Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Court: chennai Year: 1970 Page 1 of about 40 results (0.042 seconds)

Feb 05 1970 (HC)

K. Lakshminarayanan, Coimbatore Vs. the Commissioner of Income-tax, Ma ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-05-1970

Reported in : AIR1971Mad192; [1971]79ITR525(Mad)

..... arises out of the order of the tribunal and that their order is in any way incorrect within the meaning of section 256(2) of the income-tax act, 1961.6. the petition is dismissed with costs. counsel's fee rs. 150/-.7. petition dismissed. ..... ramaprasada rao, j.1. this is petition under section 256(2) of the income-tax act, 1961, whereunder the petitioner is seeking a direction to the appellate tribunal to state the case and refer the following questions of law for the opinion of ..... portion has been suppressed due to normal exigencies.5. mr. padmanabhan, however, refers to a decision of our court in m. hussain ali and sons v. commr. of income-tax, reported in : [1965]58itr787(mad) . that was a case where the accounts kept by the assessee were rejected and the best judgment method was invoked and laterly penalty ..... 1) whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the inspecting assistant commissioner had jurisdiction to levy penalty on the basis of the satisfaction of the income-tax officer in the course of the assessment proceedings? (2) whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the provisions of section 271(1)(c) ..... by the department was increased to rs. 62,500/-. the inspecting assistant commissioner of income-tax concurrently took up penalty proceedings as provided in the act and levied a penalty of rs. 25,000/-, on an appeal against such levy of penalty to the income-tax appellate tribunal the penalty order and the quantum were confirmed. it is common ground .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 24 1970 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. K.S. Ratnaswamy

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-24-1970

Reported in : [1970]78ITR303(Mad)

..... any such property as his own to the exclusion of others, it is necessary to work up the notional status contemplated in the section of the income-tax act on such uncertain hypothesis. as pointed out by lord dunedin in rama rao v. rajah of pittapur, [1918] i.l.r. 41 mad. ..... , 1956-57 and 1957-58, for the first two years, after proceedings were initiated under section 34(1)(a) of the income-tax act, 1922, hereinafter referred to as ' the act', and for the later two years on his own. the status declared in all the returns was that of ' resident and ..... aspect which has to be considered in the case and not any other limb of section 4a of the act. relying mainly upon zackariah sahib v. commissioner of income-tax, : [1952]22itr359(mad) and ramjibliai hansjibhai v. income-tax officer, ahmedabad, : [1964]53itr547(guj) (guj.) mr. balasiibrahmanyan contends that the assessee being a ..... disturb the concurrent findings of fact of the appellate assistant commissioner and the tribunal.14. reliance is placed on zackanah sahib v. commissioner of income-tax, where viswanatha sastri j. observed as follows:'the expression 'maintains a dwelling place' connotes the idea that the assessee owns or has taken ..... ordinarily resident person'. the income-tax officer completed the assessment. on appeal, ; though initially the appeal was directed against the rejection of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 03 1970 (HC)

Rajapalayam Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-03-1970

Reported in : [1970]78ITR677(Mad)

..... yarn. during the accounting year ending with march 31, 1959, the assessee set up a new industrial undertaking which admittedly satisfied the requirements of section 15c(2) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, with which we are concerned in thisreference. the assessment year in question is 1961-62. the profit, depreciation and development rebate in respect of this unit for the ..... was entitled to the relief under section 15c '4. section 15c, appearing in chapter iii of the act, captioned 'taxable income' postulates, inter alia, a situation whereunder a portion of such income is exempt from tax. it provides :'save as otherwise hereinafter provided, the tax shall not be payable by an assessee on so much of the profits or gains derived from any industrial ..... of the section, the fiscal individuality of the new undertaking is maintained and it acts on its own without reference to the assessee and its composite trading activity, though such an assimilation is allowed generally under the tax laws for the computation of the totality of theassessable income of the assessee. thus interpreted, section 15c is self-active and the undertaking gains ..... unit during 1961-62. hence, no concession can be claimed by the assessee under section 15c. as observed by srinivasan j. in ashok motors ltd. v. commissioner of income-tax;'if we take the total profits of the composite business, the unabsorbed depreciation allowance has to be deducted therefrom in order to arrive at the taxable profits. once again, in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 03 1970 (HC)

