Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Page 7 of about 270,278 results (0.504 seconds)

Feb 11 1966 (HC)

Bhanji Lavji Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : [1967]63ITR1(Guj)

..... messrs. shamji kalidas & company were received by the assessee in the taxable territories and the profit embedded in these sale proceeds was, therefore, liable to tax under section 4(1)(a) of the indian income-tax act. the assessee was also charged penal interest under section 18a(8) in the assessment for the assessment year 1948-49, on the view that the assessee ..... had failed to make payment of advance tax under section 18a(3). now the assessment in respect of the assessment years 1947-48 and 1948-49 ..... initiation of proceedings under section 4(1)(a) was, therefore, not satisfied and he accordingly allowed the appeals and set aside the orders of assessment made by the income-tax officer, porbandar. the income-tax officer, porbandar, being aggrieved by this decision, brought appeals before the tribunal. the tribunal took the view that the order of the appellate assistant commissioner in so far ..... the applications under section 27 was clearly erroneous and it accordingly set aside the whole of the order of the appellate assistant commissioner and confirmed the orders of the income-tax officer rejecting the applications under section 27 and remanded the appeals against the original orders of assessment to the appellate assistant commissioner for hearing the merits. the appellate assistant .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 19 1963 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat Vs. Spunpipe and Construction Co. ...

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : [1965]55ITR68(Guj)

..... p.n. bhagwati, j. 1. this is a reference under section 66(1) of the income-tax act at the instance of the commissioner. the facts giving rise to this reference may be briefly stated as follows. the assessee is ..... and the same misconception also overtook the tribunal. from the statement of the case and particularly the following passages from the statement of the case : 'the income-tax officer, who made the assessment of the spunpipe and construction co. ltd., worked out the surplus or excess resulting from the purchase of the ahmedabad factory ..... the valuation of the closing stock was necessary. for the reasons we have given while rejecting a similar contention advanced in relation to the order of the income-tax officer, we also reject the present contention in relation to the order of the appellate assistant commissioner. 10. it is, therefore, clear that the appellate ..... resulting consequently in the increase of the profit of the assessee for the year ending 30th july, 1954. the learned advocate-general pointed out that the income-tax officer had disallowed a sum of rs. 69,746 as the excess value debited to the trading account in respect of trading assets whereas the appellate ..... of the order of the tribunal those questions were as follows : '(1) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the income-tax officer is justified in making a fair and reasonable allocation of the coat of different assets for the purpose of ascertaining capital and revenue profit from the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 11 1988 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Motilal C. Patel and Co.

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : [1988]173ITR666(Guj)

..... tribunal ('tribunal' for short), has referred to us for our opinion the following questions under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961 : ' (1) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amount of rs. 66,066 received by the assessee-firm ..... this amount of rs. 66,066 was offered for taxation when the assessee filed its return for the assessment year under reference that is 1973-74. the income-tax officer while framing assessment for the assessment year under reference held that the amount of rs. 66,066 which the assessee had received in s. y. ..... 66,066 received in s. y. 2028, represented the assessee's income earned in s. y. 2028. the income-tax officer, therefore, brought to tax the entire amount of rs. 1,32,132 for the assessment year under reference. 6. the assessee carried the matter in appeal ..... 2027, was merely an advance towards expected profits and, therefore, it did not constitute the assessee's income in s. y. 2027. the income-tax officer was of the view that rs. 66,066 which the assessee had received in s. y. 2027 and the four amounts totaling rs. ..... assessee in its return for the assessment year 1972-73. the assessment for the assessment year 1972-73. was completed by the income-tax officer on september 25, 1973, assessing the assessee's total income at rs. 61,366 after allowing,, deduction of business expenses incurred during s. y. 2027. 5. the assessee received from .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 13 1975 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kayarts

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : [1977]107ITR119(Bom)

