Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Court: chennai Year: 1965 Page 4 of about 107 results (0.046 seconds)

Aug 02 1965 (HC)

S. S. Sivan Pillai and Others Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-02-1965

Reported in : [1966]61ITR179(Mad)

..... veeraswami j. - these four references involve the interpretation of section 15c of of the income-tax act, 1922, and the scope of exemption available to shareholders in receipt of dividends. the assessment proceedings right through have proceeded on the assumption that sri ganapathy mills company limited, tirunelveli, ..... assessee held certain ordinary and preference shares in india cements limited, from which it revived certain dividends for the current years 1951 and 1952. they were assessed by the income-tax officer as income from 'other sources' for the assessment years 1952-53 and 1953-54. on appeal, the appellate assistant commissioner held that since the dividends were declared out of commercial profits ..... payable, the assessee were not entitled to the benefit under section 15c(4). in support of this contention the department relied on indo-commercial bank ltd. v. commissioner of income-tax. the tribunal substantially accepted the contention for the department and disposed of the appeals on that basis. the tribunals reasoning is as follows :'it is clear that the condition precedent ..... the limits provided by that sub-section, and claim the benefit under section 15c(4).learned counsel for the revenue strongly relied on indo-commercial bank ltd. v. commissioner of income-tax, and pressed before us that 'profits' in sub-section (4) of section 15c refer only to assessed profits attributable to the industrial undertaking, whose profits are exempt from .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 23 1965 (HC)

T. M. N. N. Somasundara Nadar and Sons Vs. Second Income-tax Officer, ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-23-1965

Reported in : [1966]59ITR306(Mad)

..... is contended that this omission is fatal to the assessment order itself.i am unable to accept this view of the scope of section 187 of the income-tax act, 1961. the main part of sub-section (1) of that section is to the effect 'where at the time of making an assessment under section ..... making the assessment. it is clear that while making an assessment under the main part of sub-section (1), the income-tax officer should apply the first proviso and apportion the income of the previous year relating to the firm between the partners entitled to receive the same in that year. but the ..... , relating to the assessment year 1964-65 by which he assessed the petitioner, which is a firm, to income-tax. the point on which the petitioner seeks to quash the order is that the income-tax officer failed to apportion the profits of the firm as between its partners as reconstituted since the death of one ..... the partners. it is true that the proviso contemplates that by following the apportionment of the income the liability to pay tax will be, in the first instance, on the partner so far as his share of the income is concerned. nevertheless, i am of the view that the omission to make an apportionment ..... independently made on the firm and its validity does not depend upon the apportionment of the income as between the partners. the scheme of the section is that when the income is apportioned as between the partners, the tax assessed upon a partner will, in the first instance, be recovered from him and it .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 25 1965 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras Vs. Rm. Ar. Ar. Veerappa Chettiar.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-25-1965

Reported in : [1966]61ITR256(Mad)

..... an end then. we are not at the moment thinking of a joint hindu family as statutorily recognised under the provisions of the indian income-tax act 1922. we may in passing mention that no argument for the assessee was addressed to us based on section 25a. after the disruption in ..... can regarded as anything of a different character. mr. k. srinivasan for the assessee, therefore, rightly relied on veerappa chettiar v. commissioner of income-tax when he urged that, so long as the joint hindu family continued undivided, no differentiation could be made between interest and principal at the ..... the family partition was of a capital nature and not revenue.mr. balasubrahmanyan submitted that the real principle which veerappa chettiar v. commissioner of income-tax, laid down was contained in the following sentence :'for the reasons already stated by us, it is open to question whether the allotment ..... recurring nature was also raised but it is not reiterated before us. the tribunal held, differing from the view of the income-tax officer and the appellate assistant commissioner of income-tax, that the receipt was of a capital nature.one arunachalam chettiar died on february 23, 1938, leaving a considerable estate, ..... was in the nature of damages in tort, that is, for the wrongful act of the ceylon government in making the illegal collection of estate duty. it was found that interest so received would be income chargeable to tax. there the assessee was ramanathan chettiar, one of the adopted sons of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 07 1965 (HC)

Siddhi Vinayagar and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-07-1965

Reported in : [1966]60ITR771(Mad)

