Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Court: allahabad Year: 1968 Page 1 of about 59 results (0.022 seconds)

Jan 12 1968 (HC)

Commissioner of Income Tax, U.P. Vs. Bharat Engineering and Constructi ...

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jan-12-1968

Reported in : AIR1969All188

..... j. 1. this is an application under section 66(2) of the indian income tax act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as the act), m/s. bharat engineering and construction company is the assessee. the assessment year is 1944-45. under section 34 read with section 23(3) of the act the income tax officer made the assessment. in making the assessment certain receipts of the assessee ..... assessee's claim, two items of rs. 2,50,000/- and 40,000/- were excluded from the assessee's income, the commissioner of income tax, u. p., filed before the appellate tribunal an application under section 66(1) of the act requesting for reference of two questions of law to this court. the application was dismissed by the appellate tribunal. the commissioner ..... of income tax, u. p., hasfiled the present application in this court under section 66(2) of the act.2. we may mention at the outset that the appellate tribunal accepted the assessee's claim with respect to two separate items for ..... were treated as income. the assessee protested that these items did not constitute income of the assessee. when the matter went before the income tax appellate tribunal, bombay bench at allahabad, the appellate tribunal partly accepted the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 24 1968 (HC)

J.K. Commercial Corporation Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Oct-24-1968

Reported in : [1969]72ITR296(All)

..... is that the entire legal and travelling expenses incurred by the assessee, amounting to rs. 77,158 and rs. 11,891, respectively, were allowable under section 12(2) of the income-tax act, 1922. the tribunal was not justified in disallowing a substantial portion thereof,25. we, therefore, answer the two questions referred to this court by the tribunal as follows. the whole ..... protecting its shares in the muir mills co. ltd., and to ensure its prospective dividend earning capacity. as such, the expenditure would be admissible under section 12(2) of the income-tax act.'18. thus, according to the tribunal, the objectives which induced the assessee to finance the litigation were two-fold, namely, to protect the shares, and, secondly, to insure the prospective ..... assessee-company's investment in the shares in question. accordingly, the tribunal directed that a sum of rs. 15,000 be allowed as expenditure under section 12(2) of the income-tax act, 1922.11. against the decision of the tribunal, both the department as well as the assessee-company sought a reference to this court on the question of the allowability of ..... shares in the muir mills co. ltd. and to ensure its prospective dividend earning capacity. the tribunal, therefore, held that the expenditure was admissible under section 12(2) of the income-tax act. as regards the quantum of allowance, the tribunal took the view that the whole of the expenditure was not a permissible deduction. the tribunal took into consideration the fact that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 08 1968 (HC)

Niranjanlal Potdar Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U.P., Lucknow

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Feb-08-1968

Reported in : AIR1969All387

..... not to the appellant but to sri niranjan lal potdar. the income-tax officer is directed to assess these incomes in the hands of sri niranianlal potdar.'8. now, on august 7, 1957 the income-tax officer issued a notice under section 34 of the income tax act, 1922 to the assessee for each of the assessment years 1949- ..... 50 and 1950-51 and assessed him in respect of the share income from the firm. the appeals preferred by the assessee were ..... pathak, j.1. upon a statement of the case submitted by the income tax appellate tribunal under section 66 (1) of the indian income tax act, 1922, in respect of the assessment years 1949-50 and 1950-51 the following four questions have been referred to this court. ..... against both the assessment orders to the appellate assistant commissioner. meanwhile in the assessment proceedings relating to the family for the assessment year 1951-52, the income tax officer had occasion to consider some documents produced before him concerning the division of the assets of the family. on march 31, 1955 he made an ..... was prayed that an order under section 25a of the act be made. the claim was rejected and the order became final in the absence of any appeal against it.6. for the first time, on march 23, 1952 the assessee filed income tax returns for the assessment year 1947-48 to 1951-52 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 11 1968 (HC)

R.B. Ram Rattan Prem Nath, Dehradun Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, U. ...

