Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Court: rajasthan Page 1 of about 6,575 results (0.089 seconds)

Jul 07 1980 (HC)

Maharaja Shree Umaid Mills Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1981(8)ELT772(Raj)

..... due to it, is a general right conferred on it under the law either by a suit or by some other method open to it. section 32 (u.p. agricultural income-tax act 3 of 1948), though it does not have an explanation analogous to section 46 nonetheless does not preclude either specifically or by necessary implication a right to recover the arrears ..... pronouncements are accepted without reservation as laying down the true principles of taxation under the income-tax act.32. in wallace brothers v. the commissioner of income-tax, a.i.r. 1948 p.c. 118 while dealing with the income-tax act, 1922 as amended in 1939, it was held that the liability to tax arises by virtue of the charging section alone and it arises not later than ..... of business, that law shall cease to have effect except for the purpose of the levy, assessment and collection of income-tax and super-tax in respect of any period not included in the previous year for the purposes of assessment under the indian income-tax act, 1922, for the year ending on the 31st day of march, 1951, or for any subsequent year, or, as ..... . their lordships of the privy council, while dealing with the provisions of the income tax act (1922) observed as follows :-'the jurisdiction to assess and the liability to pay the tax, however, are not conditional on the validity of notice....the liability to pay the tax is founded on sections (3) and (4), income-tax act, which are the charging sections. section 22 etc. are the machinery sections .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 22 1990 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sujankhan Laloo Khan

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : [1993]204ITR528(Raj); 1990WLN(UC)265

..... excise law enters into partnership without the written permission of the competent excise authority, such a partnership would not be valid and would not be entitled to registration under the income-tax act, 1961.'25. this judgment of the full bench of the rajasthan high court, so far as the present case is concerned, is not applicable because in the case of motilal ..... . it is open to a partner of a registered firm to share his profits earned in the original firm with the other persons by forming a sub-partnership. the income-tax act or the partnership act does not prohibit the formation of sub-partnerships. such a sub-partnership firm is, therefore, entitled to registration.24. now, we would like to take into consideration the ..... ]36itr194(sc) had to consider the question whether a firm is entitled to registration. the supreme court, in this case, after considering the various provisions of the indian income-tax act, 1922 ('the 1922 act'), and the various judgments on the point, came to the conclusion that, if any firm fulfils the following five essential conditions, then that firm is held to be entitled ..... in murlidhar himatsingka's case : [1966]62itr323(sc) , and it was held (headnote) :'. . . . there was nothing in section 23(5)(a) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, which prevented the income from firm a being treated as the income of firm b and section 23(5)(a) being applied again.'16. it was further observed (headnote) :'a sub-partner has definite enforceable rights to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 31 1997 (HC)

Modern Threads (India) Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : [1998]230ITR598(Raj); 1997(2)WLC692; 1997(1)WLN348

..... averred that the petitioner-company filed an application under section 195(2) of the income-tax act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'act 1961'), before the assessing officer, the deputy commissioner of income-tax, special range ii, jaipur, on october 29, 1996, to determine the taxability of income under the head technical know-how fees and basic process engineering fees and also for ..... the order was received by the petitioner on december 23, 1996. the petitioner feeling aggrieved against the aforesaid order preferred an appeal before the commissioner of income-tax (appeals) under section 248 of the act, 1961. a photocopy of the same has been annexed as annexure-2 to the writ petition. along with the appeal, the petitioner also filed an ..... assessing officer who directed the petitioner to give a personal guarantee of the chairman of the company in favour of the income-tax department, jaipur, and also undertaking to discharge the income-tax liability pursuant to an order under section 195 of the act, 1961. accordingly, the personal guarantee of the chairman and an undertaking was submitted. photocopies of the personal guarantee ..... application under section 119 of the act, 1961, to review the order passed by the deputy commissioner of income-tax (appeals) praying therein that the order passed by the assessing officer under section 195(2) of the act, 1961, dated december 20, 1996, may be quashed and permission may be given to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 09 1987 (HC)

