Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Court: chennai Year: 1956 Page 1 of about 92 results (0.147 seconds)

Aug 01 1956 (HC)

M. Ayyasami Nadar and Bros., Colombo Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, M ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-01-1956

Reported in : AIR1957Mad74; [1956]30ITR565(Mad)

..... rajagopala ayyangar, j.1. these are petitions under section 66(2) of the income-tax act invoking our jurisdiction to direct the appellate tribunal to state a case and refer a question of law to this court for its decision. ..... assessee was examined before the officer on 26-11-1945 and he conceded that the return originally submitted was wrong and consented to certain additions to his income. the income-tax officer took action under section 28(1)(c) and issued notice under section 28(3) and when the assessee defaulted to appear in response thereto ..... sending his explanation, or being present in person while showing cause. where the assessee sends his explanation by post the income-tax officer may or may not apply his mind to that explanation and impose the penalty none the less; it the officer does so, he clearly of ..... heard.' so far we are in agreement. the judgment continued:'a person may show cause in writing without being present out it is obligatory on the income-tax officer to hear him or give him an opportunity of being heard, it should also be noticed that the assessee has been given the option of either ..... imposed on him penalties for concealing the particulars of his income or deliberately furnishing inaccurate particulars of the same within section 28(1)(c) of the act.3. the imposition .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 27 1956 (HC)

T.M.M. Mudalai Nadar and Co., Virudhunagar Vs. the Commissioner of Inc ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-27-1956

Reported in : AIR1957Mad130

..... the assessee after the necessary scrutiny. when the assesses appealed to the tribunal, it confirmed the assessment.5. the question referred to this court under section 66(1) of the income-tax act was:'whether the sum of rs. 36094 being the re-fund of indian excise duty oh betel nuts importedfrom travancore state, was assessable as profits of the accounting period for ..... expended; that the original price for the goods having been reduced by agreement, the price actually paid and not the original price was the amount of the deduction allowable for income-tax purposes; and that the account to 30-6-1921 should be opened up and the deduction should be brought into conformity with the amount actually paid.'that contention was negatived ..... income-tax and excess profits tax.'6. it was not disputed that the excise dutythe assessee had paid in the year of account tothe government of india wasreflected in the pricesthe assessee charged his customers ..... .1. for the assessment year 1946-47, the period from 16-8-1944 to 16-8-1945 was the accounting year or the assessee for, income-tax and was also the chargeable accounting period for excess profits tax.the assesses firm traded in arecanut with its head office at virudhunagar witnin the taxable territories. the assessee obtained imports of arecanut from the travaacore .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 24 1956 (HC)

C.W. Spencer and ors. Vs. Income-tax Officer, City Circle Ii, Madras

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-24-1956

Reported in : AIR1957Mad133

..... ."7. the legislature in india took steps later than the parliament in england to meet this kind of possible evasion of tax liability. section 23-a was included in the indian income tax act by the amending act xxi of 1630. as enacted in 1930, the relevant portions of clauses (1) and (2) of section 23-a ..... m. r. morarka.2. proceedings were taken against gannon dunkerley & co., hereinafter referred to as the "company" under section 23-a of the income-tax act. which resulted in an order dated 11-3-1955. on an apportionment of those undisbursed profits each of the petitioners was liable to treat as part of his ..... in 1939 has to be tested with reference to the entry 54 in list i of the 7th schedule to the government of india act, 1935.25. in amina umma v. income-tax officer, kozhikode, (d), the learned judges quoted with approval the well settled rule of construction that was explained by chagla c.j. ..... but in my opinion that does not mean that legislation as to income-tax can never be regarded as legislation as to a thing in british india within the meaning of section 65 of the government of india my opinion, a tax on income accruing or arising or received in british india by a person ..... power to enact that provision had to be founded on entry 54 in list i of the 7th schedule of the government of india act, 1935, "taxes on income other than agricultural income." it should, however, be remembered that what the legislature did in 1939 was to amend an existing provision of law and not to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 13 1956 (HC)

M.R. Vidyasagar Vs. Income-tax Officer, Circle Ii, Madurai and anr.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-13-1956