Bhanji Bagawandass Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-03-1970

Reported in : [1971]80ITR155(Mad)

..... 1948 even earlier than april 1, 1956, in other words in respect of assessment years prior to march31, 1956, and, therefore, notices issued under section 34(1)(a) of the income-tax act before april 1, 1956, could not be challenged on the ground that they were issued beyond the time limit of eight years from the respective assessment years prescribed by the ..... , even earlier than april 1, 1956, in other words, in respect of assessment years prior to march 31, 1956, and, therefore, notices issued under section 34(1)(a) of the income-tax act, before april 1, 1956, could not be challenged on the ground that they were issued beyond the time limit of eight years from the respective assessment years prescribed by the ..... -50. in doing so, the appellate assistant commissioner followed the decision in commissioner of income tax v. p. darolia & sons [1956] 27 i.t.r. 515 . consequently, on november 3, 1953, the income-tax officer issued a notice under section 34(1)(a) of the income-tax act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'), to the appellant for the assessment year 1948-49. by his order dated ..... of section 34 suffered verbal, phased, instructive and far-reaching amendments from time to time ; but we are here concerned only with the period of limitation, within which the income-tax officer can act and issue the notice under section 34(1)(a). we are not, therefore, touching upon the other conditions for the exercise of such jurisdiction. prior to 1939, such action .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 03 1970 (HC)

A.E. Thangavelu Gounder and anr. Vs. Government of Madras

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-03-1970

Reported in : [1971]80ITR486(Mad)

..... the assessee subjected the receiver, who was in charge of the: estate of the assessee, and others and levied agricultural income-tax under the madras agricultural income-tax act, 1955. the revision to the commissioner of agricultural income-tax failed. the present tax case is against the order of the commissioner who passed the impugned order in exercise of his powers of revision.2. it is now well ..... there was no receiver whowas in custodia legis of the estate. during that period, and to be moreprecise in or about january, 1962, the revenue started proceedings underthe madras agricultural income-tax act, 1955, and issued a notice tomr. sadasiva rao, who was the receiver from april 10, 1957, to august 28,1958. the assessment year is 1959-60 and the relevant accounting ..... at all. further, section 2(e) makes it clear that an assessee is a person who is obliged to pay agricultural income-tax or other moneys payable under the act. the receiver is only a media or catalyst who passes off such income-tax on behalf of others to the coffers of the state. but, nevertheless, the money paid by the receiver is the money ..... the petitioner but also on the receiver, as he had to under section 8(1)(a) and 8(1)(c) of the act. section 8(1)(a) enables the assessing officer to levy and recover agricultural income-tax payable under the act from the receiver in like manner as it would be leviable upon and recoverable from a person on whose behalf such agricultural .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 24 1970 (HC)

M. Mariappa Gounder Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-24-1970

Reported in : [1970]77ITR785(Mad)

..... april 1, 1965.2. one important fact to be remembered in this case is that the tax liability arose long subsequent to the petitioner's appointment as official ..... revised by the commissioner of income-tax on april 7, 1966, and this resulted in the tax liability to the extent of rs. 10,566.45. this is sought to be recovered personally from the petitioner under section 178(4) of the income-tax act as amended by the finance act of 1965 with effect from ..... as has been shown in the profit and loss account already sent. in that letter the income-tax officer was told that there are no income-tax arrears, that income-tax advance and the contingent liability for income-tax were taken over by the syndicate bank and that in view of the fact that sufficient provision ..... in the said voluntary winding up. on november 17, 1963, the petitioner, in his capacity as liquidator of the company, submitted to the income-tax officer a return enclosing the balance-sheet and profit and loss account for the assessment year 1963-64 specifically stating therein that the bank had ..... liquidator and that too only as a result of the revision of the assessment by the commissioner of income-tax .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 23 1970 (HC)

First Gift-tax Officer Vs. A.A. Annamalai Nadar

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-23-1970

Reported in : [1970]77ITR608(Mad)

