Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Court: us supreme court Year: 1999 Page 5 of about 196 results (0.077 seconds)

Feb 17 1999 (SC)

Commissioner of Income Tax, Baroda Vs. Gujarat Alkalies and Chemicals ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-17-1999

Reported in : AIR2000SC3628; [2000]246ITR462(SC); (1999)9SCC228

..... understood at that time by the decisions of the court. hence the fact that the estimated income returned by the assessee for the purpose of advance-tax was lesser than the annual income would not bring the assessee within the ambit of section 273(2)(a) of the income-tax act. the view expressed by the tribunal on such factual conclusions is unassailable and the high ..... . the only question that was sought to be referred to the high court by the revenue was as follows:whether when the assessing officer as well as the commissioner of income-tax (appeals) had given a categorical finding that the assessee had acted in conscious disregard of its statutory obligation with a view to reduce the quantum of its legitimate and proper advance ..... the i.-t. act.2. the appellate tribunal rejected the application of the revenue for reference on ..... -tax liability, the appellate tribunal was right in law and on fact in holding that this was not a fit case for levy of penalty under section 279(2)(a) of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 17 1999 (SC)

Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi Vs. Bharat Carbon and Ribbon Mfg. Co ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-17-1999

Reported in : AIR1999SC3260; 2000(69)ECC238; 1999(113)ELT9(SC); JT1999(6)SC136; 1999(5)SCALE28; (1999)6SCC434; [1999]Supp1SCR492

..... reference of the following two questions by filing an application before delhi high court under section 256(2) of the income tax act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'):1. whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the itat was correct in law in confirming ..... have accrued over the accounting period to deduct such sums from profits8. the court after discussing various contentions finally held:expenditure which is deductible for income tax purpose is one which is towards a liability actually existing at the time, but the putting aside of money which may become expenditure on ..... molasses co. (p) ltd v. c.i.t., west bengal : [1959]37itr66(sc) for contending that the expenditure would be deductible for income tax purpose which is towards a liability existing at the time, but putting aside the money may become expenditure on the happening of a event is not expenditure ..... notice was issued in the said assessment year. in respect of subsequent assessment year 1981-82, the claim of the assessee was rejected by the income tax officer on the ground that as the assessee maintains mercantile system of accounting, the claim for earlier years was inadmissible. he further observed that ..... and the answer to the same is self evident in view of the decision of this court in the case of kedarnath jute . v. commissioner of income tax (central), calcutta : [1971]82itr363(sc) . against that order revenue has filed this appeal. it was the case of the assessee-respondent company that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 06 1999 (SC)

Zunjarrao Bhikaji Nagarkar Vs. U.O.i. and Others

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-06-1999

Reported in : AIR1999SC2881; 1999(66)ECC40; 1999LC29(SC); 1999(112)ELT772(SC); JT1999(5)SC366; (2000)ILLJ728SC; 1999(4)SCALE480; (1999)7SCC409; [1999]Supp1SCR87; 2000(1)SLJ291(SC)

..... gave illegal and improper directions to the assessing officer to complete the assessments of three firms under section 143(1) of the income tax act even though at the relevant time proceedings under section 144a of the income tax act were pending before him and these cases did not come within the purview of summary assessment scheme of amnesty scheme of the central board of ..... to penalty. we may contrast the provisions of rule 173q and section 11ac with section 271 of the income-tax act, 1961. this section, prior to amendment in 1988, stood as under:failure to furnish returns, comply with notices, concealment of income, etc. 271. (1) if the income tax officer or the appellate assistant commissioner or the commissioner (appeals) in the course of any proceedings under ..... be less than, but which shall not exceed twice, the amount of tax sought to be evaded by reason of the concealment of particulars of his income or the furnishing of inaccurate particulars of such income:...34. it would, thus, be seen that under provisions of section 271 of the income tax act in the first instance there is a discretion with the assessing authority whether ..... direct taxes and, therefore, respondent had violated rule 3(1)(i), 3(1)(ii) and 3(1)(iii) of the ccs (conduct) rules, 1964. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 29 1999 (FN)