Reported in : AIR1957Mad250

..... undivided family, the death or resignation of a manager is on a par with the death of an individual assassee as to attract section 24-b of the act. the fact, that the income-tax act refused to regard a mere severance of status in a hindu undivided family as putting an end to a joint family, might not fit in exactly with the ..... his predecessor, or being the legal representative of the ex-manager.if the analogy of the civil procedure code has to be invoked, the case of the hindu undivided family under the income-tax act is more akin to a trust represented by the trustee for the time being. in this illustration, when a trustee who represents the trust which is a party to an ..... representative of the deceased manager under section 2(11) c. p. code. in our judgment these decisions are wholly irrelevant for considering the scope of section 24-b of the income-tax act. the civil procedure code does not treat a joint hindu family as a juristic unit capable of instituting or defending a suit. when a manager is a party to an action, he ..... to the inspecting assistant commissioner ..... to cancel the levy of penal interest under the powers vested in him under rule 20 of the indian income-tax act.'the truth of the claim of the petitioner, that ho had moved the income-tax officer in the first instance to cancel the levy of 'penal' interest, was not challenged by the respondent. the date, 10-4-1954 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 09 1956 (HC)

P.M. Muthuraman Chettiar and anr. Vs. the Commissioner of Income-tax, ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Oct-09-1956

Reported in : AIR1957Mad259; [1957]31ITR61(Mad)

..... counsel's fee rs. 250.13. case refd. no. 80 of 1953: the question referred to us for decision under section 66 (2) of the income-tax act is:'whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the share of the assessee's loss out of the sum of rs. 43,969 cannot be ..... although a firm is an assessable entity under the indian income-tax act a firm is not a. legal entity. in the eye of the law a firm is a compendious expression used to indicate that several persons ..... by the assessee but is carried on by the assessee along with a partner or partners. mr. joshi says that a firm under ' the indian income-tax act is an assessable entity and therefore a distinction must be made between a business carried on by a firm and a business carried on by an individual ..... loss could not be determined. in the present case, the firms themselves being non-residents and not being in receipt of taxable income have not been assessed under the indian income-tax act; there was no question of assessing the was further suggested that the departmental authorities were not desirous of assessing the individual ..... describe its partners but it is also equally true that under that law there is no dissolution of the firm by the mere incoming or outgoing of partners ..... but under the income-tax act the position is somewhat different. a firm can be charged as a distinct assessable entity as distinct from its partners who can .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 1956 (HC)

Chidambaram Chettiar and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-30-1956

Reported in : AIR1957Mad418; [1956]29ITR842(Mad)

..... as disclosed in the balance-sheet'. the latter figure might or might not have been arrived at on a basis identical with the method of computation prescribed by the indian income-tax act. but until the total profits and gains are thus ascertained -- and this can be ascertained only in the course of assessment proceedings against a company whose dividends are in question ..... the company' at the end of the proviso can only mean total profits and gains of the company, as computed under the indian income-tax act, for it is the ratio between this figure and the amount of income actually subjected to income-tax which determines the proportion of the dividend in regard to which an assessee is entitled to -- or bound to suffer -- grossing up ..... construction of section 16(2) an assessee is entitled to the grossing up and relief under section 18(5) in cases where the income of a company whose dividends are in question is not assessed to tax under the indian income-tax act. section 16(2) which we have set out consists of two paragraphs. if the matter rested wholly on the first paragraph without ..... amount having been remitted to british india in the same accounting year.4. the chettinad company was not assessed to income-tax in british india under the indian income-tax act; hut the assessee stated that the chettinad company had been in receipt of interest income on advances made by it to a resident company -- the south indian corporation (madras) ltd., registered under the indian companies .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 26 1956 (HC)

Gowri Tile Works and ors. Vs. Commr. of Income-tax, Madras

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-26-1956

Reported in : AIR1957Mad453

..... assets acquired before the previous year the actual cost to the assessee less all depreciation actually allowed to him under the act, or any act, repealed thereby, or under executive orders issued when the indian income-tax act, 1886 (ii of 1886) was in force.'if this definition of 'written down value' were read into the ..... the sum of rs. 81,863 which was the profit realised by the sale of these assets was not liable to tax as capital gain under section 12-b of the income-tax act. the contention of the assessee however was that this profit which was undoubtedly a capital gain was exempted from charge on ..... rajagopala ayyangar, j.1.the questions referred to this court under section 66 (1) of the indian income-tax act are:1. whether the modification of the assessment of capital gain from rs. 61,140 to rs. 81,863 by the appellate ..... the construction urged by learned counsel for the admittedly no adjustment has been madeunder section 10 (2) (vii) in the assessee's assessmentto income-tax, the assessee is not entitled to havethis adjustment made in the computation of hiscapital gain under section 12-b. the decision of thetribunal was therefore correct ..... will or transfer on irrevocable trust shall not for the purposes of this section, be treated as sale, exchange or transfer of the capital assets;'the income-tax officer overruled this contention of the assessee but he drew a distinction between the difference between the written-down value of these assets and their original .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 12 1956 (HC)

