Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Court: chennai Year: 1985 Page 5 of about 73 results (0.049 seconds)

Mar 14 1985 (HC)

K. Sampath Kumar Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-14-1985

Reported in : (1986)51CTR(Mad)380; [1986]158ITR25(Mad)

..... assessee before the appellate assistant commissioner who allowed the assessee's claim and directed the income-tax officer to grant deduction under section 36(1)(iii) of the act. the revenue took the matter in appeal to the income-tax appellate tribunal questioning the decision of the appellate assistant commissioner upholding the assessee's ..... portion of the interest relating to the borrowals for the purchase and erection of the machinery and plant and allowed the same to be capitalised. the income-tax officer, however, rejected the assessee's claim and held that the entire interest of rs. 35,526 is to be added to the cost ..... ramanujam, j.1. the assessee is a partner in m/s. sam engineering company, coimbatore, and he was being assessed to income-tax on his share of the income as a partner of the firm. on july 24, 1978, he started his own separate business, namely, manufacture and sale ..... be charged to the profit and loss account. the learned counsel appearing for the assessee relies on the decision of the karnataka high court in addl. cit v. southern founders : [1979]120itr37(kar) , wherein a division bench of that court has held that where for the purpose of carrying on ..... business and, as such, it is allowable as business expenditure. however, the tribunal referred to certain tests laid down by the gujarat high court in cit v. alembic glass industries ltd. : [1976]103itr715(guj) for determining the nature of the expenditure, whether capital or revenue, and applying those principles to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 07 1985 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Lakshmi Narayanan

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-07-1985

Reported in : (1986)52CTR(Mad)240; [1986]157ITR816(Mad)

..... and 1971-72, the tribunal is not right in holding that the commissioner was not justified in issuing a notice proposing to revise the order of the income-tax officer. in this view, the first question has to be answered in the negative and in favour of the revenue. 4. coming to the second question ..... that the revenue has not accepted the decision of the tribunal is not a ground for ignoring the same and proceeding to revise the order of the income-tax on the basis that the tribunal's decision is not correct. however, having regard to the fact that the decision of the tribunal in respect ..... tribunal for the assessment years 1970-71 and 1971-72 on identical issues even though not accepted by the department and which decision was available to the income-tax officer before he completed the assessment 2. if the answer to the first question is in the negative, whether the tribunal was right, on the ..... the tribunal was of the view that the commissioner was in error in proceeding on the basis that the order of the income-tax officer holding that only 1/7th share income of the firm is includible in the hands of the assessee is prejudicial to the revenue cannot be sustained as the decision of ..... proceedings cannot be sustained and in that view it set aside the revisional order of the commissioner and sustained the order of the income-tax officer holding that only 1/7th share income of the firm should be included in the hands of the assessee. aggrieved by the order of the tribunal with reference to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 08 1985 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sundaram Industries Ltd.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-08-1985

Reported in : (1986)55CTR(Mad)172; [1987]166ITR35(Mad)

..... answered in the affirmative and against the revenue. 3. coming the question no. (ii), we find that in view of the finding rendered by the income-tax appellate tribunal that the revenue has not established that the sale price received towards the sale of the shares was more than the one disclosed in the sale ..... of the case and having regard to the provisions of rule 19a of the income-tax rules, 1962, the appellate tribunal was correct in holding that for the purpose of allowing the relief under section 80j in respect of the kochadai rubber ..... private limited, the provisions of section 52(2) could not be invoked for adopting the fair market value in the place of sale price, since the income-tax officer had not established that the price received was more than the one disclosed in the sale deed (iii) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances ..... , j. 1. at the instance of the revenue, the following four questions have been referred to this court for its opinion by the income-tax appellate tribunal : '(i) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the appellate tribunal was right in holding that the ..... period of working by the said units ?' 2. coming to question no. (ii), we find that the question stand covered by a decision of this court in cit v. karuppuswamy nadar & sons : [1979]120itr140(mad) , which is against the revenue. following the said decision, which is applicable to the facts of this case .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 29 1985 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Chandra Litho Press

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-29-1985

Reported in : [1986]159ITR670(Mad)

