Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Court: chennai Year: 1985 Page 3 of about 73 results (0.123 seconds)

Feb 26 1985 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Deccan Sugars and Abkhari and Co. Ltd.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-26-1985

Reported in : [1986]157ITR467(Mad)

..... , therefore, it should be allowed a claimed by the assessee. aggrieved by the decision of the tribunal, reference was sought for under section 256(1) of the income-tax act. b that was rejected. the revenue has filed this application under section 256(2). 3. the learned counsel for the revenue makes a two-fold contention. one ..... ramanujam, j. 1. in this petition filed under section 256(2) of the income-tax act by the revenue, a direction is sought for referring the following question for the opinion of this court : 'whether, on the facts and in the ..... . on appeal, the commissioner of income-tax (appeals) held that the assessee having decided to write off the amount due to it only in the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration, it ..... provisions and other articles dealt with by the stores. the assessee claimed the said sum of rs. 60,000 as a business loss. that was disallowed by the income-tax officer on the ground that the loss was for the year ending with december 31, 1973, and hence it is not admissible for the assessment year 1976-77 ..... said question need be given in this case. the assessee in this case is a manufacturer of sugar. while completing the assessment for the year 1976-77, the income-tax officer disallowed a sum of rs. 60,000 being the amount given to the employees' co-operative stores which could not be recovered. the said employees' co .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 14 1985 (HC)

George Maijo and Co. (Vizag) Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-14-1985

Reported in : [1986]157ITR475(Mad)

..... that the premium received on the sale of import entitlements is taxable under section 28(iv) of the income-tax act 2. whether the tribunal was right in distinguishing the decision of the supreme court in : [1969]73itr652(sc) (cit v. madan gopal radhey lal) ?' 3. whether the tribunal was right in holding that the premium ..... ramanujam, j.1. the assessee in this application under section 256(2) of the income-tax act, 1961, seeks a direction from this court to the tribunal to refer the following three questions for the opinion of this court : '1. ..... taken to be a capital receipt and not as a revenue receipt. this contention was rejected by the commissioner of income-tax (appeals) on the ground that the assessee got the import entitlement because of its exports which is its regular business and in view of the close ..... and the sale proceeds came to rs. 5,80,436.89. the income-tax officer included the said amount as part of the assessee's income treating it as a revenue or business receipt. this was challenged by the assessee before the commissioner of income-tax (appeals) contending that the sale proceeds of the import entitlement should be ..... same constituted profits and gains of the business of the assessee within the meaning of the said term in clause (iv) of section 28 of the said act. in these circumstances, it is impossible to regard these import entitlements as capital asset of the assessee. it is equally clear that, in these circumstances, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 28 1985 (HC)

P.V. Thyagaraj and anr. Vs. Tax Recovery Officer and anr.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-28-1985

Reported in : [1987]165ITR412(Mad)

..... petitioners' property cannot be proceeded against. another contention put forward by the petitioners is that the recovery proceedings themselves are time-barrier under section 231 of the income-tax act, 1961. 2. the first respondent, the tax recovery officer, has filed a counter-affidavit to the effect that the gift deed having come into existence after the proclamation has been issued regarding the property ..... firm had been assessed in the years 1947-48 to 1950-51 and 1963-64 and 1964-65. in view of the non-payment of the tax, certificates under section 46(2) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, were issued as early as march 26, 1958, and may 19, 1959. based on the said certificates, recovery proceedings had been initiated. while those recovery ..... . therefore, the petitioners have got an alternative remedy provided by the status. we are, therefore, of the view that the petitioners should go before the tax recovery officer under rule 11 of schedule ii of the income-tax act to challenge the impugned order said to have been passed by the first respondent. therefore, without going into the merits of the rival contentions, we ..... which cannot be undertaken in writ proceedings. on the other hand, we find that rule 11 of schedule ii to the income-tax act provides for such an investigation by the tax recovery officer. in this case, the order passed by the tax recovery officer directing the tenant to pay rents to the department has been challenged as being without jurisdiction and also on the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 04 1985 (HC)

Seshasayee Paper and Boards Ltd. Vs. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-04-1985

Reported in : (1986)51CTR(Mad)230; [1986]157ITR342(Mad)

