Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Sorted by: old Court: chennai Page 10 of about 27,652 results (0.374 seconds)

Dec 14 1927 (PC)

The Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. in Re: Income Tax Assessment of P. ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : 110Ind.Cas.742

..... of law not raised by him before the commissioner. we are clearly of opinion that he cannot do the latter. under section 66 (2) of the income tax act the commissioner may be required by the assessee to refer any question or questions of law arising upon the order. it is we think beyond doubt that ..... of the passing of the order under sections 31 and 32 of the act to the commissioner to refer questions of law to the high court; and upon his ..... to this reference taken by the commissioner of income tax is that the question of law sought to be argued here is one which was not argued before him and that it cannot now be raised by reason of section 66, sub-section 2 of the income tax act which permits the assessee to apply within one month ..... where, in the absence of accounts, assessment was levied at an agreed figure as the result of negotiations by and on behalf of the assessee and the income tax officer, whether the said assessment can be re-opened under section 34 of the said state of affairs, namely, absence of accounts or by raising the same ..... to make any reference. there upon the assessee moved the high court and this high court by its order, dated the 9th march, 1926, directed the income tax commissioner to state a case on three points mentioned in that order. subsequently the assessee moved the high court to add a fourth point on which the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 14 1927 (PC)

The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. in the Matter of the Income Tax Ass ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1928)55MLJ19

..... of law not raised by him before the commissioner. we are clearly of opinion that he cannot do the latter. under section 66(2) of the income-tax act the commissioner may be required by the assessee to refer any question or questions of law arising upon the order. it is, we think, beyond doubt ..... of the passing of the order under section 31 and 32 of the act to the commissioner to refer questions of law to the high court; and upon his refusal ..... to this reference taken by the commissioner of income-tax is that the question of law sought to be argued here is one which was not argued before him and that it cannot now be raised by reason of section 66, sub-section (2) of the income-tax act which permits the assessee to apply within one month ..... where, in the absence of accounts, assessment was levied at an agreed figure as the result of negotiations by and on behalf of the assessee and the income-tax officer, whether the said assessment can be reopened under section 34 on the same state of affairs, viz., 'absence of accounts' or by raising the ..... declined to make any reference. thereupon the assessee moved the high court and the high court by its order, dated the 9th march, 1926, directed the income-tax commissioner to state a case on three points mentioned in that order. subsequently the assessee moved the high court to add a fourth point on which the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 14 1927 (PC)

In Re: Income-tax Assessment of P. Thiruvengada Mudaliar

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1928Mad889

..... a question of law not raised by him before the commissioner. we are clearly of opinion that he cannot do the latter. under section 66(2), income-tax act, the commissioner may be required by the assessee to refer any question or questions of law arising upon the order. it is, we think, beyond doubt ..... of the passing of the order under sections 31 and 32 of the act to the commissioner to refer questions of law to the high court and upon his ..... objection to this reference taken by the commissioner of income-tax is that the question of law sought to be argued here is one which was not argued before him and that it cannot now be raised by reason of section 66, sub-section 2, income-tax act, which permits the assessee to apply within one month ..... the absence of accounts, assessments was levied at an agreed figure as the result of negotiations by and on behalf of the asses-sea and the income-tax officer, whether the said assessment can be reopened under section 34 on the said state of affairs, namely, absence of accounts or by raising the same ..... declined to make any reference. thereupon the assessee moved the high court and the high court by its order, dated 9th march 1926, directed the income-tax commissioner to state a case on three points mentioned in that order. subsequently the assessee moved the high court to add a fourth point on which .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 01 1928 (PC)

The Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. T.K.E. Ibrahimsa Ravuttar

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1928Mad543; 110Ind.Cas.207; (1928)54MLJ524