..... that any machinery which runs on electricity would constitute 'other electrical machinery' found in item iii(iii) e-3(b) of column i, part i of appendix i to the income-tax rules, 1962, is sustainable in law ?' 2. from the questions referred to above, it will be clear that the dispute between the parties is as to whether the offset machinery ..... 'other electrical machinery' occurring in item iii(iii) e-3(b) of column i, part i of appendix i to the income-tax rules, 1962, so as to enable the assessee to claim depreciation at the rate of 10%. the income-tax officer has proceeded on the basis' that since the offset machinery cannot generate electricity, it will not fall within the expression 'other ..... ramanujam, j.1. the following two questions have been referred to this court for its opinion by the income-tax appellate tribunal at the instance of the revenue : '(1) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in holding that the assessee was ..... the view taken by the tribunal in this case could be accepted as tenable. this view taken by the tribunal was the subject matter of a batch of tax cases before this court in cit v. m. s. sahadevan : [1980]123itr820(mad) and this court has disagreed with the view taken by the tribunal. as a matter of fact, in that case .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 07 1985 (HC)

Additional Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Southern Leather Industries

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-07-1985

Reported in : (1986)54CTR(Mad)385; [1987]164ITR194(Mad)

..... . it is not also the case of the department that there was any element of personal expenditure of the partners included in the said sum of rs. 16,544. the income-tax officer disallowed the claim on the ground that the firm which exports these goods is the corporation, though the goods are those of the assessee and that, therefore, it could ..... could increase the export trade also. we are in agreement with the tribunal that the object of the trip was to produce conditions or circumstances which would have increased the income of the assessee. in the circumstances, therefore, we answer the three questions referred to us in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. there will, however, be no order ..... foreign tour. the finding of the tribunal was that the object of the foreign tour was clearly to produce conditions or circumstances whereby the assessee would have had an increased income. it is also seen from the facts that the assessee itself was an exporter. the goods sent abroad bore their individual marks. they were, however, exporting them through the corporation ..... materials for the tribunal to come to the conclusion that the object of the partners' foreign tour was to produce conditions or circumstances whereby the assessee itself would have increased income and whether on the material available such a conclusion was reasonable ?' 2. the assessee in this case, m/s. southern leather industries, is a partnership firm. some of the partners .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 11 1985 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. United India Fire and General Insurance ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-11-1985

Reported in : [1990]182ITR355(Mad)

..... calculating the calculating the cost of investments for the application of rule 2 of the second scheduled to the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964, for the assessment year 1971-72 ' 2 ..... the purpose of surtax and not the dividend income for 1971-72 and 1972-73 and 2. whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appellate tribunal was right in directing the income-tax officer to exclude the sum of rs. 2,45,000 for ..... referred to this court for its opinion by the income-tax appellate tribunal at the instance of the revenue : '1. whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appellate tribunal was right in holding that the gross dividend income should be deducted while computing the chargeable profits for ..... answered against the revenue and it is answered accordingly. 3. coming to the second question, it is also covered by the decision of this court in addl. cit v. madras motor and general insurance co. ltd. : [1979]117itr354(mad) , which is against the revenue. therefore, the second question is also answered against ..... . so far as the first question is concerned, we find that it is covered by a decision rendered by this court in t.c. nos. 1196 to 1198 of 1977, dated october 6, 1983 (cit v. sundaram industries (p.) ltd. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 14 1985 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sri. Jeya Jothi and Co.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-14-1985

Reported in : [1987]164ITR318(Mad)

..... claimed it as a bad debt and as a loss arising out of the advances made to the mill and, therefore, deductible as an expenditure. however, the income-tax officer rejected this claim and held that it is a capital loss and disallowed the claim. on appeal, the appellate assistant commissioner, however, held that the ..... a good financier so that the employment of the workers and the capital of the investors could be protected. the assessee-firm, which was granted registration by the income-tax officer, came into existence in june, 1960, primarily, to work shanmugar mill, rajapalayam. a petition was filed before the high court in o.p. no ..... that it is also having money-lending business, cannot conclude the question. in this connection, he referred to the decision in ramnarain sons (p.) ltd. v. cit : [1961]41itr534(sc) . the assessee in that case who was a dealer in shares and securities was also carrying on business as managing agents of other ..... been possible to contend that the advance was in the nature of a premium, as in the decision in cit v. coimbatore pictures private ltd. : [1973]90itr452(mad) . though, as held in ramnarain sons (p.) ltd. v. cit : [1961]41itr534(sc) , the assessee also carrying on business as a money-lender may not conclude the ..... v. ramaswami, j.1. sree shanmugar mill limited, rajapalayam, a company incorporated under the companies act, had incurred heavy losses and was under liquidation and an official liquidator had been appointed by this court in o.p. no. 279 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 26 1985 (HC)