..... .j. 1. these two petitions have been filed by the assessee challenging two notices issued under section 154 of the income-tax act, 1961, by which the assessee was called upon to show cause why relief allowed under section 80j of the act should not be recomputed excluding the borrowed capital in view of the retrospective amendment brought about by the finance (no. 2 ..... commissioner has held that the assessee was entitled to the benefit of section 80j of the act and he further directed the income-tax officer to allow the assessee, the relief admissible under section 80j of the act. the income-tax officer while giving effect to the order of the appellate assistant commissioner determined the capital employed at rs. 3,43 ..... undertaking was computed at rs. 3,63,74,658. 4. for the assessment year 1974-75, the relief under section 80j of the act is given to the assessee by an order of the appellate assistant commissioner of income-tax while deciding the appeal, i.t.a. no. 566/77-78. dealing with ground no. 5, taken by the assessee, the appellate assistant ..... the assessment proceedings in the case of the assessee which is a public limited company registered under the indian companies act. the assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1972-73 in its final stage was determined by an order of the income-tax appellate tribunal i.t.a. no. 1241 (mds) /76-77. in paragraph 10 of the order, the tribunal has positively .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 08 1985 (HC)

Hallacarry Estate Vs. Agricultural Income-tax Officer

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-08-1985

Reported in : [1985]155ITR411(Mad)

..... take up and dispose of the same today itself on merits. the petitioner has suffered an order of assessment under the tamil nadu agricultural income-tax act, 1955, hereinafter referred to as 'the act', at the hands of the respondent. mr. r. l. ramani, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, states that as against the ..... preferred to the assistant commissioner of agricultural income-tax, uthagamandalam, and the same is pending and hence, as per the proviso to s. 40 of the act, the respondent should not treat the petitioner as in default. section 40 of the act with the proviso reads as follows : 'recovery of tax and penalties. - any amount specified ..... failing so to pay shall be deemed to be in default : provided that, when an assessee has presented an appeal under section 31, the agricultural income-tax officer may, in his discretion, treat the assessee as not being in default so long as such appeal is undisposed of.' 2. learned counsel for the ..... passed the impugned order dated march 26, 1985, stating that the stay of collection of tax could not be complied with. mr. r. lokapriya, learned government advocate, would submit that the proviso to s. 40 of the act would come into play only if the agrl. ito is to treat the assessee as ..... that such steps are being taken by the respondent. it is needless to state that the import of the proviso to s. 40 of the act as well as the decision of this court, referred to above, will be kept in mind by the respondent if in fact he should take .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 17 1985 (HC)

Smt. T. Seetha Vs. Income-tax Officer.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Oct-17-1985

Reported in : [1986]15ITD636(Mad)

..... of recovery, it should be allowed as a bad debt since the other requirements specified in this behalf under section 36(2) of the income-tax act, 1961 (the act) are satisfied. he invited our attention to the decision of the madras high court in godavari bai v. ced [1971] 86 itr ..... and accrued to the wife and the minor sons because of their capacity mentioned in section 16(3) (a) (i) and (ii) in the income-tax act.' (p. 276)the madras high court in misrinul succors case (supra), while dealing with a similar question, has followed the decision of the supreme ..... the interest so allowed was assessable in the hands of the husband under section 16(3) (a) (i) and (ii) of the indian income-tax act, 1922. the supreme court held that it was so assessable. while coming to this conclusion the supreme court held that the accumulated profits of the ..... by the partners, over and above their capital contribution mentioned earlier, would be entitled to interest and the credit of the partners share of income periodically in her current account would, without the partner exercising her right of withdrawal, would amount to the partner having voluntarily advanced the amounts ..... can convert what otherwise was not a borrowing into a borrowing. though these observations were with reference to the claim under the companies (profits) surtax act, their significance cannot be lost sight of in the present context. therefore, the learned departmental representative submitted, that, even though the assessee might be .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 07 1985 (HC)

Fourth Income-tax Officer Vs. Canara Finances.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jun-07-1985

Reported in : [1986]17ITD18(Mad)