..... the counsel. the supreme court had occasion to consider the scope and content of such a power of the appellate authority under section 254(1) of the income-tax act of 1961. the supreme court in income-tax officer v. m. k. mohammed kunhi was of the view that the section should be interpreted liberally and that it did confer on the appellate tribunal powers ..... the text of section 23(5) of the gift-tax act, 1958, is in pari materia with that of section 254(1) of the income-tax act. having regard to the ratio in income-tax officer v. m. k. mohammed kunhi, : [1969]71itr815(sc) , we are of the view that the income-tax appellate tribunal, exercising jurisdiction under the gift-tax act, 1958, also possesses such wide powers and, notwithstanding ..... the text of section 23(5), it has, by necessary implication, the power to grant stay of the collection of the tax ..... assessing authority, pending disposal of the appeal. the main point raised before us is that the income-tax appellate tribunal had no jurisdiction to grant such stay pending disposal of the appeal, as no such power is expressly envisaged in section 23(5) of the gift-tax act of 1958. the contention of the respondent, however, is that such power is implied.2. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 30 1970 (HC)

T.T. Krishnamachari Vs. Income-tax Officer, Collection Branch and anr.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-30-1970

Reported in : [1970]77ITR651(Mad)

..... certified that such person purporting to sell, has either paid or made satisfactory provision for payment of all existing liabilities under the income-tax act and other tax laws enumerated in section 230a(1)(a). under sub-section (2) of section 230a, the application for the certificate mentioned in ..... he need not fill up form no. 34a from items 10 to 17 prescribed under the income-tax act of 1961, and that he is entitled to issuance of the certificate under section 230a of the income-tax act, 1961, as a matter of course.' it is fundamental that law should be applied only to ..... prescribes the form which is ordinarily termed as the tax clearance certificate for registration in certain cases. the form is form no. 34a, learned counsel for the petitioner states ..... between thepetitioner and the buyer, but the petitioner is only intending to sell his property. the question, therefore, is whether section 230a of the act and the consequential prescription in form no. 34 a would be attracted. section 230a imposes a restriction on registration of transfers of immovable properties in ..... sub-clause (1) shall be made by the person purporting to sell and intending to register the document of transfer and it shall be in the prescribed form. rule 44a of the act .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 22 1970 (HC)

The Management of Nagapattinam Electric Supply Co. Ltd., Madras and an ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Oct-22-1970

Reported in : AIR1971Mad358; (1971)IIMLJ347

..... treat being not in itself an exercise of compulsory powers. in fazilka electric supply co. ltd. v. commr. of income-tax, delhi, , the view was expressed by the supreme court that for purposes of sec. 10(2)(vii) of the indian income-tax act 1922, a compulsory purchase mentioned in the second proviso to sub-section (1) of section 7 of the indian ..... electricity act, 1910 was not a compulsory acquisition in the sense that it is without reference to, and independent of any agreement ..... of the business of the undertaking, sufficient notice of the election to exercise the option has been provided for the licensee. subsequently b in 1948, the elelctricity (supply) act provided for, inter alia, constitution of state electricity boards a part of the countrywide scheme for rationalisation of the production and supply of electricity and generally for taking measures conducive ..... . kailasam j. held against the appellants, the nagapattinam electric supply co. ltd. and the kumbakonam electric supply corporation ltd. both are public limited companies incorporated under the companies act 1913 and carried on the business of distributing and supply electrical energy within the limits respectively of nagapattinam and of the revenue taluks of kumbakonam. papanasam and part of thanjavur .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 23 1970 (HC)

Saradambal Ammal Vs. A.M. Natesa Mudaliar

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-23-1970

Reported in : (1972)1MLJ244

..... g as the ostensible or nominal owner was made by p in contravention of the service rules as well as to evade the provisions of the income-tax act and the agreement entered into between g and p was invalid and p was not entitled to claim possession of the business, the award of which ..... when the agreement was entered into, p had no idea of evading or defeating the provisions of the income-tax act, though the plaintiff obtained the benefit of a lower rate of tax for the business income and his personal income escaped taxation. in other words, the learned judges held that at the inception p did not entertain ..... any idea of defeating the provisions of the income-tax act, though in the later years, p did secure some benefit, since the business was regarded as that of g. the learned judges also ..... properties. having once operated as the consideration for his earlier promise, her past services could not be treated under section 2(d) of the contract act as a subsisting consideration for his subsequent promise to transfer the properties to her. the past cohabitation was the motive and not the consideration for the ..... question was a sham and nominal document not intended to be and was not in fact acted upon. the respondent continued to be in possession and enjoyment of the house in his own right after the settlement, paying taxes etc. there was no transfer or divestment of title or possession. the suit property is .....

Tag this Judgment!


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