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Mar-11-1968

Reported in : AIR1969All375

..... (sc) thesupreme court, pronouncing upon the validity of proceedings under section 34(1)(a) for the assessment year 1945-46, held that during the period between the amendments of the income tax act in 1954 and 1956 and subsequently sections 34(1)(a) and 34(1a) occupied different fields, but apparently proceedings for the assessment year 1946-47 were excepted from the scope ..... parel-lel jurisdictions, one under section 34(1)(a) and the other under section 34(1a). it was open to the income-tax officer to take recourse to either jurisdiction for that assessment year. we are of opinion that the income-tax officer acted within, his powers in taking assessment proceedings under section 34(1)(a). that is also the view expressed by the bombay ..... high court in laxminarayan r. rathi v. income-tax officer : [1964]52itr254(bom) although upon somewhat different reason-ing.14. the assessee urges that ..... section 34(1a) or 34(1)(a)? 2. whether for the assessment years1947-48 and 1948-49 the income tax officer was justified in initiating action under section 34(1)(a) or he should have taken recourse to section 34(1)(b) of the act?' 2. the assessee is a partnership firm consisting of rai bahadur ram ratan and his son prem nath .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 11 1968 (HC)

Ramchand and Sons Sugar Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax ...

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Mar-11-1968

Reported in : AIR1969All383

..... declined to accept the valuation of rs. 41,69,681/- as the basis of allowing depreciation on the assets, and acting under the first proviso to section 10 (5) (a) of the indian income tax act, 1922 he determined the cost of the assets to the assessee at rupees 24,08,110/- and allowed depreciation on that basis. the appellate assistant commissioner set aside ..... do.'in gangadhar banerjee's case : [1965]57itr176(sc) the supreme court indicated how the commercial or accounting profits should be determined. it explained:'the income-tax officer, acting under this section, is not assessing any income to tax; that will be assessed in the hands of the share-holder. he only does what the directors should have done. he puts himself in the place ..... the assessment and directed the income tax officer to re-determine the cost after recording the evidence of an expert.5. for the ..... after taking into account the loss of rs. 20,562/- suffered in the preceding year the income-tax officer was still justified in applying section 23-a.11. section 23-a (1) of the act, as it stood at the relevant time, read as follows:'where the income-tax officer is satisfied that in respect of any previous year the profits and gains distributed as .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 24 1968 (HC)

Jawahar Lal Mani Ram Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : May-24-1968

Reported in : [1969]72ITR78(All)

..... the assessment proceedings for the assessment years 1946-47, 1947-48, 1948-49 and 1949-50 a claim was made under section 25a of the indian income-tax act, 1922, that the hindu undivided family had disrupted with effect from may 19, 1945, giving rise to smaller hindu undivided families. one of such smaller ..... instance of the assessee the tribunal referred the following question to this court for its opinion : ' whether the assessments made under section 34 of the income-tax act for the assessment years 1946-47, 1947-48, 1948-49 and 1949-50 were bad in law, as they were made after the expiry of the ..... a bench of this court. the bench considered it necessary to reframe the question as follows : ' whether the assessments made under section 34 of the income-tax act for the assessment years 1946-47, 1947-48, 1948-49 and 1949-50 were bad in law, as they were made after the expiry of ..... arise in the case and accordingly we have framed the following two questions : '(1) whether it was open to the income-tax officer to issue notices under section 34 of the income-tax act, 1922, for the assessment years 1946-47 to 1949-50 and make assessmentin pursuance of the notices in spite of the ..... belonged to the same category and therefore required equal treatment. this court pointed out that section 34 of the indian income-tax act and sub-section (4) of section 5 of the impugned act dealt with persons who had similar characteristics and properties and therefore a different treatment of some out of the same .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 10 1968 (HC)

Lakshmipat Singhania Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Dec-10-1968

Reported in : [1969]72ITR512(All)

..... and the question was whether the sum of rs. 40,000 received by her as her remuneration in the relevant account year was salary chargeable under section 7 of the income-tax act, 1922. sir leonard stone c.j., who delivered the leading judgment, held that the amount paid to the lady was neither salary nor wages because she, as a director, was ..... company was registered in bhopal where the manufacturing operations were carried on. at all material times, bhopal was an indian state to which the indian income-tax act, 1922, as it then stood (hereafter referred to as the act), did not apply.3. the directors were entitled to receive sitting fees for attending meetings of the board under article 105a and further remuneration from ..... interest of the company in that country. the question before the house of lords was whether the remuneration received by the assessee was liable to tax in england under schedule e, rule 6. schedule e of the income tax act, 1918, provided :'tax under schedule e shall be charged in respect of every public office or employment of profit.'25. rule 6 laid down :'the ..... ' and he was, therefore, liable to be charged under schedule e to the income tax act, 1918.26. the decision, however, is no longer good law even in england. by the income tax act, 1952, as amended by the finance act, 1956, it was provided that for the years 1956-57 and subsequent years income-tax under schedule e in respect of any office or employment is chargeable on .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 29 1968 (HC)

Vithaldas Kedar Nath Vs. Income Tax Officer District Ii (ii) Kanpur an ...