Jefferson County Vs. Acker

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Mar-29-1999

..... was not a federal area." 4 u. s. c. 106(a). a special definitional provision, which applies through cross-reference to the buck act (but not to the public salary tax act) defines the term "income tax" broadly to include "any tax ... measured by ... income, or ... gross receipts." 1l0(c). and in howard v. commissioners of sinking fund of louisville, 344 u. s. 624 , 628-629 ..... 's exemption for those holding another state or county license reveals its true character as a licensing scheme, not an income tax. the dispositive measure is the public salary tax act, which does not require the state tax to be a typical "income tax," but consents to any tax on "payor compensation," which jefferson county's surely is. cf. howard, 344 u. s., at 629. pp. 439 ..... public salary tax act consents to any tax on "payor compensation," which jefferson county's surely is. the ..... 's laws may not be reached by a county's occupational tax. see 1967 ala. acts 406, 4.12 the dispositive measure, however, is the public salary tax act, which does not require the local tax to be a typical "income tax." just as the statute in howard consented broadly to "any tax measured by net income, gross income, or gross receipts," 344 u. s., at 629, the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 16 1999 (SC)

Dalmia Cement Ltd., Rajasthan Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delh ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-16-1999

Reported in : AIR1999SC2154; [1999]237ITR617(SC); JT1999(3)SC130; 1999(2)SCALE641; (1999)4SCC124; [1999]2SCR735

..... the judgment and order of the high court stand set aside along with the order of the tribunal as also that of the income-tax authorities.28. the respondent-tax authorities are directed to take steps in accordance with law, having due regard to the observations made herein before in this judgment. there ..... of the transferor and shall be included in his total income.section 63. 'transfer' and 'revocable transfer' defined- for the ..... payment and is therefore not deductible.13. in this context, reference to a bench decision of the calcutta high court in the case of commissioner of income-tax v. jhanzie tea association (1989) 178 itr 296 also seems to be apposite. s.c. sen, j. (as his lordship then was) in ..... company? and for the assessment year 1965-66 the question was: whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the income-tax appellate tribunal was right in holding that the profit arising from the working of the two cement factories situated in pakistan for the year 1 ..... income where there is no transfer of assets -all income arising to any person by virtue of a transfer whether revocable or not and whether effected before or after the commencement of this act shall, where there is no transfer of the assets from which the income arises, be chargeable to income-tax as the income .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 05 1999 (SC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Bhaskar Picture Palace

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jan-05-1999

..... to the commencement of the aforequoted order, in which it is, inter alia, stated :'11. section under which the order is passed : 245d(l) of the income-tax act, 1961'.8. in his submission, the application had, therefore, been rejected not onlyunder sub-section (1a) but also under sub-section (1). the submission hasonly ..... the same years for which they had applied earlier and the settlement commission entertained these applications. its full bench in birumal gaurishankar jain and co. v. income-tax settlement commission , found that, having regard to the omission of sub-section (1a) as aforestated, the settlement commission was entitled todo so. the union ..... 1. this batch of cases concerns section 245d of the income-tax act, 1961, as it stood prior to 1991 and thereafter. prior to the amendment in 1991. section 245d(1) and (1a), read thus :' ..... stand and regular show collections were not entered in the regular books of account maintained by the applicant thereby concealing particulars of income. therefore, the objection raised by the commissioner of income-tax is sustained for the said years.'6. in regard to the assessment years 1983-84 and 1984-85, the settlement commission, ..... with on the ground that concealment of particulars of income on the part of the applicant or perpetration of fraud by him for evading any tax or other sum chargeable or imposable under this act, has been established or is likely to be established by any income-tax authority, in relation to the case : provided that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 26 1999 (SC)

The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sardar Arjun Singh Ahluwalia (Dead) ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-26-1999

Reported in : AIR2000SC175; (1999)157CTR(SC)97; [1999]240ITR693(SC); JT1999(8)SC543; 1999(6)SCALE665; (1999)8SCC724; [1999]Supp4SCR135