Annamalai by Pr. Al. M.M. Meenakshi Achi Vs. Commissioner of Income-ta ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-12-1956

Reported in : AIR1957Mad592

..... of profits for remittance was not a relevant factor. he contended that, if profits accrued or arose abroad, and those profits were not computed for taxation under the indian income-tax act and were not taxed -- that was the position between 1933 and 1939 -- any amount brought into the taxable territories by the assessee during the accounting year subsequently to 1-4-1939 should ..... a case of that kind. if the assessee held both capital and profits abroad--we are concerned with the profits that accrued or arose abroad between 1933 and 1939--the income-tax act did not impose any obligation upon the assessee to meet any given expenditure either from out of the capital or from out of his profits. his discretion was unhampered by ..... rs. 1,59,558 at cairo. out of this sum, rs. 1,24,685 would have been admissible expenditure had there been a computation under 8. 10 (2) of the income-tax act. in the year of account ending with 20th march 1938 the assessee brought into british india a sum of rs. 50,258 from cairo. the learned judges recorded :'the solution ..... allahabad high court. the learned judges stated:'thus, for the purpose of determining the question whether the entire income chargeable under the income-tax act was available at the time of the remittance to british india, expenditure, although not admissible under section 30 (2) of the income-tax act, must be taken into consideration.'it was upon : [1947]15itr1(all) , that the learned authors based their statement .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 19 1956 (HC)

Nachiappa Chettiar Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Dec-19-1956

Reported in : AIR1957Mad788

..... reference to this court of these points of law arising from this disallowance. the, tribunal referred under section 66 (1) of the income-tax act the following which forms the subject of reference in r. c no. 81 of 1953: 'is the assessee entitled to claim the deduction of (a) ..... the learned chief justice affirmed the correctness of this proposition. our attention was also invited to the following passage in the judgment of dunkerley j. in commissioner of income-tax, burma v. a. k. a. r. chettiar family, (1941) 9 itr 347: air 1941 ran 263, where the learned judge observed: '.,...the ..... -lender in discharge of a debt the property acquired assumes the character of the money-lender's stock-in-trade. for this proposition reliance was placed on commissioner of income-tax, burma, v. p. l. c. m. concern, minhala, [1934] 2 itr 417: air 1934 ran 276, where page c. j. in delivering ..... of the altered state of tailings be treated as a business loss incurred by the assessee. these claims of the assessee were rejected by the income-tax officer and the assistant commissioner on appeal, arid the disallowance was sustained by the tribunal on further appeal. the assessee requested the tribunal for the ..... the management and control of the property transferred by deed no. 1604, the amount expended on account of the payment of rates and taxes and the amount of the income derived on account of rents and profits; and (c) an account of the amounts realised by the sale of the various properties .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 18 1956 (HC)

Rasipuram Union Motor Service Ltd. Vs. Commr. of Income Tax, Madras

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-18-1956

Reported in : AIR1957Mad151; [1956]30ITR687(Mad)

..... 23a for the assessment years 1955-56 and 1956-57 and in the sums determined by the income-tax officer ?"the assessee is a private limited company falling within section 23a of the indian income-tax act. the books of account of the company disclosed a loss of rs. 23,686 for the ..... up it however appears that the assessee sought permission to include in the annexures certain order and directions relating to the collections of arrears of income-tax. but this was repelled by the tribunal which observes as follows (paragraph 9 of the statement of the case) :"the assessees learned ..... company far from earning profits actually incurred losses.the income-tax officer, the appellate assistant commissioner and the income-tax appellate tribunal have concurred in holding that the assessee falls within the mischief of section 23a of the act. the result is that super-tax has been levied on rs. 22,742 and rs ..... answer to these notices that the company paid income-tax and sur-charge under the motor vehicles act, amounts to the extent of rs. 11,310 over and above that already allowed in arriving at the distributable income, that the company had paid penal tax of rs. 5,895 which should also be ..... calendar year 1954, the previous year relevant for the assessment year 1955-56. the department did not accept the book results and estimated the profits of the company under the proviso to section 13. such estimated income .....

Tag this Judgment!

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