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Feb-29-1968

Reported in : AIR1969All390

..... (1968) 67 itr 230 madras high court expressed doubt whether the court can compel an officer to go outside the limits of time prescribed by section 35 of the indian income-tax act and direct him to rectify an order after the expiry of the time prescribed by the section.15. in rex v. hanley (1912) 3 k. b. 518 it was observed ..... possible for the court to intervene in the matter.11. in kadirvel nadar v. state of madras : [1962]46itr251(mad) it was explained that section 34 of the madras agricultural income-tax act merely lays down a period within which proceedings under the section should be commenced. if the proceedings commenced within the period prescribed in the section, the power of the commissioner ..... oak, c.j.1. these three connected petitions under article 226 of the constitution arise out of three connected proceedings for rectification under section 35 of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (hereafter referred to as the act). the facts of the three cases are similar. they raise common questions of law. it will, therefore, be sufficient to refer to the facts of one of ..... not necessary that the power should be exercised within the period fixed in the section.12. in commissioner of income-tax, west bengal v. duncan brothers : [1955]28itr427(cal) calcutta high court had to examine the provisions of section 66 (1) of the indian income-tax act. it was held that the provision to the effect that the appellate tribunal shall within 90 days of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 31 1968 (HC)

H.G. Misra and Co. Vs. Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax ...

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Oct-31-1968

Reported in : AIR1969All566; [1969]72ITR489(All)

..... by the above sub-section the central government issued the following order by notification on the 11th june, 1963:--'in exercise of the powers conferred by section 298 of the income-tax act, 1961 (xliii of 1961), the central government hereby makes the following order, namely:-- 1. short title and commencement--(1) this order may be called the ..... october, 1961 and ended on the 31st march, 1962. for this period, the applicant returned an income of rs. 74,129/- assessable for the assessment year 1962-63. the income was ultimately assessed at rs. 86,302/-. the indian income tax act, 1922, hereafter referred to as the old act, was in force throughout this account period. the applicant was a new assessee and, therefore, section ..... reasonable cause failed to furnish an estimate of the tax payable by him under sub-section (3) of section 18-a of the repealed act in respect of the said financial year, the provisions of section 273 of the income-tax act, 1961 (xliii of 1961), shall apply as if the references in that section to the provisions ..... commencing on the 1st day of april, 1961, an assessee has furnished an estimate of the tax payable by him under sub-section (2) or sub-section (3) of section 18-a of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (xi of 1922) (hereinafter referred to as the repealed act), which he knew or had reason to believe to be untrue, or where he has without .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 23 1968 (HC)

income-tax Officer Vs. Bisheshwar Lal

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Apr-23-1968

Reported in : [1970]76ITR653(All)

..... against the imposition of penalty might well have disappeared. we are satisfied, therefore, that when a notice regarding penalty is issued under section 28 of the income-tax act, 1922, after an unreasonable lapse of time, it amounts to an abuse of power and the proceedings can certainly be quashed by a writ issued by ..... petitioner had an alternative remedy. (3) that even admitting all the facts alleged by the petitioner, the proceedings taken against him under section 28 of the income-tax act could not be said to be without jurisdiction and, consequently, should not be interfered with by this court by the issue of any writ. 4. it ..... the assessment in question was completed on june 24, 1944, and on the same date a notice under section 28 of the income-tax act of 1922 was issued, calling upon the assessee to show cause why a penalty should not be imposed upon him for concealment of ..... important, mr. gopal behari's contention is that, since no period of limitation is provided in the act for the issue of a notice under section 28, the issue of fresh notice by the income-tax authorities to the petitioner in the year 1956, after having taken no action for 12 years on the ..... case with the plea of alternative remedy, mr. gopal behari suggest that the petitioner should have allowed the income-tax officer to impose the penalty and should then have gone up in appeal, as provided under the act. but, in the peculiar circumstances of this case, we feel that the petitioner was justified in preferring .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //