|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 281 to 300 of 332 Records
-
1994 (3) TMI 52 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Business Expenditure, Income From Property, Income Tax Act, Legal Expenses, Municipal Corporation
-
1994 (3) TMI 51 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Restriction On Transfer, Transfer Of Property, Valuation Officer, Wealth Tax Act ... ... ... ... ..... valuation is affected, but is not restricted to Rs. 3 lakhs alone. In the case of CWT v. Raghubar Narain Singh 1984 146 ITR 228, the apex court held that if an asset is subject to certain hazards including the liability of certain debt to be deducted from the asset, then that factor which has the effect of diminishing the market value of the asset is a relevant factor to be taken into consideration while estimating the value of the asset in the open market. In these circumstances, we are of the view that the Tribunal was not justified in coming to the conclusion that because of the provisions of the Act, the value of the property has to be restricted to Rs. 3 lakhs alone. The matter is sent back to the Tribunal to hear other objections of the assessee with regard to valuation of the property and decide the valuation in accordance with the observations made above. Consequently, the reference is answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. No orders as to costs.
-
1994 (3) TMI 50 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Generalia Specialibus Non Derogant, Taxing Statutes ... ... ... ... ..... provisions and are applicable only in respect of proceedings under section 147 whereas section 153(1) is applicable in respect of assessments under section 143/144 and, therefore, they are provisions of general nature. The maxim generalia specialibus non-derogant has to be made applicable where special provisions exist, it will find its way in supersession of general provisions. In these circumstances, the provisions of section 153(2)(a) were rightly found to be applicable and the assessment order was not barred by limitation. The view taken by the Tribunal is in accord ance with law. Consequently, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal was justified in holding that the limitation provisions contained in section 153(2)(a) were applicable and not in section 153(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, and, consequently, the assessment order passed by the Income-tax Officer was within time. The reference is answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. No order as to costs.
-
1994 (3) TMI 49 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Income Tax Act, Question Of Law ... ... ... ... ..... present matter, an appeal was filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. Besides the points that the proceedings initiated under section 147(a), the action could be justified under section 147(b) of the Act and in the alternate the action could be taken to give effect to the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax under section 263, were raised. From these submissions, it is evident that the question of law arises with regard to the scope of jurisdiction of the Income-tax Officer in passing fresh assessment/reassessment order and, therefore, without discussing further the matter on merit, we are of the opinion that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was not justified in saying that no question of law arises. The application submitted by the Revenue is accepted and the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is directed to refer the above question of law. No order as to costs.
-
1994 (3) TMI 48 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Claim For Depreciation, Revised Return ... ... ... ... ..... ing a substantial interest in the company is to be regarded as the income of the director or of such person having a substantial interest in the company. In a later decision in the case of CIT v. M. R. Ruia 1988 170 ITR 512, a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court consisting of Bharucha (as he then was) and Sugla JJ., took the very same view and observed that there is no warrant for treating the value of any benefit or perquisite received by the director s relative as the income of the director, unless there is some legal fiction or a deeming provision by which the value of such benefit or perquisite received by a relative of the director is to be regarded as the income of the director. We respectfully concur with the aforesaid view of the Bombay High Court. As a result of the aforesaid discussion, question No. 2 will have to be answered in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The reference is disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.
-
1994 (3) TMI 47 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Claim For Depreciation, Revised Return ... ... ... ... ..... rity. Till the assessment was made and the liability of the assessee to pay the tax was fixed, the questions raised by either party would have been merely academic. It is only when the liability to pay the tax was fixed by the assessing authority and that order was either maintained or set aside finally by the final Appellate Tribunal, the questions arising as those of law would become ripe for being referred to the High Court for its opinion. The questions framed by the Department are questions of law and do arise from the order of the Tribunal. For the foregoing reasons both the applications are allowed. The Tribunal is directed to draw up a statement of the facts of the case in each of the two cases and refer the questions for the opinion of the High Court. The costs shall be determined while disposing of the matter finally on reference being made by the Tribunal. One copy each of this order shall be placed on the records of Income-tax Cases Nos. 65 of 1992 and 66 of 1992.
