Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Court: chennai Year: 1985 Page 6 of about 73 results (0.047 seconds)

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!

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!

Mar 20 1985 (HC)

Sree Murugan Financing Corporation Chit Promoters and Financiers and o ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-20-1985

Reported in : (1987)1MLJ204

..... or proximation to justify the demand has to be proved by state. in this perspective, even on taking into account totality of income and expenditure for all services rendered under the act, it transpires that after the increased fee was imposed in 1980-81, in spite of the deficit which was experienced in the ..... : [1965]2scr477 , three of the five learned judges of the supreme court held that what was levied as licence fee under calcutta municipal act was only a tax. learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon it to contend that unless the state is able to justify that the levy is for services rendered ..... chosen to rely upon it so as to augment the general revenues of the state, and hence it is not a fee but a tax, which is not authorised under the act.4. on behalf of the respondents, in the counter-affidavit filed in w.p. nos. 10552 of 1981 and 1333 of 1982, ..... co-relation between the fees collected and the services extended, it loses the characteristics of fee.(6) whether the demand made is a fee or a tax is always a question of fact to be determined in the circumstances of each case.(7) in extending services to a specified class', if indirectly other ..... state of orissa : [1961]2scr537 , four out of five learned judges of the supreme court have laid down the following essential features between a tax and fee.(1) tax and fee are compulsory extractions of money by public authorities and there is no generic difference between them.(2) a fee levied is essentially for services rendered .....

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!

Jun 28 1985 (HC)

Union of India and Anr. Vs. Raj's Continental Exports Private Limited

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jun-28-1985

Reported in : 1991(31)ECC369; 1987(27)ELT256(Mad)

..... view that when two view are possible, one in favour of the revenue should be adopted. on the other hand, in commissioner of income-tax, west bengal - i v. vegetable products ltd. (1973) 88 itr 92 , the supreme court has held that 'if the court finds that the ..... base metals (chapter 74 to 81 inclusives).'5. both the learned counsel placed reliance on rule 3 of the rules for the interpretation of the customs tariff act, 1975, and rules 3 reads as follows :- 'rule 3 : when for any reasons, goods are, prima facie classifiable under two or more headings, classification ..... assistant collector of customs is as follows : 'i order the assessment of staple pins in question under heading 83.01/15(2) of customs tariff act, with countervailing duty under item 68 cent.' except the finding of the assistant collector of customs that the staple pins are of thinner variety used as ..... . the respondent objected to the classification and contended that the stand taken by the department is incorrect and against the principles under the customs tariff act. the respondent has also brought to the notice of the customs authorities that several writ petitions were filed questioning the correctness of the order on ..... m. no. 144/85 were presented to the assistant collector of customs. the respondent classified the goods under heading 73.31 of the customs tariff act, 1975. but the assessing authorities expressed the view that on an earlier occasion the appellate collector of customs has given a ruling that the staples .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 16 1985 (HC)

Standard Electric Appliances, TuticorIn Vs. Superintendent of Central ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jul-16-1985

Reported in : 1986(8)ECC87; 1986(23)ELT302(Mad)

..... veil could be lifted where the companies shared the relation of a holding company and a subsidiary company and so juggi lal kamlapat v. commissioner of income-tax, u.p., 1969 1 s.c.r. 938 where this court held that the veil of corporate end could be lifted to pay regard to ..... service during the warranty period, this by itself would not make him a 'related person' within the meaning of section 4 of the central excises act. 14. we have cited the authorities to indicate that even when the legislature wanted by the amendment sales to related person to be considered differently, ..... fiction. here again, regard must be had to the explanation which provides that the expression 'holding company and subsidiary' have the same meanings as in the companies act, 1956. reference in this connection may be made to tata engineering and locomotive co. ltd. v. state of bihar and others - : [1964]6scr885 where ..... is a relative of the assessee. it will be noticed that the explanation provided that the expression 'relative' has the same meaning as in the companies act, 1956. as regards the other provisions of the definition of 'related person' that is to say 'a person who is so associated with the assessee ..... messrs philips india ltd. were considered to be favoured buyers for the purpose of section 4(4)(c) of the central excises and salt act, 1944 (hereinafter called the 'act'). there is one apparent error into which the authorities seem to have fallen inasmuch as they seem to have been influenced by the concept .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 16 1985 (HC)