..... the said amounts had been received by the assessee as salary is not in dispute. the question really is whether clause (a) of section 15 of the income tax act, 1961, applies, as contended by learned counsel on behalf of the assessee, or clause (c) thereof , as contended by the revenue. section 15, ..... and 1947-48?2. there was a difference of opinion between the two learned judges who heard the reference under section 256(1) of the income tax act, 1961. one learned judge answered both questions in favour of the revenue and the other learned judge answered both questions in favour of the assessee ..... clause (c) , which is, broadly put, intended to catch such salary as has escaped the charge of income tax in earlier years.8. learned counsel for the assessee also contended that the income tax act did not extend to the holkar state, within, which the said salary or remuneration had been earned by the ..... assessee from the mills, in the previous years relevant to the assessment years 1946-47 and 1947-48 and, therefore, the said amounts could not have been charged to income tax in ..... as it then stood, reads thus:15. the following income shall be chargeable to income-tax under the head 'salaries'- (a) any salary due from an employer or a former employer to an assessee in the previous year, whether paid .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 17 1999 (SC)

Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay Vs. E. Merck Service and Agencies

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-17-1999

Reported in : AIR2000SC3610; (1999)9SCC220

..... order1. the high court at bombay rejected the revenue's application under section 256(2) of the income-tax act. the questions to which the application pertained read thus:1. whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in law in holding that ..... processing machine/computer even though the assessee is not engaged in any of the activities mentioned in section 32a(2) but only acts as intending agent for foreign companies?the high court referred to its decision in commissioner of income-tax, bombay city-i v. i.b.m. world trade corporation : [1981]130itr739(bom) (bom) and observed that the answers to the questions ..... shift allowance on computer only and not on data processing machines and computer is eligible for extra shift allowance despite the fact that appendix-i, iii (c)(3) of the income-tax rules clearly prohibit granting extra shift allowance on both the above items?2. whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in law .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 24 1999 (SC)

N.J. Albert Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-24-1999

Reported in : AIR2000SC1952; (2000)10SCC238

..... on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is en titled to weighted deduction under clauses (i) and (ii) of section 35b(1)(b) of the income-tax act, 1961?2. whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the tribunal is justified in holding that services rendered by the agent, nut meat trading company, is ..... in the circumstances of the case the assessee is entitled to claim deduction in respect of the pro vision made for payment of leave with wages?2. in commissioner of income-tax v. kerala nut food company : [1991]192itr585(ker) , a division bench of the same high court took note of a circular of the central board of direct ..... in the instant case of the question posed to it relying exclusively upon m/s. c. tharian & sons's case 1987 tax lr 966 must, therefore, be held to be bad in law.3. we think, in the circumstances, that the reference (r.a. no. 257/coch/81) should be restored to ..... taxes and certain decisions and concluded, in our view, rightly, that the decision in m/s. c. tharian and sons's case was per incuriam. the answer by the high court .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 11 1999 (SC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Trivandrum Vs. Relish Goods

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-11-1999

Reported in : AIR1999SC1640; [1999]237ITR59(SC); JT1999(2)SC130; 1999(2)KLT1(SC); 1999(I)OLR(SC)658; 1999(2)SCALE17; (1999)3SCC167; [1999]1SCR992

..... prawns, this judgment in sterling foods (supra) has been rightly applied by the bombay high court, in the case of commissioner of income- tax v. sterling foods (goa) : [1995]213itr851(bom) , to a claim under section 80hh of the income-tax act and it has been held that the activity of processing of prawns is not an activity of manufacture or production.7. we are ..... of the case :i) the assessee's business involves 'production' ?ii) the assessee is entitled to exemption under section 80hh of the i.t. act, 1961?2. the assessee claimed the allowance under section 80hh of the income-tax act, 1961, on the ground that it was an industrial undertaking that manufactured/produced articles. it would appear from the judgment of the tribunal that ..... high court held that buying and processing of shrimps involved production and, therefore, the assessee was entitled to the allowance that it claimed. it followed its judgment in commissioner of income-tax v. marwell sea foods : [1987]166itr624(ker) .4. we find from the judgment of the kerala high court in the case of marwell sea foods (supra) that harwell sea foods ..... the assessee bought shrimps, peeled them and froze them. there is, no other material on the record which indicates what was done by the assessee and how it was done. the income-tax officer negatived .....

Tag this Judgment!


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