levy and imposition of additional tax under subsection (1A) of section 143 of the Income-tax Act and also quashing the intimation dated February 12, 1992 (Annr. modified, vide annr. B-3, dated February 28, 1992). Costs made easy.
-
1993 (1) TMI 67 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Interest On Borrowed Capital ... ... ... ... ..... ations regarding the individual shares of the partners in the profits of the two branches of the firm at Ernakulam and Kottayam. It is also stated that, as far as other branches are concerned, the partners would share the profit and loss of the firm in the ratio of 55 per cent. and 45 per cent. There is no indication in the deed that the two partners are to bear the loss of the two branches at Ernakulam and Kottayam otherwise than on the terms on which they were to share the profits of the two branches. On a reasonable and proper interpretation of the deed, it has to be held that there were sufficient materials before the authorities to arrive at the shares of individual partners in the loss of the firm. Therefore, we answer the questions referred in I.T.Rs. Nos. 10 and 11 of 1987, in the negative, in favour of the assessee. Income-tax References Nos. 585 of 1985, 4 of 1986 and 40 of 1986 will be considered by the Division Bench for answering the remaining questions referred.
-
1993 (1) TMI 66 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Advance Tax ... ... ... ... ..... Tribunal was justified in confirming the Appellate Assistant Commissioner s order that the interest payable under section 18A(6) of the 1922 Act should be calculated after deducting the D. I. T. relief admissible to the assessee from the incometax calculated on his income. That being the legal position, in our opinion, it does not make any difference whether correct computation was made in the original assessment or later, by way of rectification of mistake. In any event, the amount payable shall be the correct amount determined by the Income-tax Officer on regular assessment either originally or on rectification, in the event of any mistake in the original calculation. In view of the foregoing discussion, we do not find any error in the conclusion arrived at by the Tribunal. We, therefore, answer the question referred to us in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, we make no order as to costs.
-
1993 (1) TMI 65 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Capital Gains, HUF ... ... ... ... ..... plies only in cases where the cost for which the previous owner acquired the property cannot be ascertained. It is only in such cases that the cost of acquisition to the previous owner is taken to be the market value on the date on which the asset in question became the property of the previous owner. That is not the case here. It is not one of those cases where the cost in the hands of the previous owner cannot be ascertained. Admittedly, the cost in his hands is nil. That being so, there is no scope for taking resort to sub-section (3) of section 55 of the Act. That being so, the calculation of capital gain made in the instant case by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Tribunal by taking resort to the said provision cannot be sustained. In view of the foregoing discussion, the question referred to us is answered in the negative, that is, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, we make no order as to costs.
-
1993 (1) TMI 64 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Depreciation, Initial Depreciation ... ... ... ... ..... ive acquisition. This judgment has thus given a new dimension to the concept of enduring benefit . The approach now is more realistic and practical. The purpose of the outlay , its intended object and effect , considered in a commonsense way, having regard to the business realities, are more relevant factors for determining whether a particular outlay is capital or revenue. In a given case, if the situation so requires, the test of enduring benefit might even break down under the weight of these considerations. Applying the above principles to the facts of the present case, it is difficult to hold that the payment of Rs. 1,73,849 made to Messrs. Harnischfeger Corporation, U. S. A., was not revenue expenditure. In that view of the matter, the second question referred to us is also answered in favour of the assessee. In the result, both the questions referred to us are answered in the affirmative, that is, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. No order as to costs.
-
1993 (1) TMI 63 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... his own action of the nature indicated above the liability still survives, the onus will be on him to bring sufficient materials on record to satisfy the authorities concerned in that regard. In fact the decision of this court in J. K. Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT 1966 62 ITR 34, is a case on this point. However, in the present case such is not the stand of the assessee. We are, therefore, of the clear opinion that section 41(1) of the Act is attracted to the facts of the present case and, as such, the amount of Rs. 6,093 would be deemed to be profit of the business of the assessee and charged to tax as income of the previous year in question. In view of the foregoing discussion, we are of the clear opinion that the Tribunal was not justified in holding that the said amount was not includible in the total income of the assessee. The question referred to us is, therefore, answered in the negative, i.e., in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. We make no order as to costs.
-
1993 (1) TMI 62 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Firm, Registration ... ... ... ... ..... r section 4 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, to constitute a partnership in law, it is necessary that there must be an agreement entered into by two or more persons, the agreement must be to share the profits of a business and the business must be carried on by all or any of those persons acting for all. It is not the requirement of law that the business should in fact be carried on only by all the partners and that all of them should participate in carrying on of the business. Likewise, law also does not require that every partner must contribute capital. The considerations on which the registration was refused by the Income-tax Officer, being unsustainable, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, in our opinion, was right in directing the grant of registration to the assessee-firm. This application under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is without any substance and it is accordingly, rejected. The assessee shall be entitled to its costs which we assess at Rs. 200.
-
1993 (1) TMI 61 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Advance Tax ... ... ... ... ..... ich interest was payable under sub-section (1) has been increased or reduced, as the case may be, the interest shall be increased or reduced accordingly, and (i) in a case where the interest is increased, the Income-tax Officer shall serve on the assessee, a notice of demand in the prescribed form specifying the sum payable, and such notice of demand all be deemed to be a notice under section 156 and the provisions of this Act shall apply accordingly (ii) in a case where the interest is reduced, the excess interest paid, if any, shall be refunded. However, since this High Court has consistently taken the view that a regular assessment must be construed to extend to all subsequent modifications of the regular assessment in appeal, reference, revision, rectification, we respectfully follow the earlier decision. We, therefore, answer the question in the affirmative and against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. There will be no order as to costs. J. N. HORE J. - I agree.
....
|
