Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Court: supreme court of india Year: 1985 Page 1 of about 113 results (0.125 seconds)

Aug 29 1985 (SC)

Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore Vs. J.H. Gotla, Yadagiri

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-29-1985

Reported in : AIR1985SC1698; (1985)48CTR(SC)363; [1985]156ITR323(SC); (1985)4SCC343; [1985]Supp2SCR711; 1986(1)LC628(SC)

..... of the case, make any material difference. what has to be found out is what is to be included.22. income-tax act, 1922 was replaced by income-tax act, 1961. section 64 of the income-tax act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as '1961 act') deals with inclusion of income of the assessee arising out of the assets transferred directly or indirectly to the spouse or the minor child. the provisions ..... august, 1973 for the assessment year 1959-60, 1960-61 and 1961-62 by certificate granted by the high court under section 66a(2) of the indian income tax act, 1922, hereinafter referred to as the 'act'.2. the assessee is an individual. he was carrying on business in the relevant assessment years in purchase and sale of ground-nut oil and was also ..... individual, there shall be included, as belonging to that individual' (emphasis supplied). then the different items including the items of assets transferred have been mentioned. the income-tax act only makes these as includible as such while the wealth-tax act makes these includible as belonging to the assessee. it is not necessary to examine whether in view of section 2(m) of the wealth ..... had taken the view that where the wife or the minor child of an individual incurred a loss which if it were income would be includible in the income of that individual under section 16(3) cf the income-tax act, 1922, such loss should be set off against the income of the individual, was withdrawn on 6th april, 1972. subsequently, section 64 of the 1961 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 08 1985 (SC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, A.P. Vs. T. Veerabhadra Rao, K Koteswara R ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jul-08-1985

Reported in : AIR1985SC1600; [1985]155ITR152(SC); 1985(2)SCALE1; 1985Supp(1)SCC403; [1985]2SCR20; [1985]Supp2SCR20; 1986(1)LC354(SC)

..... the judgment of the high court of andhra pradesh disposing of a reference made under sub-section (1) of section 256 of the indian income tax act, 1961 for its opinion on the following question of law.whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the bad debt of ..... claimed as a bad debt under clause (vii) of sub-section (1) of section 36 of the income tax act, 1961.6. clause (vii) of sub-section (1) of section 36 of the income tax act, 1961 provides:36.(1). the deductions provided for in the following clauses shall be allowed in respect of the ..... appeal the appellate assistant commissioner upheld the claim.4. the income-tax department appealed to the income-tax appellate tribunal against the order of the appellate assistant commissioner and urged that clause (i) of sub-section (2) of section 36 of the income tax act, 1961 did not permit such an allowance because it did ..... matters dealt with therein, in computing the income referred to in section 28 .(vii) subject to the provisions of sub-section ..... not proved that the debtor was so financially embarrassed that he was unable to pay the debt. on appeal, the appellate assistant commissioner of income tax held that the business transferred from the predecessor firm to the assessee continued uninterrupted, and the change of ownership was no bar to the bad .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 08 1985 (SC)

Commissioner of Income Tax, A.P. Vs. T. Veerabhadra Rao, K. Koteswara ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jul-08-1985

Reported in : (1985)48CTR(SC)123; 1985(Supp)SCC403

..... the judgment of the high court of andhra pradesh disposing of a reference made under sub-section (1) of section 256 of the indian income tax act, 1961 for its opinion on the following question of law:whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the bad debt of ..... be claimed as a bad debt under clause (vii) of sub-section (1) of section 36 of the income tax act, 1961.6. clause (vii) of sub-section (1) of section 36 of the income tax act, 1961 provides:36. (1) the deductions provided for in the following clauses shall be allowed in respect of ..... appeal the appellate assistant commissioner upheld the claim.4. the income tax department appealed to the income tax appellate tribunal against the order of the appellate assistant commissioner and urged that clause (i) of sub-section (2) of section 36 of the income tax act, 1961 did not permit such an allowance because it did ..... the matters dealt with therein, in computing the income referred to in section 28* * *(vii) subject to the provisions of sub ..... not proved that the debtor was so financially embarrassed that he was unable to pay the debt. on appeal, the appellate assistant commissioner of income tax held that the business transferred from the predecessor firm to the assessee continued uninterrupted, and the change of ownership was no bar to the bad .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 11 1985 (SC)

Maya Rani Punj Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-11-1985

Reported in : AIR1986SC293; (1986)50CTR(SC)191; [1986]157ITR330(SC); 1985(2)SCALE1267; (1986)1SCC445a; [1985]Supp3SCR827; [1987]65STC416(SC); 1986(1)LC192(SC)

