Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1987)63CTR(Bom)16; 169ITR516(Bom)
..... j.1. the question of law referred to this court for the opinion at the instance of the assessee under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, is :'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the following payments are items of capital expenditure and not allowable ..... fresh share capital of rs. 22,50,000 during the previous year and incurred an expenditure of rs. 2,44,888 in connection therewith. the income-tax authorities as well as the tribunal disallowed the expenditure on the ground that the expenditure was of a capital nature. placing reliance on this court's ..... demised premises and paid a sum of rs. 8,396 to m/s. ravee a. sood, estate agents, during the previous year.4. the income-tax officer disallowed the assessee's claim for deduction in respect of both the above items of expenditure on the ground that the expenditure was incurred in connection ..... issue of shares and obtaining of loan by issuing debentures. it is pertinent to mention that in the case of bombay burmah trading corporation ltd. v. cit : 145itr793(bom) , the capital raised included both by issue of bonus shares and by issue of altogether fresh shares and certain types of ..... decision in the case of bombay burmah training corporation ltd. v. cit : 145itr793(bom) , mr. dastur submitted that the disallowance of the entire expenditure is not at all justified and that expenditure on items like postage .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 35ITR183(Bom)
..... deciding whether section 23a is applicable to this case and whether the income-tax officer has rightly exercised his power, this sum of rs. 1,63,377 should be ..... tribunal was concerned. now, in arriving at the assessable income of the assessee, the income-tax officer took into consideration a sum of rs. 1,63,377, which were profits, according to the department, earned by the assessee under section 42 (2) of the income-tax act and the contention of the assessee is that in ..... the trouble arises. now, the view taken by the department is that even under the second part of section 23a (1), the profits which the income-tax officer has to consider are profits which would include the sum of rs. 1,63,377. one has only to state the proposition to realise ..... section 23a. 2. now, let us first look at the scheme of section 23a. the first condition for the exercise of the power of the income-tax officer is the distribution of dividend by the company of less than the statutory percentage, which, at the relevant time, was 60 per cent. and ..... the substance of the matter is this that for the purpose of the second part of section 23a, when the income-tax officer is considering the smallness of the profits, when the income-tax officer is considering the profits and is considering whether it would be reasonable or unreasonable to declare a larger dividend, the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1990)90CTR(Bom)135; 189ITR774(Bom)
..... d.r. dhanuka j.1. this reference is made by the income-tax appellate tribunal, bombay bench 'b' bombay, under section 256(2) of the income-tax act, 1961, in pursuance of an order of this court dated july 18, 1985, in income-tax application no. 599 of 1982 at the instance of the assessee. the question for our consideration is as under :'whether, on the facts and ..... film and was thus a part of the capital outlay. the matter was carried in second appeal by the department before the income-tax appellate tribunal. on this aspect, the income-tax appellate tribunal held that the order of the commissioner of income-tax (appeals) was erroneous. the tribunal set aside the order of the commissioner and held that the receipt of the said subsidy in ..... dealt with the question as to whether the receipt of such subsidy would constitute a revenue receipt or capital receipt in the hands of the recipient for the purpose of income-tax. it was observed by the board in the said circular that the scheme under consideration was framed by the government for the growth of industries and not for supplementing the ..... the assessee from the government of maharashtra constituted a revenue receipt and was, therefore, taxable. being aggrieved by the said order, the assessee filed an appeal before the commissioner of income-tax (appeals)- ii, bombay. by this well-considered order dated january 25, 1980, the commissioner held that the said amount was not taxable. during the course of his order, the commissioner .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 186ITR412(Bom)