..... of any gratuity this year. thus, the claim is not allowable as deduction. it was also submitted that section 40a (7) of the income-tax act, 1961, (the act), applies and the conditions laid down therein are not satisfied. the learned counsel for the assessee strongly supported the order of the commissioner ( ..... fulfils the conditions laid down in section 40a (7) the deduction claimed cannot be allowed.5. in peoples engg. & motor works ltd. v. cit : [1981]130itr174(cal) the calcutta high court held that for gratuity to be deductible the assessee must fulfil the conditions said down in section 40a ..... 1) clearly states as under :'(1) the provisions of this section shall have effect notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained any other provisions of this act .......'in view of the clear language therein it is clear that notwithstanding the other provisions it is only section 40a (7) which would be ..... appeals). he urged that the liability for gratuity is allowable as deduction under section 36 as well as under section 37 of the act.4. we have considered the rival submissions. from the assessment year 1973-74 onwards the allowability of any provision for gratuity is governed by ..... 7). the deduction cannot be allowed on general principles under any other section of act because section 40a (1) would have effect notwithstanding anything contained in sections 30 to 37 of the act including sections 36 and 37.6. in cit v. andhra prabha (p.) ltd. : [1980]123itr760(mad) the madras .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 20 1985 (HC)

Asst. Registrar of Companies Vs. Southern Machinery Works Ltd. and ors ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Dec-20-1985

Reported in : [1986]59CompCas670(Mad)

..... income-tax act. it was contended, that under the income-tax act, the principal officer designated is responsible for compliance of the requirements under the various provisions of the income-tax act and, therefore, all the directors cannot be prosecuted. it was held that it was a matter of evidence ..... or not is a matter of evidence and the complaint cannot be thrown out at the threshold. in that case, prosecution was launched under the income-tax act against the directors of a company for failure to deduct income-tax on the salary of the employees, for failure to submit the returns in time, and for other violations of the provisions of the ..... , it is stated that the expressions ' officer' and ' director' shall include any person in accordance with whose directions or instructions the board of directors of the company is accustomed to act. the term ' officer ' is defined under section 2(30) as including any director, managing agent, secretaries and treasures, manager or secretary , or any person in accordance with whose ..... launched. the learned trial magistrate upheld the objection and dismissed all the companies as such. hence, these revisions by the assistant registered of companies. 3. section 159 of the act deals with submission of annual return by the company having a share capital . sub-section (1) of this section providers that every company having a share capital shall, within .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 21 1985 (HC)

Madhav Aluminium Conductors (P.) Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-21-1985

Reported in : [1986]15ITD671(Mad)

..... v. rajagopala rao, judicial member - this is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the commissioner cochin passed under section 263 of the income-tax act, 1961 (the act) dated 22-7-1983 and it relates to the assessment year 1976-77. the brief facts of the case are as follows. the assessee is a ..... dated 29-9-1977. the ito gave effect to the aacs orders on 15-10-1977. according to the orders of the ito dated 15-10-1977 income-tax payable by the assessee was reduced to rs. 1,16,609. consequent upon it a refund of rs. 55,263 was issued to the assessee. a ..... payable was rs. 1,71,872. however, as an advance tax of rs. 1,32,300 was already paid by the assessee-company, a demand of rs. 39 ..... show that the issue involved is highly debatable. the ito acted absurdly and erroneously in invoking section 154 to delete the interest already charged. there was no mistake, of law or, of fact, which would be apparent from the assessees records, enabling the income-tax officer to invoke section 154. the assessees application dated 23- ..... private limited company engaged in the manufacture of aluminium conductors. the assessment was completed for 1976-77 on 12-9-1976 on a total income of rs. 2,89,480 on which the income-tax .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 24 1985 (HC)

Carborundum Universal Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-24-1985

Reported in : [1986]17ITD305(Mad)

..... accounting period ended 31-8-1977 was completed on 24-7-1981. the assessment was made under the provisions of section 143(3), read with section 144b, of the income-tax act, 1961 (the act), i.e., after reference to the iac and on due consideration of the directions issued by him. we would set out certain facts. the assessment order insofar as the ..... not a case where there was merely an appeal pending before the first appellate authority. the case puthuthotam estates (1943) ltd. (supra) is a case under a tamil nadu agricultural income-tax act, 1955, which deals with provisions akin to section 264 and not the provisions of section 263, which are now under consideration. therefore, the ratio of that case also does not ..... acting under section 33b of the 1922 act, cancelled the order of the ito filing the proceedings and directed him to continue proceedings under section 34 ..... in support of the aforesaid proposition had relied on a judgment of the punjab and haryana high court in cit v. damyanti mehta and yash raj mehta . that was a case in which proceedings under section 34(1) (a) of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (the 1922 act) were initiated but the ito dropped the proceedings by his order proceedings filed. the commissioner thereafter .....

Tag this Judgment!


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