Standard Electric Appliances Vs. the Superintendent of Central Excise ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jul-16-1985

Reported in : 1986(7)LC278(Madras)

..... veil could be lifted where the companies shared the relation of a holding company and a subsidiary company and to juggi lal kanlapat v. commissioner of income tax u.p. : [1969]73itr702(sc) where this court held that the veil of corporate entity could be lifted to pay regard to the economic ..... service during the warranty period, this by itself would not make him a 'related person' within the meaning of section 4 of the central excise act.14. we have cited the authorities to indicate that even when the legislature wanted by the amendment sales to related persons to be considered differently, ..... . here again, regard must be had to the explanation which provides that the expression 'holding company and subsidiary' have the same meanings as in the companies act, 1956. reference in this connection may be made to tata engineering and locomotive co. ltd. v. state of bihar and ors. : [1964]6scr885 where ..... a relative of the assessee. it will be noticed that the explanation provided that the expression 'relative' has the same meaning as in the companies act, 1956 as regards the other provisions of the definition of 'related person', that is to say, 'a person who is so associated with the assessee ..... . philips india limited were considered to be favoured buyers for the purpose of section 4(4)(c) of the central excises and salt act, 1944 (hereinafter called 'the act'). there is one appare error into which the authorities seem to have fallen inasmuch as they seem to have been influenced by the concept .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 19 1985 (HC)

L. William Vs. the Church of South India and anr.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-19-1985

Reported in : (1987)ILLJ249Mad

..... be in employment with all the benefits that will follow by virtue of such employment. the law lexicon of british india, 1940 and the commissioner of income-tax, bombay presidency v. the bombay trust corporation ltd only state that 'when a person is 'deemed to be' something, the only meaning possible is ..... . 13. mr. v. krishnan, learned counsel for the appellant, submitted that on the facts of the present case, only article 113 of the limitation act is applicable. article 113 reads as follows : 'any suit for which no period of limitation is provided elsewhere in this schedule-period of limitation three years ..... the chief educational officer cannot direct the reinstatement of the plaintiff since it is beyond their power. the only power the authorities have got under the act and the rules made therein according to mr. s. w. kanakaraj, is to de-recognise the institution if it does not obey the directions of ..... of the order of suspension and dismissal. according to the learned counsel, the suit is hopelessly barred by limitation since article 58 of the limitation act is applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case and it is too much to contend that the period of limitation runs only from ..... misconceived and cannot be sustained both on law and on facts, that such a relief prayed for is against the provisions of the specific relief act and as such, the plaintiff cannot claim any salary for service not rendered. it is further contended by the defendants, that the plaintiff cannot .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 19 1985 (HC)

L. William, S/O. Luke Vs. the Church of South India, Represented by th ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-19-1985

Reported in : (1986)1MLJ397

..... be in employment with all the benefits that will follow by virtue of such employment. the law lexicon of british india, 1940 and the commissioner of income-tax, bombay presidency v. the bombay trust corporation ltd. only state that 'when a person is 'deemed to be'; something, the only meaning possible is ..... limitation.13. mr. v. krishnan, learned counsel for the appellant, submitted that on the facts of the present case, only article 113 of the limitation act is applicable. article 113 reads as follows:any suit for which n6 period of limitation is provided elsewhere in this schedule - period of limitation three years ..... chief educational officer cannot direct the reinstatement of the plaintiff since it is beyond their power. the only power the authorities have got under the act and the rules made therein according to mr. s.w. kanagaraj, is to de-recognise the institution if it does not obey the directions of ..... the order of suspension and dismissal. according to the learned counsel, the suit is hopelessly barred by limitation since article 58 of the limitation act is applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case and it is too much to contend that the period of limitation runs only ..... misconceived and cannot be sustained both on law and on facts, that such a relief prayed for is against the provisions of the specific relief act and as such, the plaintiff cannot claim any salary for service not rendered. it is further contended by the defendants, that the plaintiff cannot .....

Tag this Judgment!


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