Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Court: chennai Year: 1996 Page 1 of about 275 results (0.063 seconds)

Aug 01 1996 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jawahar Mills Ltd. (No. 2)

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-01-1996

Reported in : (1997)142CTR(Mad)68; [1997]226ITR230(Mad)

..... . thanikkachalam j.1. in accordance with the directions given by this court, the tribunal referred the following question for the opinion of this court under section 256(2) of the income-tax act, 1961 : 'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appellate tribunal is justified in law in holding that the expenditure incurred on replacement of false ..... 20 years and it amounted to a material alteration resulting in a substantial improvement of the asset providing enduring benefit and, therefore, capital expenditure. 3. on appeal, the commissioner of income-tax (appeals) held that the cost of replacement was allowable as revenue expenditure and there was nothing in it to suggest that it was capital expenditure. he relied on the principles ..... ceiling should be allowed as a revenue expenditure while computing the income for the assessment year 1977-78 ?' 2. the assessee is a public limited company engaged in the manufacture of cotton yarn at salem. for the assessment year 1977-78 ..... expenditure incurred for replacing an old barbed wire fence by a compound wall and the expenditure incurred for replacement of a thatched roof with asbestos sheets was revenue expenditure. in cit v. mahalaxmi textile mills ltd. : [1967]66itr710(sc) , the assessee claimed a sum of rs. 93,215 for introduction of the 'casablanca conversion system' in its spinning plant, which .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 19 1996 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. M.S. Venkateswaran

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-19-1996

Reported in : [1996]222ITR163(Mad)

..... the following common question, for the assessment years 1972-73 to 1975-76, for the opinion of this court, under section 256(2) of the income-tax act, 1961 : 'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was correct in holding that there was no justification for disallowing ..... to non-business purposes?' 2. in making the assessment of the assessee, who is an individual, carrying on business in executing sanitary contracts, the income-tax officer disallowed interest payment of rs. 10,069 for the assessment year 1972-73 on the ground that the said interest relating to the borrowed ..... in the earlier years and that last year the same disallowance was made. for the assessment year 1974-75, following the earlier years' order, the income-tax officer disallowed a similar sum of rs. 10,069. so also, for the assessment year 1975-76 a similar disallowance was made. 3. on appeal ..... , the appellate assistant commissioner found force in the submission of the assessee that interest on the amount borrowed for payment of income-tax by the deceased father of the assessee would be an admissible deduction, that the balance diverted capital was only rs. 50,527 as against which ..... . 4. aggrieved, the department came up in appeal before the tribunal. the attention of the tribunal was drawn to the order of the commissioner of income-tax passed under section 264 for the assessment year 1971-72, in which it was found that the father, shri m.v. subramaniam, died on july .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 14 1996 (HC)

B. Palaniswamy Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-14-1996

Reported in : (1997)143CTR(Mad)368; [1997]225ITR432(Mad)

..... this case. 6. we have heard both learned counsel appearing for the assessee as well as learned standing counsel for the department. section 64(1)(vi) of the income-tax act, 1961, authorises inclusion of income as arises directly or indirectly to the son's wife of such individual from assets transferred directly or indirectly on or after the 1st day of june, 1973 ..... learned counsel, the department failed to establish such a nexus in the present case so as to warrant application of the provisions contained in section 64(1)(vi) of the income-tax act, 1961. it was further submitted that the capital contributed by the daughter-in-law in the abovesaid firms was later on on withdrawn by her and, therefore, there is no ..... similar nature while considering the provisions of section 64(1)(vi), explanation 3, to section 64(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, in cit v. shivji ram agarwal , wherein it was held that : 'a perusal of explanation 3 to section 64(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, shows that it applicability is confined to clauses (iv) and (v) of section 64. it does not apply ..... firms, vijayalakshmi colour company and singarappan palayakat company, were includible and assessable in the hands of the assessee under section 64(1)(vi) of the income-tax act, 1961 ?' 2. the assessee is an individual and derives share income from two firms called singarappan palayakat co. and palaniappan palayakat co., both at pudupet, in which he is a partner. during the previous year relevant .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 14 1996 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Adamkhan

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-14-1996

Reported in : (1997)139CTR(Mad)162; [1997]223ITR264(Mad)