..... for which ended on september 14, 1955, the assessee-firm applied for registration on may 26, 1956, under section 26a of the income-tax act 1922. the income-tax officer granted registration to the firm and completed the assessment on that basis. the commissioner of income-tax, in exercise of his power under section 33b, however, held that the application for registration which was received by the ..... was justified in refusing registration to the assessee-firm for the assessment year 1956-57 under section 26a of the income-tax act ?'it is argued before us for the assessee that, even granting that the two facts relied on by the commissioner of income-tax for his conclusion have a factual basis, inasmuch as the assessee-firm has not been held to be a ..... .the contention for the assessee does not appear to require any elaborate consideration by this court, because of two decisions of the supreme court, commissioner or income-tax v. sivakasi match exporting co. and commissioner of income-tax v. a. abdul rahim & co. in the first of these cases the facts there are practically similar to those in the instant one, so far ..... subsequent letter of manicham chettiar himself to the department. the assessees appeal to the tribunal failed, as it found itself in substantial agreement with the conclusion of the commissioner of income-tax. it is in these circumstances the following question has been referred to this court under section 66(2) :'whether, on the fact and in the circumstances of the case, the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 30 1965 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras Vs. Associated Drug Co. (P.) Ltd.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-30-1965

Reported in : [1965]58ITR306(Mad)

..... judgment of the court was delivered bysrinivasan j. - it is on the application of the department under section 66(1) of the income-tax act that the following questio :'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the provisions of section 23a(1) can ..... the instance of the department.the provision of law that applies is section 23a it stood before its amendment by the finance act of 1955. it states that where the income-tax officer is satisfied that the profits and gains in respect of any previous year distributed as dividends are less than 60 per ..... of dividends. we have to examine what the company did when it purported to act upon the accounts before it and to decide upon the payment of the dividend. in new mahalaxmi silk mills ltd. v. commissioner of income-tax, the learned judges point out that section 23a is enacted with a view to ..... could decide upon the quantum of dividends, he is entitled to set apart sums towards liabilities.it is not always an easy matter for the income-tax authorities to determine with any precision the commercial profits of a trading concern. this very case reveals the wide divergence that exists between the computation ..... made by one authority and another. the income-tax officer determined this sum as in excess of rs. 46,000. the appellate assistant commissioners computation yielded the figure of rs. 22,335. the tribunal .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 17 1965 (HC)

P. Appavu Pillai Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-17-1965

Reported in : [1965]58ITR622(Mad)

..... in the computation of the profit and gains of a business is what is termed obsolescence allowance. section 10(2)(vii) of the income-tax act specifies this allowance and the condition under which it can be granted in these term :'in respect of any such building, machinery or ..... misconstrued the scope of section 10(2)(vii). it follows that the assessee would be entitled to the allowance as granted by the income-tax officer. the question is answered accordingly.in view, however, of the fact that this reference was rendered necessary through the shortcomings of the ..... that certain vehicles were in fact condemned as useless during the relevant account years. during the assessment proceedings, the assessee produced before the income-tax officer 'daily collection and expenditure book, conductors challans, trip sheets, tyre consumption stock book and other subsidiary books and vouchers for purchases and ..... of these condemned vehicles wiping out the relevant entry in this account. the income-tax law does not specify that any particular set of accounts should be maintained by an assessee. section 13 of the act, which deals with the method of accounting, is the only provision which can ..... income-tax officer to arrive at the income on the basis of an estimate, or adopting such other methods either with or without reference to the books of account available, as he may determine to be suitable in the circumstances of the case. the section does not, however, say, nor is there any provision in the act .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 25 1965 (HC)

Gnanambika Mills Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-25-1965

Reported in : [1965]58ITR795(Mad)

