|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 441 to 459 of 459 Records
-
2000 (2) TMI 19 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Reference, Firm, Change In Constitution Of Firm - It was contended by learned counsel for the assessee that the Assessing Officer should have given an opportunity to the assessee to remove the defects in terms of section (2) of section 185. We have reproduced the provision of sub-section (2) of section 185 which patently show that the defects contemplated are of a procedural or clerical nature and the defects like the non-execution of the partnership within the accounting period or non-filing of the applications for registration/renewal within time are not defects which are capable of being cured or removed. - there is nothing on record to show what happened in the intervening assessment years, i.e., the assessment years 1982-83 and 1983-84. The Tribunal has proceeded on the basis that the grant of renewal of registration for the assessment years 1984-85 and 1985-86 is consequential to the grant of registration for the assessment year 1981-82 and the questions, as proposed, also adopt the same approach. Therefore, registration having not been allowed for the assessment year 1981-82, no question of renewal of registration for the aforesaid years would arise
-
2000 (2) TMI 18 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Income From House Property - The short point which arises for consideration in this matter is whether the determination of the annual letting value at Rs. 20,41,776 for the purpose of section 23 of the Act is contrary to the provisions of the Income-tax Act. On the facts it may be mentioned that the Court of Small Causes at Bombay has fixed the standard rent of the premises at Rs. 53,325 per month from March 1, 1982. This evidence, has not been placed on record as indicated by the judgment of the Tribunal dated December 3, 1993, in I.T. Nos. 2882 and 2883 of 1998. In view of the above it is clear that the annual letting value taken into account by the impugned judgment of the Tribunal is without considering the standard rent fixed by the Small Causes Court, which, as stated above, has fixed the standard rent at Rs. 53,325 per month from March 1, 1982. - Under the above circumstances, the appeal is allowed
-
2000 (2) TMI 17 - SC ORDER
Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the poultry sheds should be treated as plant thereby allowing the assessee-company a higher rate of depreciation as applicable to plant and not the rate of depreciation as applicable to building - A question of law is involved and that, therefore, the High Court ought to have required the Tribunal to refer to it the aforestated question
-
2000 (2) TMI 16 - SUPREME COURT
Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is justified in directing the Income-tax Officer to allow 71/2 per cent of the net income of the trust after deducting from its total income, the remuneration paid to the trustees as expenditure for administering the trust under sections 57(i) and 19(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - it is a question of fact than a question of law - Tribunal rightly dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue
-
2000 (2) TMI 15 - SUPREME COURT
Allowability of the deduction of Rs. 1,40,86,821 claimed by the appellant for the assessment year 1986-87 under section 43B - Since the proviso to section 43B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was applicable with retrospective effect, therefore, for the assessment year 1986-87 deduction under section 43B would be allowed
-
2000 (2) TMI 14 - SC ORDER
Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in directing the Income-tax Officer to deduct interest payments made to the coparceners on the amounts lent by them to the Hindu undivided family - Held, no
-
2000 (2) TMI 13 - SUPREME COURT
Whether, the claim of the assessee for exemption u/s 10(29), in respect of the interest income, staff quarters rent, miscellaneous income and supervision charges was rightly accepted by the CIT (Appeals) and confirmed by the ITAT - Whether, the income received by the assessee from any source other than from letting of godowns or warehouses is exempt under section 10(29) - there is conflict of opinion in decision of the Supreme Court and therefore, matter to be placed before a larger bench of SC
-
2000 (2) TMI 12 - SUPREME COURT
Once it is held that no expense was incurred by the appellant, the question of any allowable expense being deducted in computing the income from the profits and gains of the appellant does not arise - Any question of any allowable deduction can arise only if any expense is so incurred by the assessee.