..... the grounds that the same did not fall under the provisions of any section, viz. section 28 and/or section 36 and/ or section 37 of the income-tax act, 1961 ?'2. the assessee-company is a non-resident company. it is engaged in the business of manufacture of accounting and computing machines which are sold or ..... clause (2) of the agreement dated october 23, 1962, clearly indicated, was being acquired for its existing business. moreover, as pointed out by shri dastur, the income-tax appellate tribunal has rejected the claim of the assessee for a reason other than this reason. accordingly, we proceed on the assumption that the factory premises were being acquired ..... off by the assessee-company.3. the assessee claimed the aforesaid amount of rs. 1,08,088 as a business loss. the claim was disallowed by the income-tax officer and the disallowance was confirmed by the appellate assistant commissioner who, inter alia, observed that the agreement had nothing to do with the current business of ..... decisions, according to him, were distinguishable as in those decisions, the connection between the expenditure and the business was very proximate. for instance, in the allahabad case cit v. jwala pd. radha kishan : 107itr540(all) , the assessee was a sole selling agent and was earning huge profits from the persons from whom he ..... t.d. sugla, j.1. the income-tax appellate tribunal has referred only one question of law to us for opinion in this case at the instance of the assessee. the question reads .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 105ITR669(AP); 41STC223(AP)
..... revenue in regard to the amount of refund, i.e., rs. 8,228, as includible in the assessee's total income for the assessment year 1968-69 under section 41(1) of the income-tax act, 1961. in view of this concession, we answer the second question in the affirmative and in favour of the revenue ..... by the supreme court, the amount was not yet paid. therefore, the decision of the supreme court in kedarnath jute mfg. co. ltd. v. commissioner of income-tax : 82itr363(sc) .clearly applies to this case. 6. sri swamy referred us to a number of other decisions it is not, however, necessary to ..... there is no doubt that the assessee in this case followed the mercantile method of accounting. it is so clearly stated in the assessment order of the income-tax officer dated january 3, 1969. therefore, the appellate assistant commissioner went wrong in thinking that it was cash basis that was followed by the assessee. ..... of rs. 8,228. they were not accounted for as trading receipts. when called upon to explain the omission, it stated before the income-tax officer that the sales-tax account in its entirety is recorded as liability since it had to be paid. the dispute relating thereto was pending before the supreme court ..... . 3. on the first question sri polavarapu rama rao for the revenue contended that the sum of rs. 17,710 was admittedly collected as sales-tax and so it .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1960AP292
..... length in the appeal relating to the assessment year, 1940-41, i.e., the one in which proceedings under section 34 of the income-tax act were started, since the considerations that applied to that appeal also governed the appeal arising out of the assessment proceedings for the year in question ..... satisfactorily the source and nature of certain amount of cash received during the accounting year, the income-tax officer is entitled to draw the inference that the receipts are of an assessable nature.'this indicates that the learned judge did not makeany ..... passage. we think that our opinion is also reinforced by the observations in the judgment of the supreme court in govindarajulu mudaliar v. commr. of income-tax : 34itr807(sc) , which is to hie following effect:'there is ample authority for the position that where an assessee fails to prove ..... other appeal, did not give separate reasons in support of its conclusion that the explanation regarding the entries was rightly reject-ed by the income-tax officer and the appellate assistant commissioner5. another argument presented by the counsel for the assessee is that whatever might be the position with regard ..... than the brothers of some (the partners, totalling rs. 1,26,000/-3. in the course of assessment proceedings for 1942-43, the income-tax officer noticed both sets of entries and, since he suspected the genuineness of these credits, he called upon the assessee to prove that they were .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1953All208; 22CompCas322(All); 22ITR470(All)
..... v. bhargava, j. 1. this is a reference by the income-tax appellate tribunal under section 66(1), income-tax act. the assessee is a limited banking company having among its objects the following. clause (a) to give loans or advances on personal or ..... loss could not be treated as a bad debt. the circumstances in the present case are entirely different. in this case, it is clear that the income-tax tribunal was fully justified in inferring that the property acquired from the rohelkhand ice factory was sold by the assessee as payment of the loan advanced and ..... of the lord chancellor in -- 'bomford v. osborne', (1942 10 i t r (sup) 27) and the views expressed in -- 'lalit ram mangilal v. commissioner of income-tax, u. p.', : 18itr286(all) are, in no way, divergent. even the lord chancellorwas of the view that, where conclusions of facts are deduced from pure findings ..... etc., of the match factory by the assessee could or could not be held to be an adventure in the nature of a trade. what the income-tax authorities have held is that the acquisition and sale of this property by the assessee was a transaction entered into by the assessee 'in the course of ..... a transaction of moneylending business.learned counsel, in this connection, referred us to a decision of this very bench in -- 'gurucharan prasad jagannath prasad v. commissioner of income-tax u. p. and ajmer-merwara lucknow : 19itr42(all) . the facts in that case were, however, quite different. in that case, the most important .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 202ITR428(All)