..... directions of this court in t.c.p. no. 28 of 1978, the tribunal referred the following question for the opinion of this court under section 256(2) of the income-tax act, 1961 : 'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appellate tribunal was right in holding and had valid materials to hold that the assessee had not ..... circumstances disclosed during the assessment proceedings and with the help of the explanation to section 271(1)(c) of the income-tax act, 1961, found the assessee guilty of concealment. 4. accordingly, he levied a minimum penalty of rs. 53,793 equal to the income concealed. 5. aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the appellate tribunal. the appellate tribunal on considering the facts ..... 50 per cent. of the peak credit at rs. 63,693 and thus made the assessment on a total income of rs. 63,693 under section 144 of the act. the assessee was not present in the assessment proceedings. 10. the income-tax officer initiated penalty proceedings and referred the matter to the inspecting assistant commissioner. the assessee also wrote a letter dated september ..... 27, 1970. a return was filed on august 3, 1970, disclosing an income of rs. 10,000. the assessee approached the central board of direct taxes as against the summary order made by the income-tax officer under section 132 of the act. after hearing the assessee, the central board of direct taxes passed an order under section 132(11) on january 20, 1972, dismissing the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 17 1996 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. English Electric Company of India Limit ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-17-1996

Reported in : [1997]225ITR970(Mad)

..... instance of the department, the tribunal referred the following question for the opinion of this court, under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the 'act' : 'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appellate tribunal was right in holding that the provision ..... of the assessment. the supreme court accordingly held that in that case the assessee was entitled to deduction of the sales tax liability in computing its total income under the income-tax act. in cit v. orient supply syndicate : [1982]134itr12(cal) , the calcutta high court held that it is not in all ..... v. union of india : [1963]49itr165(sc) , and held that under the indian income-tax act, 1922, the liability to pay income-tax arises on the accrual of the income, and not from the computation made by the taxing authorities in the course of assessment proceedings; it arises at a point of time not ..... for a sum of rs. 5,75,000 as payable towards excise duty and claimed the same as a deduction. both the income-tax officer and the commissioner of income-tax (appeals) disallowed the claim. both of them took the view that since the demand from the central excise authorities was received ..... under reference and it was an allowable deduction and it could not be said to be a contingent liability as held by the commissioner of income-tax (appeals) while negativing the claim of the assessee. 4. learned senior standing counsel appearing for the department submitted that if the excise .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 11 1996 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. K.P. Madan Mohan

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-11-1996

Reported in : [1996]222ITR1(Mad)

..... tribunal referred the following question for the opinion of this court under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961 (in short, 'the act') : 'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and having regard to the provisions of section 57(iii) of the income-tax act, 1961, the appellate tribunal was justified in holding that a further sum of rs. 14, ..... other sources'. the tribunal, thereafter estimated the expenditure and allowed a sum of rs. 15,000 as deduction under section 57(iii) of the act. 5. mr. s.v. subramanian, learned senior standing counsel for the income-tax department, the applicant herein submitted that the account books said to have been maintained by the assessee were not produced before the authorities below and ..... contention that the purchase of ticket is an investment and the money spent for purchasing the ticket therefore cannot be allowed as expenditure. therefore, learned senior standing counsel for the income-tax department submitted that the order passed by the tribunal, allowing an expenditure of rs. 15,000 is not correct. 6. on the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the ..... to learned counsel for the assessee/respondent, even if the tickets did not yield any income the expenditure incurred for purchasing the said tickets should be allowed as deduction under section 57(iii) of the act. 9. in the case reported in cit v. rajendra prasad moody : [1978]115itr519(sc) , the supreme court, while considering the claim for deduction of interest paid .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 21 1996 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. N.A. Pappuraja Sons

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-21-1996

Reported in : [1997]225ITR768(Mad)

