Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Court: chennai Year: 2001 Page 1 of about 265 results (0.053 seconds)

Mar 01 2001 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax and ors. Vs. K.T. Kunjumon

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-01-2001

Reported in : [2001]251ITR479(Mad)

..... for wiping out the existing liability of the assessee.11. it will be, therefore, our endeavour to consider the real import of section 158bc as also section 132b of the income-tax act. in our opinion, the interpretation given by the learned single judge is absolutely correct and we agree with the same.12. there can be no dispute that where there is ..... department, mrs. chitra venkataraman. learned counsel contended that the interpretation by the learned judge of section 158bc of the income-tax act was not correct. according to learned standing counsel, there were ample powers in that section if read with section 132b of the income-tax act to adjust the amounts in the way the authorities had done in this case. learned counsel stressed on the ..... a search under section 132 of the income-tax act, the assessment would be under chapter xiv-b of the act, which was a specially introduced chapter by the finance act, 1995. a glance at the whole scheme of this chapter suggests that under section 158ba, there is a 'non obstante ..... ), chennai, with a request that a sum of rs. 60,00,000 lying in his bank account may be appropriated towards the tax liability that may arise out of the action under section 132 of the income-tax act both at chennai and ernakulam. by that letter the petitioner also sought for a direction to lift the attachment orders. however, it is clear that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 24 2001 (HC)

R. Ramachandran Vs. G. Hariharan

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-24-2001

Reported in : (2001)2MLJ417

..... members for the beneficiaries and that they should be directed to produce the development agreement, power of attorney, application to the competent authority under the income-tax act for permission to sell the property in question, orders passed by the competent authority and all other papers into court.17. learned single judge after ..... ,45. the supreme court in the ruling reported in anil behari v latika ball dassi, has pointed out as follows:' section 263 of the succession act vests judicial discretion in the court to revoke or annual grant for just cause.'46. in this case, as already pointed out, the appellant has ..... till the court has decided that the probate must be revoked on one or more of the grounds specified in s. 50, probate and administration act. the only matter for consideration at this stage is, whether the appellants have made out a just cause for revocation of the probate which was ..... of probate of tellers of administration may be revoked or annulled for just cause and that the explanation/ illustration in section 263 of the indian succession act is only illustrative and not exhaustive. [b] there is no reason to come to the conclusion that notice for probate proceedings in o.p. no ..... not made out a case for revocation of probate and none of the grounds for revocation as set out in section 263 of the indian succession act have been satisfied by the appellant. that apart, appellant has not come to the court with clean hands and has chosen to suppress material facts .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 22 2001 (HC)

South India Surgical Company Vs. K. Govindan, Income-tax Officer

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jun-22-2001

Reported in : [2001]251ITR78(Mad)

..... to the conclusion that the order passed by the tribunal would be construed to be the order under section 273a(4) so as to attract section 279(1a) of the income-tax act. 17. at this point of time, it is relevant to note that learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would point out that the petitioner already moved a petition under section ..... down in p. jayappan v. s. k. perumal, first ito : [1984]149itr696(sc) , that the criminal court has to give due regard to the result of any proceedings under the income-tax act having a bearing on the question in issue and in an appropriate case it may drop the proceedings in the light of an order passed under the ..... . 1. south india surgical company, chennai, has filed these applications praying for quashing of the proceedings in four private complaints filed by the income-tax officer, the respondent herein, for the offences under sections 276c, 277 and 278b of the income-tax act, 1961, read with sections 193, 196 and 420 along with sections 34 and 120b of the indian penal code, 1860, in respect ..... penalty which was originally imposed upon the petitioner has been reduced by the tribunal under section 273a(4) of the income-tax act and, consequently, the prosecution cannot be allowed to continue in view of the bar contained in section 279(1a) of the income-tax act. 3. although on the strength of these two points, the above applications have been filed, learned counsel for the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 22 2001 (HC)

Nirmal and NavIn P. Ltd. and ors. Vs. D. Ravindran, Deputy Commissione ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jun-22-2001

Reported in : [2002]253ITR19(Mad)