..... get the benefit of loss nor even the partners of the firm. the assessment proceedings were commenced under section 34 of the indian income-tax act, 1922. notice was issued for both the assessment years 1952-53 and 1953-54. for the first assessment year the assessee-firm filed a ..... were in the course of a profit-making scheme. the supreme court concurred with the view that was taken by the income-tax officer by holding that the income-tax officer had correctly estimated the profit of the assessee by treating the land as stock-in-trade and valuing it according to the ..... were purchased and they were sought to be divided, came up for consideration before the supreme court in p.m. mohammed meerakhan v. commissioner of income-tax : [1969]73itr735(sc) . the supreme court took the view that the transactions of the assessee constituted an adventure in the nature of trade and ..... of producing the picture for the entire period june 1, 1951, to november 30, 1952. however, the distinction sought to be made by the income-tax officer in respect of what are called establishment expenses was not accepted by the tribunal. the tribunal pointed out that in the business of production of ..... endorsement to the following effect : 'the action under section 34(1)(a) was initiated in this case after obtaining the approval of the commissioner of income-tax. the action is hereby dropped.' 3. on an appeal by the assessee, the appellate assistant commissioner dismissed the appeal and no final proceedings were .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 13 1956 (HC)

Vishwanath Gopal Oil Mill Vs. S.C. Prashar

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : [1957]32ITR344(Bom)

..... the jurisdiction was challenged beyond time, and on that the petitioners have come before us on this petition. 2. section 64(1) of the income-tax act lays down which income-tax officer has to assess a particular assessee, and sub-section (3) of section 64 provide : 'where any question arises under this section as ..... chagla, c.j.1. respondent no. 1 served a notice upon the petitioners under section 34 of the indian income-tax act dated january 5, 1956. the notice was served on january 13, 1956. by this notice the petitioners were asked to submit ..... question to the commissioner, and what is referred to the commissioner is the determination, again, on merits. therefore, it is clear that if the income-tax officer comes to the conclusion that the objection taken by the assessee is barred by limitation, there is no obligation upon him to refer anything to ..... proviso to section 64(3) is in the following term : 'provided further that if the place of assessment is called in question by an assessee the income-tax officer shall, if not satisfied with the correctness of claim, refer the matter for determination under this sub-section before assessment is made.' 9. therefore, ..... palkhivala's contention is sound, the objection to the jurisdication has been taken beyond time. admittedly, the letter of the petitioners challenging the jurisdiction of the income-tax officer reached him on march 31, 1956, two days beyond the extended that the relevant date for this purposee is not march 31, 1956, but march .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 19 1965 (HC)

Joharimal Ramlal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : [1967]64ITR437(Bom)

..... . in compliance with the requisition of this court, the tribunal has stated the case under sub-section (2) of section 66 of the income-tax act on the following two question : '(1) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the customs rebate amounting to ..... . 12. similar also are the facts in the other decision in k. p. s. v. rajarathina nadar and sons v. commissioner of income-tax/excess profits tax, on which reliance was placed by mr. palkhivala. the amount relating to which the dispute arose was in the first instance showed in the ..... the unclaimed balances, when first received, were obviously liabilities, no subsequent operation could turn them into trading receipts. they were not, therefore, assessable to income-tax.' now on the finding of the tribunal in the instant case, receipt of these rebate amounts in the first instance, at the time they were received ..... morley v. tattersal. the appellate assistant commissioner also rejected the claim of the assessee and dismissed the appeals. further appeals were taken to the income-tax appellate tribunal. on the material placed before it, the tribunal took the view that the real arrangement between the mills and the assessee was ..... the assessee had filed certain contracts which, according to it, it had entered into at the time. in the form of contracts produced before the income-tax officer, there appeared a foot-note to the following effect : 'imported cotton duty refunded to the exporter will be recovered by the mills' or .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 25 1967 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City I Vs. Devidas Vithaldas and Co ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : [1968]68ITR388(Bom)

..... 1958-59 the assessee paid rs. 42,480 and the question was whether the payment of that sum was allowable under section 10 of the income-tax act. the supreme court held, reversing the decision of the kerala high court, that the payment under clause 7 of the agreement was in the ..... their own convenience and it had no reference to padamsi or his legal representatives. 32. the decision in ratilal b. daftari v. commissioner of income-tax was next relied upon. that was case where there was, so to say, sub-partnership between one partners and strangers and the share which the ..... supreme court. 22. the sheet-anchor of the argument of mr. kolah was the decision in travancore sugar & chemicals ltd. v. commissioner of income-tax. there the assessee-company was floated to take over the assets of certain undertaking run by the government of travancore, and the promoters entered into an ..... heirs was the purchase price of capital asset, namely, the goodwill. the case vithaldas thakordas and co. v. commissioner of income-tax, therefore, cannot apply here. 20. in commissioner of income-tax v. p. n. ethiraj, it was held that even in cases where a business in partly transferred to another and payment ..... expenditure to the assessee. the payments were for the purchase of the goodwill and could only be treated as capital expenditure. in appeal, the income-tax appellate tribunal has reversed this decision. the reasoning by which they came to the conclusion that the amounts paid to mrs. premlata padamsi were in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 04 1957 (HC)