..... be said that the partnership firm has violated any of the conditions prescribed under the partnership deed so as to disentitle it from obtaining registration under section 185 of the income-tax act, 1961. in that view of the matter, considering the facts arising in the case, in the light of the judicial pronouncements cited supra, we hold that the order passed ..... . thanikkachalam, j. 1. in pursuance of the order of this court, the tribunal referred the following question, for the opinion of this court, under section 256(2) of the income-tax act, 1961 : 'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appellate tribunal is correct in law in holding that the assessee-firm was entitled to the benefits ..... point for consideration is, whether this would disentitle the partnership firm to get registration under section 185 of the income-tax act, 1961. section 185(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, states that : 'on receipt of an application for the registration of a firm, the income-tax officer shall inquire into the genuineness of the firm and its constitution as specified in the instrument of partnership, ..... is bound to register the firm unless the assessee has contravened section 23(4) of the indian income-tax act, 1922.' 16. in virendra kumar avinash kumar v. cit : [1988]171itr263(all) , the allahabad high court while considering the provisions of section 185 of the income-tax act, 1961, held that partnership is a matter of agreement and for a valid agreement, there must be .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 24 1996 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. N.S.M. Sankarapandian

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-24-1996

Reported in : (1997)142CTR(Mad)62; [1996]222ITR289(Mad)

..... in stating that the amounts paid by the abovesaid two firms to the assessee is salary and, therefore, the assessee is entitled to standard deduction under section 16 of the income-tax act, 1961. in that view of the matter, we answer the question referred to us in the negative and in favour of the department. there will be no order as to ..... -partner from jaipur printers falls to be considered under the head 'income from salaries' and consequently, in allowing deduction under section 16(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, it held that 'section 15 of the income-tax act, 1961, has provided for the income chargeable to income-tax under the head 'salaries'. the provisions of section 15 of the income-tax act, 1961, contemplate the jural relationship of employer and employee. in ..... year 1974-75, the sums received by their respective husbands from the firm for services rendered to the firm are liable to be assessed by invoking section 64 of the income-tax act, 1961, held 'that when the karta of a hindu undivided family enters into a partnership with others, he does so in his individual capacity and the karta alone becomes the ..... in the circumstances of the case, the appellate tribunal was correct in law in holding that the assessee is entitled to claim standard deduction under section 16(i) of the income-tax act, 1961, from the sums paid as salary by the firms in which he and his hindu undivided family were associated ?' 2. the assessee as the karta of the hindu undivided .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 08 1996 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Pioneer Engineering Syndicate

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Oct-08-1996

Reported in : [1998]234ITR503(Mad)

..... of 1980, the tribunal referred the following two questions for the assessment years 1974-75 and 1975-76 for the opinion of this court under section 256(2) of the income-tax act, 1961 : '1. whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appellate tribunal is justified in deleting the sum of rs. 1,16,921 and rs. 51 ..... andhra pradesh in respect of godawari barrage project works and rs. 51,844 being the amount due from the government of andhra pradesh in respect of musi bridge works. the income-tax officer passed an order dated february 16, 1976, determining the total loss as rs. 23,02,323. before the appellate assistant commissioner in appeal the assessee contended that rs. 4 ..... rs. 51,844 and hence it cannot be said that this amount has accrued to the assessee in the assessment year 1974-75. therefore, the income-tax officer was directed to delete this amount from the total income. inasmuch as this amount was not accepted by the government of andhra pradesh for payment of the same to the assessee in the assessment year ..... under the head 'other sources'. but, on march 16, 1976, a revised return was filed disclosing 'nil' income. the income-tax officer passed an order dated march 16, 1976, computing the business loss as rs. 83,498 and the income assessable under the head 'other sources' as rs. 52,593 and after setting off the latter against the former determining the total loss as .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 08 1996 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Rane Madras Ltd.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-08-1996

Reported in : [1998]231ITR929(Mad)

..... section 212(3a) or under section 210. in this view, it held that the assessee would be entitled to interest under section 210 on the refund of excess tax. the tribunal further observed that there was no provision in the income-tax act for making a deposit of any amount and the payment can be construed as the payment of third instalment of advance ..... supra. thus, considering the facts arising in this case, we are of the opinion that there is no ground for the commissioner of income-tax to interfere with the order passed by the income-tax officer under section 263 of the act. 12. in that view of the matter, we hold that the order passed by the tribunal in cancelling the order passed under section ..... tax with something in excess of what is liable to be paid. thus, the appellate tribunal cancelled the order of the commissioner of income-tax passed under section 263, directing the income-tax officer to withdraw the interest ..... of this court under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961 : 'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appellate tribunal was right in holding that the payment of tax not in excess of 1/3rd of the tax demanded under section 210 should be considered to be an advance tax payment made under section 212(3a) and interest under .....

Tag this Judgment!


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