..... a matter of fact, there are allegations in the complaint that the petitioners/accused nos. 7 to 10 have abetted the offence under sections 276c(1) and 277 of the income-tax act committed by accused no. 1, express newspapers ltd. in other words, it is stated in the complaint that petitioners/ accused nos. 7 to 10 conspired, fabricated and forged records, ..... 8 being the company, automatically a-9 would also get immunity. hence, the prosecution against all the petitioners are liable to be quashed.10. the settlement commission constituted under the income-tax act deals with the filing of the application under section 245c and has passed orders under sections 245d(1) and 245d(4) and, ultimately, the order has been passed under section ..... the point relating to the lack of maintainability in view of the immunity granted by the settlement commission would make the following submissions :the petitioners under section 245c of the income-tax act, made applications to have the case settled and to grant immunity from penalty andprosecution. admittedly, these applications were filed and admitted prior to the filing of the private complaint ..... of sales, etc., and, as such, the petitioners/accused nos. 7 to 10 committed the offences of abetment under section 278 read with section 276c and section 277 of the income-tax act.5. even before filing of the said complaint, the petitioners/accused nos. 7 and 8 filed applications before the settlement commission on may 12, 1988. the said applications were .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 08 2001 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. C.R.K. Swamy

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-08-2001

Reported in : [2002]254ITR158(Mad)

r. jayasimha babu, j.1. the order of the tribunal holding that the addition to income was not justified, having become final, the tribunal's orderholding that the revision of assessment by the commissioner on the ground that penalty proceedings had not been initiated was unsustainable, in the circumstances, is an order which is required to be upheld.2. moreover, as held by a bench of the delhi high court in the case of addl. cit v. sudershan talkies : [1993]200itr153(delhi) , failure on the part of the assessing authority to initiate penalty proceedings would not give jurisdiction to the commissioner of income-tax to pass an order under section 263 of the income-tax act, 1961 and to direct initiation of such proceedings. we are in respectful agreement with that view.3. the question referred to us for the assessment year 1984-85, as to whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appellate tribunal was right in law in setting aside the order passed under section 263 of the income-tax act and holding that non-initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) do not render the assessment made dated january 16, 1989, erroneous or prejudicial to the interests of the revenue and consequently the commissioner of income-tax is not justified in assuming under section 263, is therefore answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue.

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 01 2001 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Dr. V. Srinivasan

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-01-2001

Reported in : [2002]254ITR419(Mad)

..... was held not applicable for the purpose of levying income-tax on the trust and tax was levied only in the hands of the beneficiaries.8. the department having recognised the trust and taxed the beneficiaries under the wealth-tax act as well as under the income-tax act cannot alter its stand and refuse to recognise ..... the trust. the rent paid by the assessee has been treated as income for the trust.9. the genuineness of the trust ..... 1985, relating to the assessment year 1985-86, rs. 1,80,000 paid as rent to the trust should be allowed as deduction. the income-tax officer treated the property as the assessee's own property and disallowed the deduction. on appeal, the commissioner confirmed the assessment. the tribunal held ..... bank has also been deducted, as an expense, in the assessment of the trust. therefore, it has been recognised by the income-tax authorities that the trust received money as rent from the building constructed by it and the trust distributed money to the beneficiaries who were ..... application as found in earlier years.'it is further stated therein that :'since the provisions of section 164 do not apply to the assessee, income earned by the trust is being considered for assessment in the individual hands of the beneficiaries.'the beneficiaries are s. venkatakrishnan and s. rukmani .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 22 2001 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. South India Corporation Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-22-2001

Reported in : [2001]250ITR318(Mad)

..... mere device or a mere screen, the payments could not be treated as paymentsmade to directors as directors and the payments would not fall within section 40(c) of the income-tax act.'4. following the principles laid down in the above case, we answer the first question in favour of the assessee and against the revenue.5. with regard to question no ..... tribunal was correct in holding that the guarantee commission paid to the directors should not be considered for the computation of the amount disallowable under section 40(c) of the income-tax act ?(2) whether the tribunal was correct in holding that for the purpose of computing the amount disallowable under section 40(c) in respect of the motor cars provided to ..... on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal is right in holding that the commissioner of income-tax has jurisdiction to revise the order passed by the income-tax officer under section 143(3) read with section 144b of the income-tax act ?(2) whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal is right in holding that the ..... computing the disallowanceunder section 40(c) of the income-tax act, 1961. the income-tax officer did not take these expenditure into account for the purposes of computing the amount disallowable under section 40(c). but, however, the commissioner of income-tax (the 'cit') by virtue of his powers under section 263 of the act, revised the order of the income-tax officer allowing certain expenses to be deducted for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 08 2001 (HC)