Dayabhai Girdharbhai Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madhya Pradesh an ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : [1957]32ITR677(Bom)

..... made under the proviso to section 13 of the indian income-tax act, the assessee is not liable to be penalised under the provisions of section 28(1)(c) of the indian income-tax ac ?' 2. the short facts are that the assessee made a return of income-tax on the 13th of september, 1951, in respect of ..... states that there was deliberate concealment, which was the finding of the income-tax officer confirmed by the appellate assistant commissioner and the tribunal. 4. the mr. pandit argues that if a penalty is attracted notwithstanding the fact that a ..... question as to whether there was any evidence on which the income-tax authorities could have come to such a conclusion. no such question has been referred to us, and indeed the question referred to us in terms ..... the fact that the return has been subsequently corrected. the question as to whether the omission is deliberate or bona fide is a question for the income-tax authorities to determine, it being a pure question of fact, and it cannot arise for determination by us unless there was a reference on a ..... sales of rs. 40,770 the assessee showed a gross loss of rs. 3,444. the assessee's explanation of this loss did not satisfy the income-tax officer and he suspected that the closing stock of the assessee as shown was not correct. he, therefore, called upon the partner who appeared before .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 03 1957 (HC)

Bombay Cycle Stores Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madhya Pr ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : [1958]33ITR13(Bom)

..... us by the tribunal, and they are : '(1) was the tribunal entitled to compute the gross income from the sales of bicycles and motor-cycles under the proviso to section 13 of the indian income-tax act, even though the gross profits ascertained by reference to the accounts of the assessee were found to ..... be correct (2) were the income-tax authorities right in adding rs. 12,174 paid in respect of sales tax to the income of the assessee even though it ..... cycles the correct profit could be ascertained from the books, notwithstanding the fact that it could not be so ascertained in respect of accessories, the income-tax officer should have accepted the profits so ascertained as his own estimate. now, dealing with the first part of the argument, the proviso to ..... and motor-cycles only and expressed his inability to furnish such details in respect of accessories.he relied upon this for the inference that the income-tax officer found that the gross profits in respect of sales of cycles and motor-cycles only could be correctly ascertained from the accounts. it ..... dealt in motor-cycles, cycles and accessories in the assessment year 1950-51. the accounting year was the year ending 31st december, 1949. the income-tax officer found that the profits and gains could not properly be deduced from the accounts kept by the assessee, applied the proviso to section 13 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 1962 (HC)

Orient Trading Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Calc ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : [1963]49ITR723(Bom)

..... credited in the account as not deductible under section 10(2) (iii) of the income-tax act. the assessee took the order of the income-tax officer in appeal before the appellate assistant commissioner, who agreed with the view which the income-tax officer had taken, and dismissed the assessee's appeal. in the said appeal, the ..... v.s. desai, j. 1. on a requisition made by this court under section 66(2) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, the tribunal has drawn up the statement of the case and referred to this court the questions hereinafter stated ..... outstanding balance in this account as on the material date. in our opinion, therefore, the reply received by the appellate assistant commissioner from the income-tax officer assessing messrs. surajmal nagarmal supplied a very satisfactory support to the assessee's assertion that the account of rampratap agarwal in its account was ..... and the balance transferred to the account of messrs. surajmal nagarmal. the account was treated as the account of messrs. surajmal nagarmal by the income-tax investigation commission during the investigation of messrs. surajmal nagarmal's case and the credits in this account subsequent to 1947, i.e., after the ..... commission) act, 1947, of the case of messrs. surajmal nagarmal, this amount of rs. 2,50,000 was accounted for an dealt with in the settlement reached by messrs. surajmal nagarmal with the central government. the explanation was not accepted by the income-tax officer, and he treated the credit entry of .....

Tag this Judgment!


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