-
1994 (3) TMI 46 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Finding Of Fact, Question Of Law, Revised Return, Unexplained Investments, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... well as the averment made in the revised return that a part of the ornaments belonged to the ladies. Thereafter is the conclusion that silver weighing 338 tolas and 214 tolas be treated as accumulation of the family over a number of years and gold ornaments weighing 383 tolas and silver ornaments weighing 2,070 tolas be treated as belonging to Phoolabai and her family. According to the Revenue, these conclusions are based entirely on surmises and not on any legally admissible material. Whether there is any legally admissible material in reaching a find ing can be regarded as a question of law. The Tribunal was in serious error in refusing to state a case for the consideration of the High Court. We, therefore, allow the application and direct the Appellate Tribunal in each of these cases to state the cases to the High Court in terms of section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and section 27(3) of the Wealth tax Act, 1957, respectively. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
1994 (3) TMI 45 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Income Tax Act, Question Of Law ... ... ... ... ..... of fact is not acceptable. It is a matter to be considered as to whether in the background that after the search the property was tried to be declared to be of the trust and whether any trust is to be created or contemplated under the will dated November 24, 1977, are questions of interpretation or construction of a document. So far as the second argument of counsel for the assessee is concerned, it will suffice to say that the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Assessment), Allahabad, has rightly assessed the association of persons on protective basis. It is not a case where the property which has been claimed by Sri Subhash Kumar to be of the association of persons is accepted to be so. In the result, this application is allowed. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad, is directed to draw up a statement of the case and refer the questions of law mentioned in its order dated May 6, 1992, to this court for decision. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
1994 (3) TMI 44 - PATNA HIGH COURT
Firm Registration, Income Tax Act, Income Tax Rules ... ... ... ... ..... the firm as subsisting and as constituted on the date of making of the declaration who will come within the expression persons concerned in rule 24. In this case on the date when Form No. 12 declaration was filed on July 28, 1975, the partners of the firm were only 13 in number who had signed the declaration. This fact is not disputed. We are of the view that the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) took a reasonable view of the matter and was justified in law in ordering continuance of the registration for the year 1975-76. The order of the Appellate Tribunal does not suffer from any error of law. We, therefore, answer the question referred to this court in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The reference is disposed of as above. A copy of this judgment, duly signed by the Registrar with the seal of this court, shall be forwarded to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna.
-
1994 (3) TMI 43 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Accounting Year, Actual Cost, Agricultural Income Tax, Assessment Notice, Capital Expenditure, Capital Or Revenue Expenditure, Foreign Currency, Reassessment Notice
-
1994 (3) TMI 42 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Appropriate Authority, Auction Sale, Delay In Filing Petition, Earnest Money, Movable Property, Petition Against Order, Purchase Of Immovable Property By Central Government, Supreme Court, Writ Petition
-
1994 (3) TMI 41 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Agency Business, Carry Forward And Set Off, Income Tax Act, Same Business, Set Off Of Loss, Single Business
-
1994 (3) TMI 40 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
High Court, Income Tax Act, Rectification Of Mistakes ... ... ... ... ..... ctly applies to the facts of the present case and the said decision is binding on me, I am inclined to follow the said decision of the Division Bench of this court. Therefore, it has to be held that the assessment dated August 31, 1976, made in the present case contrary to the judgment subsequently rendered by this court on July 4, 1980, in Tax Cases Nos. 683 and 684 of 1976 (M. K. Kuppuraj v. CIT 1981 127 ITR 447 would constitute an error on the face of the record and, therefore, an application under section 154 of the Act to rectify such a mistake is maintainable. In view of the above position of law, the petitioner is entitled to succeed in the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the order dated May 28, 1982 in C. No. 1424(5)/82-83, challenged in the writ petition is quashed and the respondents are directed to deal with the application for rectification and dispose of the same on the merits and according to law. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1994 (3) TMI 39 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Attachment And Sale, Legal Representative, Recovery Proceedings ... ... ... ... ..... petitioner from her liability on receiving 25 per cent. of the tax arrears. Learned senior counsel further submits that the Department may be also asked to waive the interest portion of the amount demanded. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the position of law referred to above in the proceedings under article 226 of the Constitution of India, it is not possible to issue such directions to the Department. However, it is open to the petitioner to make a representation to the competent authority, setting out all the facts and seek the relief of waiver of interest and also the other relief claimed in this petition. As and when such representation is made by the petitioner to the competent authority, such authority may consider the representation of the petitioner sympathetically taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and pass appropriate orders according to law. With these observations, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.