..... for disposal of the assessee's appeal on merits.12. in our opinion, the initiation of the proceedings for reopening the assessment under section 147(a) of the income-tax act by the income-tax officer was perfectly valid and justified. the discrepancy arising between the assessment of sri banarsi dass gupta recorded on august 4, 1962, that the full consideration of a ..... the significance of the discrepancy between the two statements. judged in the light of those facts, we have no hesitation in holding that the initiation of reassessment proceedings by the income-tax officer was legitimate and proper.14. sri bharatji agarwal, learned counsel for the applicant, attempted to demonstrate that the statement of the assessee made in 1962 was wrong and, ..... truly the material facts necessary for the assessment. the third member was clearly right.13. as mentioned earlier, the question before us is a limited one, namely, whether the income-tax officer could legitimately have reasons to believe that the assessee had failed or omitted to disclose fully and truly all the material facts necessary for the assessment year 1949-50 ..... -50.8. aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the assessee appealed to the appellate assistant commissioner. the appellate assistant commissioner allowed the appeal and came to the conclusion that the income-tax officer had no jurisdiction to reopen the assessment. he pointed out that the question whether the assessee had received the 'on money' or not had been the subject-matter .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1967SC1907; 67ITR79(SC); 1SCR47
..... appellate assistant commissioner. in compliance with the order of the bombay high court, the appellate tribunal drew up a statement of the case under section 66(4) of the indian income-tax act, and referred the three questions mentioned above. the high court, as stated above, answered question no. 3 in favour of the assessee, and the appellant having obtained special leave ..... does not make the property in the goods pass at indore. there is considerable force in the learned counsel's submissions. in seth pushalal mansinghka (p.) ltd. v. commissioner of income-tax [civil appeals nos. 557-558 of 1966 : judgment delivered on may 5, 1967 : since reported in : 66itr159(sc) ], this court, on similar facts, held that the ..... )--------- -------- --------- ------- ------------19,93,053 3,35,855 16,57,198 1,77,139 14,80,059--------- -------- --------- ------- ------------ (the figures at the extreme right show the item numbers used by the income-tax officer in para. 2 of the assessment order.) 5. the modus operandi for effecting the sales enumerated in the chart referred to above is described as follows in the statement ..... .1. these appeals by special leave are directed against the judgment of the high court of judicature at bombay answering the following questions (question no. 3) against the commissioner of income-tax, bombay city and suburban district, appellant before us : '3. whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the applicant's case, the tribunal was right in holding .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC1139; 44ITR532(SC)
..... who was appointed an income-tax inspector in the income-tax department of the government of india in 1943 became an income-tax officer in the same department on promotion in 1946. it appears that the income-tax services were reconstituted by an order of the government of india dated september 29, 1944, and later on in 1953 section 5 of the income-tax act was amended in accordance ..... with this decision to reconstitute. one of the feature of the reconstitution was that in place of the one class of income-tax officer, two classes came into existence, one consisting of income-tax officers of class i service and the other class in which all ..... that article 16(1) has been violated. no such complaint can however be reasonably made, if for example, all income-tax officers while income- tax sub-inspectors are eligible for promotion only as income tax inspectors but not directly as income-tax officers.similarly, it of the income-tax officers of the same grade, some are eligible for promotion to a superior grade, and others are not, the ..... the creation of different grades in the government service, that is what the petitioner's argument amount to. the contention that art. 16 has been violated because class ii income-tax officers are not eligible for promotion to higher posts, like the posts of commissioners and assistant commissioners directly is, therefore wholly unsound.3. the only other contention raised .....Tag this Judgment!