..... may 3, 1962 beyond more than seven months of the due date. with effect from april 1, 1962, the income tax act of 1961 ('1961 act' for short) had come into force. the income tax officer took, proceedings under section 271(1)(a) of the 1961 act and imposed a penalty of rs. 4,060 for failure to furnish the return within the time on a finding ..... the appeal. on further appeal the appellate tribunal held that penalty was leviable under the 1961 act but the amount of penalty had to be quantified according to the provisions of section 28 of the income tax act, 1922('1922 act' for short). applying the provisions of the 1922 act, the tribunal reduced the penalty to rs. 400. at the instance of the revenue the following ..... ratio of jain brothers' case would have been fully applicable. though jain brothers' case was with reference to the income tax act, 1961, the provisions of section 18(1)(a) of the wealth tax act, as amended, brought in a similar provision and a sum equal to 2% of the tax for every month during which the default continued with an optimum of 50% of the ..... any, payable by him, a sum equal to 2% of the assessed tax for every month during which the default continued.section 297(1) repealed the 1922 act. sub-section (2), as far as relevant, provided:notwithstanding the repeal of the indian income tax act, 1922(hereinafter referred to as the repealed act), -(a) to (e) x x x (f) any proceeding for the imposition of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 09 1985 (SC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Central, Bombay Vs. Jalan Trading Co. P. L ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-09-1985

Reported in : AIR1985SC1656; (1985)87BOMLR461; (1985)3CompLJ198(SC); [1985]15ITR536(SC); 1985(2)SCALE225; (1985)4SCC59; [1985]Supp2SCR517; 1985(17)LC1016(SC)

..... 1. this appeal by special leave at the instance of the revenue assails the decision of the bombay high court upon a reference under section 66 of the income tax act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'). in respect of the assessment year 1954-55, the respondent-assessee claimed deduction of a sum of rs. 7,93,837 under section 10(1) or alternatively ..... or revenue expenditure in which latter event only it would be a deductible allowance under section 10(2)(xv) of the income-tax act. the question has all along been considered to be a question of fact to be determined by the income-tax authorities on an application of the broad principles laid down above and the courts of law would not ordinarily interfere with ..... under section 10(2)(xv) of the act in determining its business profits which the income tax officer and the two appellate authorities in due course rejected. on the application of the assessee the dispute regarding admissibility of the claim was referred to the ..... for obtaining a capital asset, the assessee would not be entitled to claim it as a deduction under section 10(1) of the act and on the principle of taxation that income tax is to be levied on the real income, the amount paid for obtaining capital asset would not be deductible. in such circumstances, we are inclined to agree with the appellant's .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 19 1985 (SC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Bansi Dhar and Sons

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-19-1985

Reported in : AIR1986SC421; AIR1986SC421a; 1986(24)ELT193(SC); [1986]157ITR665(SC); 1985(2)SCALE1416; (1986)1SCC523; [1985]Supp3SCR850; 1986(1)LC179(SC)

..... the high court, must be kept separate from the concept of inherent powers or incidental powers in exercising jurisdiction under section 66 of 1922 act or 256 of 1961 act. section 66 of income-tax act of 1922 or section 256 of income-tax act of 1961 is a special jurisdiction of a limited nature conferred not by the cpc or by the charters or by the special ..... question of jurisdiction of the high court, to grant stay or pass interim orders in pending references under section 66 of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (hereinafter called the act of 1922) and section 256 of the income tax act, 1961 (hereinafter called the act of 1961). these appeals are by special leave from the judgments of the high courts. the main judgment is the judgment of ..... , that since the matter relating to the two assessment years (1960-61 and 1962-63) was before the high court in references under section 66(1) of the indian income-tax act, 1922/section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, similar order of stay should be granted by the high court and prejudice would be caused to the assessee if in spite of full ..... was liable to be assessed as such. then at the instance of assessee-huf, the tribunal referred to the high court the following question under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, as arising out of the said common order namely :whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amount of rs. 2,49,874/- received by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 06 1985 (SC)

Haji Abdul Hameed (Dead) by His Lrs. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, U ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-06-1985

Reported in : AIR1986SC1271; (1985)49CTR(SC)394; [1985]156ITR230(SC); 1986Supp(1)SCC479