..... land revenue in british india or subject to a local rate assessed and collected by officers of government as such in the language of section 2 (1) (a) of the income-tax act. we are now satisfied that the answer to the reference in the case above referred to was given without full discussion or consideration. section 6 of ..... income-tax act xi of 1922 is the charging section. though in that section interest on securities, property, business and other sources of income are all indicated as heads of income chargeable with income-tax, still the section begins with the words 'save as otherwise provided by this ..... act'. in clause 3 of section 4 it is, however, provided that the act shall not apply to certain classes of income and the sub-clause 8 thereof is ' agricultural income'. it follows from this that the ..... classes of the incomes specified in section 6 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 20 1928 (PC)

The Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. A.L.S.P.P.L. Subramanian Chettiar a ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1928Mad923; 110Ind.Cas.889; (1928)55MLJ416

..... meaning which should be ascribed to the expression 'capital borrowed for the purposes of the business' in section 10, clause 2 (iii) of the indian income-tax act. it was argued by the learned vakil for the commissioner that any sum of money which a partner puts into the business of a firm for being ..... the commissioner to find that there was no genuine borrowing of capital. i agree that the present case falls under section 10(2)(iii) of the indian income-tax act.beasley, j.i agree and make the same reservation as wallace, j.tiruvenkatachariar, j.1. the answer to the question referred to the full bench ..... no. 22 of 1926. - this is governed by our opinion in the other case.10. costs rs. 100 will be paid by the commissioner of income-tax to the assessees.wallace, j.i agree with the statement of law applicable to this case as expounded by my learned brothers, the case being one where, ..... the profits or gains of the partnership within the meaning of section 10(2)(iii).7. costs rs. 500 will be paid by the commissioner of income-tax to the assessees.8. the above judgment represents the joint view of ramesam, j., and myself and was drafted by him after full discussion between us ..... of interest paid to the partners for sums advanced by them should be deducted in estimating the amount on which the partnership should be assessed for income-tax under section 10(2)(iii). the assistant commissioner held that the whole of the additional sums advanced by the partners must be regarded really as the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 18 1928 (PC)

The Municipal Council Vs. the Bombay Company, Ltd.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1929Mad409; (1929)56MLJ525

..... mr. krishnaswami aiyar for the appellant that these tests should not be applied in judging the evidence in this case because they were decided under the english income-tax acts and they were concerned with the interpretation of the words 'exercising a trade for profit' or 'carrying on a trade' and not with the meaning ..... the essence of the business or trade, arc habitually made, there a trade or business is carried on within the meaning of the income-tax acts, so as to render the profits liable to income-tax.16. see also san panlo (brazilian) railway company v. carter (1896) a.c 31. all the well-known cases on ..... for the sale of his merchandise to customers in the united kingdom, does not exercise a trade in the united kingdom within the meaning of the income-tax acts, so long as all contracts for the sale and all deliveries of the merchandise to customers are made in a foreign country. in that case ..... or person may be said to carry on or exercise a trade in any locality has been considered in england in various cases mainly under the income-tax acts : the principles laid down in these cases will be very helpful in examining the evidence in this case. these decisions are so well known that ..... transmitted them to him in france where he exercised his discretion as to executing these orders. it was sought to assess grainger and son to income-tax on the ground that they were exercising a trade in the united kingdom. the following extract from the judgment of lord herschell explains the basis .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 31 1928 (PC)

B. Raja Rajeswara Sethupathi Avergal Alias B. Muthu Ramalinga Sethupat ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1929Mad179; (1928)55MLJ770

..... income-tax officer assessed the income under the income-tax act. the question is whether the payment was made under duress in order to take it out of the principle that payments under mistake of law cannot be recovered. it is ..... . the assessment notice was dated, 31st march, 1922 and payment was made on 21st april, 1922. the rajah of ramnad in his return of taxable1 income made in pursuance of the income-tax act included wrongly the items of income derived from forests and fisheries.5. he says this return was made owing to a mistake, and, on the figures submitted by the rajah, the ..... additional subordinate judge of ramnad at madura dismissing his suit for the recovery of certain amounts paid by him as income-tax for three years. the rajah of ramnad was asked by the income-tax officer to make a return of his income taxable under the income-tax act (vii of 1918) under section 17(2) read with section 2, clause (13). he submitted a return for the ..... .r. (1922) m. 518 and could have refused to pay the amount, even if he was unsuccessful in his representation to the income-tax authorities that the income from forests and fisheries was not liable to be assessed under the income-tax act, and he chose to do none of these things but paid the amount on 21st april, 1922, i.e., two months after the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 31 1928 (PC)