-
1994 (3) TMI 38 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Book Entries, Income From Property, Income Tax Act, Transfer Of Property ... ... ... ... ..... mmovable properties. A combined reading of the entries in the instant case would clearly show that the position which was wished for by the parties had not been properly brought about by any effective transaction known to law. It is also brought to our notice by Mr. C. V. Rajan, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue, that an attempt was made subsequently to have the earlier view taken in the case reported in CIT v. Dadha and Co. 1983 142 ITR 792 (Mad) reconsidered. However, this court in the case of CIT v. Palaniappa Enterprises 1984 150 ITR 237, reaffirmed the view taken in CIT v. Dadha and Co. 1983 142 ITR 792 (Mad), and held that there was no case for reconsideration. In view of the above decisions of this court, we hold that the Tribunal was not right in deciding the issue in favour of the assessee. Accordingly, the questions are answered in the negative and in favour of the Revenue, and the Revenue is entitled to get costs from the assessee. Costs one set Rs. 1,000.
-
1994 (3) TMI 37 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Business Expenditure, Income Tax Act, Retrenchment Compensation ... ... ... ... ..... 79 118 ITR 261 (SC), where the Supreme Court stated that it is too late in the day now to treat the expenditure incurred by a management in paying reasonable sums by way of compensation for termination of service as not business expenditure. It is also significant that it is not the stand of the Revenue that the sum of Rs. 2,481 representing the payment of notice pay to the nine workmen is not reasonable. Therefore, the third question is answered in the affirmative and against the Revenue. As noticed by the learned judges in the decided case of CIT v. George Oakes Ltd. 1992 197 ITR 288 (Mad), here also there was a scheme pursuant to which the amount in question was given. The decision of the Supreme Court referred to above (in the extract given ), fully supports the stand taken by the assessee, and in the circumstances, we find no difficulty in answering the second question against the Revenue and in the affirmative. The Revenue will pay the costs which are fixed at Rs. 500.
-
1994 (3) TMI 36 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Assessment Year, Borrowed Capital, Business Expenditure, Computation Of Capital, Donation For Charitable Purposes, New Industrial Undertaking, Salary And Perquisites, Special Deduction
-
1994 (3) TMI 35 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Capital Gains, Income Tax Act, Proposed Transfer, Transfer Of Property ... ... ... ... ..... ine of part performance in vogue in England and was partially imported into this country by enacting section 53A. This section does not confer any title on the transferee in possession but merely imposes a statutory bar on the transferor. The doctrine of part performance is a defence. It is a shield and not a sword. It is a right to protect the transferee s possession against any challenge to it by the transferor contrary to the terms of the contract. It is now by amending section 2(47) of the Act introducing sub-clause (v) that a transaction falling within the provisions of section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act has been treated as transfer in relation to capital assets. Such a definition of transfer cannot be applied when we look at section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act independently of the word transfer as defined in section 2(47) of the Act. No referable question of law, as formulated, arises for consideration. Accordingly, this petition fails and is dismissed.
-
1994 (3) TMI 34 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Income Tax Act, Written Down Value ... ... ... ... ..... essment. It is no doubt true, section 34 says that the deductions referred to in section 32(1) shall be allowed only if the prescribed particulars have been furnished and, in this case, the assessee is not in a position to furnish the particulars. But having regard to the fact that the Malaysian assets have not been valued separately, depreciation can be given on a proportionate basis. Having given depreciation on the Malaysian assets on a proportionate basis, the assessing authority is not justified in withdrawing the benefit merely on the basis that item-wise particulars have not been furnished. We are inclined to agree with the view taken by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Tribunal on this aspect of the case. Thus, the second question referred in Tax Cases Nos. 857 and 858 of 1979, is answered in the affirmative and against the Revenue. In the result, we answer the question in the affirmative and against the Revenue with costs. Counsel s fee Rs. 1,000 one set.
-
1994 (3) TMI 33 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Application For Revision, Income Tax Act ... ... ... ... ..... under section 264 comes to an end and it cannot be exercised at all while the appeal is pending or even after it is disposed of. Further, as pointed out by the Division Bench in C. Gnanasundara Nayagar v. CIT 1961 41 ITR 375 (Mad), the finality of the assessment which flows from the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) or the order of the Tribunal cannot be disturbed by the Commissioner in the exercise of his revisional jurisdiction under section 264 of the Act and that the revision and appeal are not concurrent remedies open to the assessee. In view of the clear position of law referred to above, the first respondent is quite right in dismissing the revision petition holding that he had no jurisdiction to entertain or hear the same and that there is no infirmity in the said order of the first respondent. For all the reasons stated above, I see no merit in this writ petition and it is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.
....
|