..... the sense of levying of the tax on the computed income proceeded under section 41(2) and not under section 41(1) of the income-tax act, 1922 and the earned income relief was claimed either under clause (b) or clause (c) of section 2(6aa). so far ..... as the receipt of income in the hands of haji abdul shakoor is concerned since ..... the business was not carried on by him nor was the income derived by him from his personal exertions clearly ..... in these two assessment years after the income was earned by the wakf the same was distributed between the two brothers as beneficiaries under the deed and it was in respect of such receipt in the hands of two assessees that earned income relief was claimed under section 2(6aa)(b) or (c) of the indian income-tax act, 1922.3. admittedly, the assessment in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 11 1985 (SC)

Indian Motors Transport Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Hary ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-11-1985

Reported in : [1985]156ITR489(SC); 1986Supp(1)SCC484

..... the high court took the view that the tribunal was not justified in law in directing the income-tax officer first to allow the development rebate under the rules and subsequently withdraw it under section 35(11) of the indian income tax act, 1922 (hereafter referred to as ' the act ').2. the short facts giving rise to this appeal are that for the assessment year 1958 ..... justified in law in directing the income-tax officer first to allow full development rebate under the rules and subsequently withdraw it under section 35(11) of the act, was referred to the high court at the instance of the revenue. the high court answered the question in the ..... the assessee to the tribunal and the tribunal took a contrary view holding that it, was incumbent upon the income-tax officer first to allow the full development rebate under the rules and then subsequently withdraw it under section 35(11) of the act. a specific question as to whether, on the facts and bin the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was ..... years from the date of their purchase had come to the knowledge of the income tax officer. in such circumstances, we do not think that it was necessary ' for the income-tax officer to have first allowed the development rebate and then cancelled it under section 35(11) of the act. among the condition which entitle an assessee to claim development rebate is also the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 01 1985 (SC)

Scientific Engineering House (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Nov-01-1985

Reported in : AIR1986SC338; (1985)49CTR(SC)386; [1986]157ITR86(SC); 1985(2)SCALE908; (1986)1SCC11; [1985]Supp3SCR701; 1986(1)LC557(SC)

..... formed the basis for the business of manufacturing the instruments in question would fall within the wide and inclusive definition of 'plant' given in section 43(3) of the income tax act, 1961.9. turning to the first question, having regard to the relevant terms of the two agreements we find it very difficult to accept the view concurrently expressed by ..... been regarded as constituting a book falling within the inclusive definition of 'plant' given in section 43(3) of the income tax act, 1961. in this behalf counsel relied on commissioner of income-tax, andhra pradesh v. taj mahal hotel : [1971]82itr44(sc) and commissioner of income-tax, gujarat v. elecon engineering company ltd. : [1974]96itr672(guj) . on the other hand, counsel for the revenue ..... , designs charts, plans, processing data and other literature falls within the definition of 'plant' and therefore a depreciable asset.15. counsel invited our attention to the decision in commissioner of income tax, gujarat v. elecon engineering co. ltd. : [1974]96itr672(guj) , where the gujarat high court has, after exhaustively reviewing the case law on the topic, held that drawings and ..... which were voluminous occupying almirah-full of storage space and these collectively constituted the pages of a book and the assessee had claimed depreciation at the appropriate rate. the income-tax officer held that the sum of rs. 1,60,000 did not represent the value of books purchased by the assessee but represented the price paid fix acquiring the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 14 1985 (SC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Kanpur Vs. Mother India Refrigeration Indu ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-14-1985

Reported in : AIR1985SC1720; (1985)3CompLJ379(SC); (1985)48CTR(SC)176; [1985]155ITR711(SC); 1985(2)SCALE236; (1985)1SCC4; (1985)4SCC1; [1985]Supp2SCR556; 1986(1)LC588(SC)

..... assessee in view of conflict of decisions between various high courts the tribunal has referred the following question of law for this court's opinion under section 257 of the income tax act, 1961 :whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the depreciation for the current year should first be deducted before deducting the unabsorbed carried forward business losses ..... the assessment year 1950-51, before setting off the depreciation allowance of rs. 58,140/- and rs. 44580/- respectively for these yearsafter referring to the relevant provisions of the indian income tax act 1922, namely, sections 10 and 24, particularly proviso (b) to section 10 (2)(vi) and section 24(2) proviso (b) the high court answered the question in favour of the ..... having regard to the provisions of section 72(2) read with 32(2) of the income tax act, 19614. since the answer to the question raised depends upon proper construction to be placed on the relevant provisions of the 1922 ..... depreciation) is always to be treated as the first charge on such profits and gains and that is also the scheme of the act. according to him tax is payable on the total income of the concerned year, that such income includes profits and gains of a business, that the profits and gains must mean net profits and gains and net profits and gains .....

Tag this Judgment!


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