B. Raja Rajeshwara Sethupathi Avergal Alias B. Muthu Ramalinga Sethupa ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : 114Ind.Cas.829

..... from forests and fisheries; he says this return was made owing to a mistake, and, on the figures submitted by the rajah, the income tax officer assessed the income under the income tax act. the question is whether the payment was made under duress in order to take it out of the principle that payments under mistake of law cannot be recovered. it is ..... additional subordinate judge of ramnad at madura dismissing his suit for the recovery of certain amounts paid by him as income-tax for three years. the rajah of ramnad was asked by the income tax officer to make a return of his income, taxable under the income tax act (vii of 1918) under section 17(2) read with section 2, clause 13. he submitted a return for the ..... .r. 1922 mad. 325 and could have refused to pay the amount, even if he was unsuccessful in his representation on to the income tax authorities that the income from forests and fisheries was not liable to be assessed under the income tax act, and he chose to do none of these things but paid the amount on 21st april, 1922, i.e., two months after ..... the appellant.3. it is contended by the learned government pleader that no civil suit would lie to recover an amount paid as income tax. a civil suit is barred under section 52 of the income tax act of 1918. if the tax was levied under the act, no doubt, a suit would be barred, but if the assessment was made in respect of an item of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 19 1928 (PC)

In Re: the Assessment of T.P. Pethaperumal Chettiar Karaikudi Ist Circ ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : 115Ind.Cas.485

..... proceedings of 1926 27 the question arose whether this sum, or any part of it, represented profits of the taiping business liable to tax under section 4(2) of the indian income tax act. the income tax officer examined the accounts of the taiping business and computed the profits for the year of account, krodhana (13th april, 1925, to ..... is 'whether the sum of 13,301 dollars is allowable in this case as a deduction under section 10(2)(iii) of the income tax act as interest paid in the year krodhana.' under section 10 profits and gains of a business carried on by an assessee are to ..... 12th april, 1926) to be 22,820 dollars and taxed this sum as profit remitted to british india. the assessee claimed an allowance ..... was paid by the assessee in that previous year and added to the principle and, therefore, not having been paid in the year of account the income tax officer was quite correct in disallowing the assessee's claim.2. for these reasons we answer the question referred to us in the negative.3. ..... , four of these tavanai periods terminated and the total amount of interest that fell due on those four occasions was 9272 dollars. this sum the income tax officer allowed as a deduction, but the assessee claimed in addition the sum of 13,301 dollars which represented the interest which had fallen due on .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 19 1928 (PC)

The Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. T.P. Pethaperumal Chettiar

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1929Mad34; (1928)55MLJ850

..... proceedings of 1926-1927 the question arose whether this sum, or any part of it, represented profit of the taiping business liable to tax under section 4(2) of the indian income-tax act. the income-tax officer examined the accounts of the taiping business and computed the profits for the year of account, krodhana (13th april, 1925 to ..... is 'whether the sum of 13,301 dollars is allowable in this case as a deduction under section 10(2)(iii) of the income-tax act as interest paid in the year krodhana.' under section 10 profits and gains of a business carried on by an assessee are to ..... 12th april, 1926) to be 22,820 dollars and taxed this sum as profit remitted to british india. the assessee claimed an allowance ..... was paid by the assessee in that previous year and added to the principal and therefore not having been paid in the year of account the income-tax officer was quite correct in disallowing the assessee's claim.3. for these reasons we answer the question referred to us in the negative.4. ..... four of these tavanai periods terminated and the total amount of interest that fell due on those four occasions was 9,272 dollars. this sum the income-tax officer allowed as a deduction, but the assessee claimed in addition the sum of 13,301 dollars which represented the interest which had fallen due on .....

Tag this Judgment!


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