Motilal Chunnilal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1987(2)WLN126

..... of selling provisions, medicines and wines, but as the licence for sale of wines stood in the name of one of the partners, the registration of the firm under the income-tax act was cancelled holding that the deed of partnership was void. it was held that the partnership carried on business in stores, provisions, medicines and wines and so the partnership could ..... wholesale vending of foreign liquor which was renewed from year to year. the question being raised as to whether the firm was entitled to registration under section 26a of the income-tax act, 1922, it was held by their lordships of the supreme court that the licence did not prohibit the holder from entering into a partnership, but it merely provided that the ..... the licensee entering into partnership with strangers without obtaining the permission of the excise authorities renders such a partnership illegal and the firm is not entitled to registration under the income-tax act.10. in gordhandas kessowji v. champsey dossa air 1921 pc 137, it was held by their lordships of the privy council that a licensee of salt manufacture cannot be said ..... the above is in the affirmative, whether the tribunal was justified in holding that the firm was not valid and, therefore, not entitled to registration under section 185 of the income-tax act, 1961 ?' 2. the government of rajasthan granted a licence for the retail sale of country liquor during the year 1966-67 at bhilwara including the shops situated at bhupalganj, gulmandi .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 22 1996 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Rajasthan State Co-operative Bank

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : [1997]223ITR55(Raj)

..... three questions of law arising out of its order dated june 3, 1986, in respect of the assessment years 1978-79 and 1981-82 under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961 :'1. whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was justified in holding that the investment of the reserve and other funds in various ..... 81(v) were considered pari materia to section 14(3)(v) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, and those of section 81(i)(a) of the income-tax act, 1961, were considered as pari materia to section 14(3)(i) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, and it was held that the income by way of interest earned by government securities by the co-operative bank is exempt ..... cannot be said to be related to the banking business and, therefore, cannot be exempt under section 80p(2)(a)(i) of the income-tax act. the income of rs. 35.70 lakhs was accordingly taxed.4. the appeal was preferred to the commissioner of income-tax (appeals) who has considered that the investment of the bank's funds is also a banking business and, therefore, the ..... from income-tax under section 81(i)(a) of the income-tax act, 1961, if the said securities are held as .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 06 1969 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi and Rajasthan Vs. Mazdoor Kisan Sahk ...

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR1970Raj252; [1970]75ITR253(Raj); 1969()WLN365

..... tribunal bench 'b' (hereinafter called the tribunal) has made this reference under section 66 (1) of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (hereinafter called the act) on the ap-plications filed by the commissioner of income-tax, delhi and rajasthan and the as-sessee messrs. mazdoor kisan sahkari samiti, village bhadu, district bhilwara.2. the statement of the case submitted to this court by the tribunal ..... the assessment is complete.we may also point out that the andhra pradesh high court in veerabhadra iron foundry v. commr. of income-tax, a. p. : [1968]69itr425(ap) has taken the view that there is no provision in the act under which the reserve fund account should be credited with the amount of development rebate before the close of the accounting year ..... and that, as the assessee made the necessary entries before the assessment was finalised by the income-tax officer, the assessee was entitled to the benefit of the rebate ..... shows that the assessee was a co-operative society registered under the co-operative societies act in the year 1949. the assessee was doing .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 13 1988 (HC)

J.P. Singh Vs. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : [1990]185ITR659(Raj); 1988(2)WLN393

..... the allegations, in short, that in the return of income of the company in respect of the assessment year 1981-82, deductions to the tune ..... milap chandra, j. 1. the inspecting assistant commissioner of income-tax (assessment)-ii, jaipur, filed a complaint in the court of the chief judicial magistrate (economic offences), jaipur, under sections 276c(1) and 277 read with section 278b of the income-tax act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'), against the accused-petitioners and their private limited company, messrs. registan (p.) ltd., jaipur, with ..... them. 4. it has been contended by learned counsel for the accused-petitioners that the order of the income-tax appellate tribunal, jaipur, has not become final as an application for its rectification has been moved under section 254(2) of the act and another application for making a reference to this court has been made under section 256(1) of ..... the act, and they have not been decided as yet and it cannot, therefore, be said that the said offences have actually been committed by the accused-petitioners. he further contended that in fact the order of the commissioner of income-tax (appeals), jaipur, is correct, there was no concealment of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 29 1968 (HC)