E.i.D. Parry (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-08-2001

Reported in : (2002)177CTR(Mad)563; [2002]257ITR253(Mad)

..... be part of the salary paid to them for the purpose of computing the amount disallowable under section 40a(5) and section 40(c) of the income-tax act, 1961.1.0. at the instance of the revenue also the questions have been referred to us arising from the assessment for the assessment years 1977 ..... employees would be part of the salary paid to them for purposes of computing the amount disallowable under section 40a(5)/40(c) of the income-tax act, 1961 ?'9. this question has to be and is answered in favour of the revenue in the light of the decision of the supreme court ..... ground that they came into contact with corrosive chemicals.14. the tribunal has merely confirmed the order of the commissioner (appeals) who had directed the income-tax officer to take the help of an engineer and to ascertain as to whether the chemicals were corrosive and identify the machinery with which such corrosive chemicals ..... assessee and form part of its trading receipt. those amounts therefore are not to be treated as revenue receipts of the assessee and brought to tax. in the case of cit v. south india sugars ltd. : [2001]248itr92(mad) , this court examined a similar question and held that the amounts received by the ..... revenue expenditure.4. counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of the supreme court in the case of b. k. ltd. v. v.p. gupta, cit : [1978]113itr647(sc) . the court there was not concerned with the assessee starting a new industrial project, and subsequently abandoning the same. the case there .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 19 2001 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Fab Exports (P.) Ltd.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-19-2001

Reported in : [2001]258ITR56(Mad)

..... r. jayasimha babu, j.1. section 115j(2) of the income-tax act, 1961, reads thus :'nothing contained in sub-section (1) shall affect the determination of the amounts in relation to the relevant previous year to be carried ..... 115jaa. for the assessment years commencing on or after the april 1, 2001, section 115jb has been introduced. it has now reduced the extent of the deemed income on which tax is to be paid, from 30 per cent. to 7. 5 per cent. it is of interest to note that in the newly introduced section 115jb in ..... that in a case where the assessee is a company other than a company engaged in the business of generation or distribution of electricity, and its total income as computed under the act in respect of any previous year relevant to the assessment year commencing on or after april 1, 1988, but before april 1, 1991, is less ..... purpose of determining the book profit is only for determining the amount of tax to be levied on the assessee under section 115j(1).4. section 115j(1) requires the total income of the company, to which that section may become applicable, to be 'as computed under this act in respect of any previous year relevant to the assessment year . . ..... than thirty per cent. of its book profit, the total income of such assessee chargeable to tax for the relevant previous year shall be deemed to be an amount .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 06 2001 (HC)

Guindy Machine Tools P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Dec-06-2001

Reported in : (2002)176CTR(Mad)56; [2002]254ITR780(Mad)

..... before the previous year, the actual cost to the assessee less all depreciation actually allowed to him under this act, or under the indian income-tax act, 1922 (11 of 1922), or any act repealed by that act, or under any executive orders issued when the indian income-tax act, 1886 (2 of 1886), was in force : provided that in determining the written down value in respect of buildings ..... section 32, 'depreciation actually allowed' shall not include depreciation allowed under sub-clauses (a), (b) and (c) of clause (vi) of sub-section (2) of section 10 of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (11 of 1922), where such depreciation was not deductible in determining the written down value for the purposes of the said clause (vi).' 10. the explanations thereunder not being ..... assessment year. that claim was disallowed by the assessing officer as also by the appellate authority but was allowed by the appellate tribunal.6. section 32(1)(iii) of the income-tax act as it stood in that assessment year read thus :'32. (1)(iii) in the case of any building, machinery, plant or furniture which is sold, discarded, demolished or destroyed in ..... tools is,'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the interest paid under section 139(8) of the income-tax act, 1961, is to be allowed as a deduction under section 80v and section 37(1) of the income-tax act, 1961 ?'3. this question is required to be answered against the assessee in the light of the decision of the supreme .....

Tag this Judgment!


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