V. Muthiah Pillai (Died) and ors. Vs. Vedambal and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-26-1985

Reported in : AIR1986Mad106

..... absolutely to this defendant. it vowel on &behalf; of this defendant the first defendant has been renting out and enjoying the rental income and was paying the taxes and was spending towards the upkeep of the property. therefore, inasmuch as these things were allowed to be done in view of ..... air1972mad467 . the secretary of state for india in council v. debendralal khan .(xii) if, therefore, by operation of s. 28 of the limitation act if title is lost merely writing letters, exhibiting cordial relationship like ex. a21 will not revive that title when once it is lost.(xiii) learned counsel ..... the third defendant. therefore, unless and until such knowledge is attributed to the third defendant, no question of adverse possession will arise.(iv) the three acts, which according to the first defendant, would constitute assertion of hostile title are - (1) mutation in the municipal registry. there is nothing on record ..... 2 in their additional written statement contended that the first defendant has acquired title to the property under s. 14(l) of the hindu succession act. that is an additional ground to hold that theplaintiffs are not entitled to succeed in recovering possession of the suit property. 7. the plaintiffs ..... to the third defendant absolutely. out of trust and confidence, the third decadent had with the first defendant lie allowed the first defendant to act in the nature of a trustee. for valid consideration, ex. al sale has come to be executed in favour of plaintiffs, since the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 13 1985 (HC)

Central Board of Excise and Customs Vs. Ashok Leyland, Madras

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-13-1985

Reported in : 1986(7)ECC10; 1985(5)LC2320(Madras); 1985(22)ELT17(Mad)

..... before the tribunal, but that was rejected as out of time. the question was whether a revision could be filed under section 33a of the income-tax act, against the order of the appellate assistant commissioner which has been made the subject of an effective appeal before the tribunal. the said decision squarely ..... ground that it is filed after the prescribed time, the order cannot be said to be the subject of an appeal as, section 33a of the income-tax act excluded, from the purview of revisional powers, orders which have been made the subject of an appeal before the appellate tribunal. there also, an ..... occurring in section 130. 6. in more or less similar circumstances, this court in srinivasalu naidu v. commissioner of income tax - : [1948]16itr341(mad) dealing with the scope of section 33a of the income-tax act, held that the expression 'made the subject of an appeal' occurring in that section should be understood as the ..... - 45 stc 109 fb, had to consider the scope of suo motu powers of revision contained in section 32 of the tamil nadu general sales tax act, 1959. sect. 32 conferred on the deputy commissioner a power of revision in respect of orders passed by any subordinate authority, except in respect of ..... yarn stores v. state of madras, 14 stc 724. in that case, the scope of section 34(2)(b) of the tamil nadu general sales tax act, 1959 was considered. that decision also contained an exclusion in respect of orders which have been made the subject of an appeal. there also, it .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 26 1985 (HC)

K. Sushila Vs. the Tahsildar and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-26-1985

Reported in : (1985)2MLJ412

..... the time with respect to which the legislation was made are legitimate topic for consideration in ascertaining the object and scope of the exemption from the income-tax conferred on agricultural income....it is a matter of ordinary experience, at least in this part of the country, that mango, coconut, palmyra, orange, jack arecanut, ..... /81, the petitioner seeks exemption for the lands in question under the provisions of the tamil nadu urban land tax act. i therefore proceed to deal with the petitioner's contention in writ petition no. 9179/81 in the first instance before dealing with the case of ..... of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to quash the order of the third respondent dated 8th may, 1978 refusing to grant exemption under the urban land tax act and to direct the third respondent to grant the exemption in respect of the petitioner's land referred to above.4. in writ petition no. 9179 ..... . writ petition no. 4946/78 has been filed for the issue of a writ of declaration declaring that the provisions of the tamil nadu urban land tax act, 1966 are void and unenforceable in respect of the petitioner's land comprised in door no. 51, ward 27, survey no. 1330/1.3. writ ..... o.ms.no. 288, revenue department, dated 13th february, 1976, the government in exercise of the powers under section 27(1) of the urban land tax act, 1966, has granted exemption in respect of urban lands which are registered as house sites and which are under cultivation with wet or dry crops for .....

Tag this Judgment!


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