-
2000 (2) TMI 11 - SUPREME COURT
Hold that dearness allowance, city compensatory allowance and house rent allowance would be taxable income. Since counsel for the employees did not make any submission with regard to other allowances like night allowance, tuition fee, leave enacashment linked with leave travel concession, running allowance, etc., we do not pass any order with regard to those allowances
-
2000 (2) TMI 10 - SUPREME COURT
Compensation/damages for loss of agricultural income and other liabilities in a sum of Rs. 3,66,649 - Commissioner noted that the ITO passed the order of nil assessment without application of mind - Tribunal was justified in holding that there was evidence before the CIT that the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue and Tribunal was justified in holding that Rs. 3,66,649 was a taxable receipt for the assessment year 1983-84
-
2000 (2) TMI 9 - SUPREME COURT
Appellant had claimed relief under section 80HH in respect of its liquid section which had been newly set up in a backward area. It was the contention of the appellant that relief should be allowed on the gross income and not on the net income - Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee was not entitled to deduction under section 80HH of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on the gross profit but on the net income therefrom
-
2000 (2) TMI 8 - SUPREME COURT
Whether Tribunal was right in law in holding that interest on fixed deposit, interest on temporary loans and interest on arrears of sales deposit are to be considered as business income and not income from other sources - Whether Tribunal was right in holding that interest on fixed deposit, temporary loans and on arrears of sales deposit are not taxable under the head 'Other sources' - questions of law arise from the order of Tribunal - Tribunal is directed to refer the above questions to HC
-
2000 (2) TMI 7 - SUPREME COURT
Appellant-assessee is a company - High Court has rightly concluded that allotment of equity shares by the appellant to Eimco, in the circumstance of the case, cannot be termed as "expenditure much less revenue expenditure" and rightly answered the question referred to it against the appellant-assessee
-
2000 (2) TMI 6 - SUPREME COURT
Purchase Of Immovable Property By Central Government - validity of the preemptive purchase of a building in the city of Bangalore under section 269UE of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and its sale by the Central Government - held that order of the preemptive purchase of a building is valid
-
2000 (2) TMI 5 - SUPREME COURT
Business of the assessee being one and indivisible - so it is not open to the Revenue to contend that the business is not one and indivisible - In view of the fact that a perusal of the question itself discloses that income from various ventures is earned in the course of one and indivisible business, the impugned order upholding the apportionment of the expenditure and allowing deduction of only that proportion of it which is referable to taxable income, is unsustainable
-
2000 (2) TMI 4 - SUPREME COURT
Validity of order of assessment u/s 147 - return filed u/s 139 and refund application was pending to be processed - Along with the return assessee has filed an application u/s 237 for refund of tax - Scope of the noting recorded by the AO - Held that:- it could not be said that the ITO gave finality to the refund since no refund is granted either in the hands of the trust or in the hands of the beneficiaries. It is an inconclusive note where the ITO left the matter at the stage of consideration even with regard to refund in the hands of the beneficiaries. This note was also not communicated to the trustees.
In any case if it is an order, it would be appealable under s. 249 of the Act. Since period of limitation starts from the date of intimation of such an order, it is imperative that such an order be communicated to the assessee. Had the ITO passed any final order, it would have been communicated to the assessee within a reasonable period.
By merely recording that in his opinion, no credit for tax deducted at source is to be allowed the ITO cannot be said to have closed the proceedings finally.
During the pendency of the return filed under s. 139 of the Act along with refund application under s. 237 of the Act, action could not have been taken under s. 147/148.
Decided against the revenue.
-
2000 (2) TMI 3 - SUPREME COURT
Assessee is an Indian resident company - business of exporting tea - claimed weighted deduction under section 35B in respect of the expenditure incurred on export of tea from East Africa to the United Kingdom - held that assessee is entitled to weighted deduction under section 35B
-
2000 (2) TMI 2 - SUPREME COURT
whether the job rendered by a photographer in taking photographs, developing and printing films would amount to a 'works contract' as contemplated under Article 366(2A)(b) of the Constitution read with Section 2(n) of the M.P. General Sales Tax for the purpose of levy of sales tax on business turnover of the photographers?
Held that:- It is clear that unless there is sale and purchase of goods, either in fact or deemed, and which sale is primarily intended and not incidental to the contract, the State cannot impose sales-tax on a works contract simpliciter in the guise of the expanded definition found in Article 366(29A)(b) read with Section 2(n) of the State Act. On facts as we have noticed that the work done by the photographer which as held by this Court in Kame's case (1976 (12) TMI 164 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA), is only in the nature of a service contract not involving any sale of goods, we are of the opinion that the stand taken by the respondent-State cannot be sustained. Appeal allowed by setting aside the judgment under appeal and grant the prayer of the appellants by quashing the assessment orders and the demand notices impugned in the writ petitions before the High Court.
-
2000 (2) TMI 1 - HIGH COURT ALLAHABAD
Service Tax – Goods Transport Operators and Clearing and Forwarding agents (1) Refund (2) Jurisdiction
....
|