..... the judgment of the court was delivered byvenkatadri j. - this is a reference under section 66(2) of the indian income-tax act. the questions of law on which the tribunal has been directed to state a case are as follow :'(1) whether ..... those transactions. in respect of them, the revenue authorities relied on the principle laid down in sri ramalinga choodambikai mills ltd. v. commissioner of income-tax, where this court held that the sales would not be regarded as mere sham transactions unless there was sufficient evidence to prove that, and ..... and explained that was because the accounts related to sums properly due to the mill. some of these labourers who were examined by the income-tax officer stated that they never handled the money on account of these transactions except for receiving some small margin of profit. there were discrepancies ..... our notice the observations of the supreme court in keshaw mills co. ltd. v. commissioner of income-tax that in calling for a supplementary statement of the case under section 66(4) of the act, the high court could require the tribunal to include in such supplementary statement only such material ..... income-tax officer and sustained the addition made by him. the appellate assistant commissioner considered also the alternative argument of the assessee that the sum of rs. 70,641 should be allowed as an expenditure as bonus paid to employees for loyal services but held that the claim did not satisfy the tests laid down under section 10(2)(x) of the act .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 09 1965 (HC)

Mysore Fertiliser Co., Madras Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-09-1965

Reported in : [1966]59ITR268(Mad)

..... of the assessee under section 66(2) of the indian income-tax act, for the opinion of this court on the question which has been formulated as follows :'whether the tribunal was justified in sustaining the addition of rs. 50,000 to the income disclosed by the assessee ?'the assessee is a firm ..... maintained by him were defective and as such the income-tax officer was right in applying the proviso to section 13 of the act to ascertain the correct income from the business. but the contention of the assessee was that the basis adopted by the income-tax officer for arriving at the gross profit at 18 ..... railway freights and carriage outwards...'these observations go to show that the tribunal was not sure whether the percentage adopted by the income-tax officer was correct or incorrect. the income-tax officer takes the comparable case and arrives at a figure of gross profit at 17.7% on the turnover of straight fertilisers ..... fixing the percentage of gross profit in the assessees case. it is true that the true percentage to be adopted would depend upon the income-tax officers experience gained by similar assessments during the course of the assessment year and in the previous years and the percentage of profits made by ..... out by the house of lords in sun insurance office v. clark, where it becomes necessary to recourse to some form of estimate by the income-tax department that method should be adopted which approximates most near to the truth, and earl loreburn l. c. in his judgment at page 454 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 19 1965 (HC)

O.M.S. Pl.A. Alagappa Chettiar and Another Vs. Commissioner of Income- ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-19-1965

Reported in : [1966]59ITR440(Mad)

..... that arise for our determination are : (1) whether the surplus realisations of 5,150 and 7,038 dollars on the sale of properties were revenue receipts assessable under the indian income tax act; and (2) whether the sums of rs. 9,778 and rs. 9,676 can be held to be interest receipts and as such part of the ..... would not be just and equitable to treat unrealised interest, although formally credited in the books of account maintained at the head office, as income, profit or gain derived or accrued or received for the purpose of the income-tax act.in the result, we answer this point also in favour of the assessee, viz., that the sums of rs. 9,778 and rs ..... as different entities for that purpose, that he could not therefore turn round and say that he was paying interest to himself and that the income tax officer acted rightly in treating the interest receipt as part of the income. as regards the taxablility of profit, the tribunal held that the division of the assets between the different places of business was only arbitrary ..... . 9,676 cannot be held to be interest receipts and as such part of the income of the assesses headquarters business. counsels fee rs. 250. one set .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 17 1965 (HC)

Indian Commerce and Industries Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-17-1965

Reported in : [1966]60ITR229(Mad)

..... j. - what is in question in this reference is the validity of the orders made under section 23a of the income-tax act, 1922, as it stood before the 1955 amendments, for the assessment years 1949-50 to 1952-53. the assessee is ..... smallness of profit, meant not assessed profit but book or commercial profit. the supreme court went on to observe :'the income-tax officer, acting under this section, is not assessing any income to tax; that will be assessed in the hands of the shareholders. he only does what the director should have done. he puts ..... on business at madras. in respect of those years it declared dividend which fell short of 60 per cent. of the assessed profits less taxes. the income-tax officer, therefore, assumed jurisdiction and directed by his orders that the undistributed balance of the profits should be deemed to have been distributed to ..... nor is the tribunals view correct when it said that the deductions should be limited to the items which it specified. the test which the income-tax officer should have before him is to see whether, having regard the relevant circumstances, the amount declared as dividend compared with the balance of ..... himself in the place of the directors. though the object of the section is to prevent evasion of tax, the provision must be worked not from the standpoint of the tax .....

Tag this Judgment!


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