Bikaner Gypsum Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : [1969]73ITR778(Raj); 1968()WLN242

..... business and, having regard to the accepted commercial practice and trading principles, was a deduction which, if there was no specific provision for it under section 10(2) of the income-tax act, was certainly an allowable deduction. the expenditure (sic) was actually incurred or the liability in respect thereof had accrued even though it may have to be discharged at some future ..... of accounting maintained by this assessee he could claim to deduct expenditure incurred in previous years in the assessment year in question ...... when wecome to section 13 of the income-tax act we find that income, profits and gains have to be computed for the purposes of section 10(1) in accordance with the method of accounting regularly employed by the assessee. there is ..... incurred in defending the monopoly right enjoyed by the assessee-company under an instrument of assignment of lease was an inadmissible expense under section 10(2)(xv) of the indian income-tax act '12. the facts stated in the statement of the case with regard to this question are as follows :in the terms of the indenture of assignment of the mining lease ..... was made by the central government in exercise of the powers conferred by section 60a of the indian income-tax act, 1922. the purpose of making this order was that in some parts of the territories of part b states, there was no income-tax. in other parts, income-tax was leviable but on a rate different from that prevalent in part a state. it was thought .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 13 1992 (HC)

Sanghi Bros. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : [1993]201ITR303(Raj); 1993(1)WLC631; 1992(2)WLN182

..... law does not expect the infringement thereof and infringements are not incidental or ancilliary to business which is carried on by a businessman. the requirement of section 37 of the income-tax act is that the expenditure must be laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for the purposes of business to be allowed as a deduction. the expenditure in respect of a ..... the question as to whether the expenditure incurred would be allowable under section 37(1) of the income-tax act. the expenditure incurred on account of penalty levied under the sales tax law of the state was held not allowable deduction. '6. the bombay high court in cit v. bharat barrel and drum mfg. co. p. ltd. : [1990]182itr21(bom) , has held that the penalty ..... , jaipur, has referred the following question arising out of its judgment under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961 :' whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was correct in law in holding that the entire amount paid by the assessee to the sales tax department could not be allowed as a deduction in computing its total ..... rs. 75,075 in respect of the assessment years 1978-79 and 1979-80 under section 16(1)(j) of the rajasthan sales tax act, 1954. the assessee claimed these amounts as deduction from its income before the income-tax officer and its claim was rejected. the commissioner of income-tax (appeals) held that the penalty levied in this case had a dual character. one was sales .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 10 1986 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Rooplal Danchand

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : (1986)57CTR(Raj)79; [1986]162ITR742(Raj); 1986(2)WLN756

..... continuation has been filed in form no. 12 on june 25, 1973. he, therefore, vide his order dated february 21, 1976, passed under section 185 of the income-tax act, 1961 (act no. xliii of 1961) (' the act ' herein), made the assessment of the assessee-firm in the status of an unregistered firm. an appeal was filed before the appellate assistant commissioner. the appellate assistant ..... , as such, the firm that was constituted by rooplal by taking other partners in the business was valid and as the conditions provided for registration under section 185 of the income-tax act are satisfied, it is entitled to registration.24. the question referred by the tribunal is answered in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the revenue ..... , which shall be endorsed on the licence. in those circumstances, the question cropped up whether the partnership was illegal and the firm was consequently not entitled to registration under the income-tax act. it was ruled by the madhya pradesh high court that in the excise rules, the prohibition from entering into partnership regarding the working of the privilege had been made absolute ..... to the high court of allahabad was : ' whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the firm was entitled to registration under section 26a of the indian income-tax act, 1922 ' the high court had answered the question in the negative. an appeal was filed by the firm. in that connection. shah c.j., speaking for the court, observed as .....

Tag this Judgment!


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