Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Sorted by: old Court: chennai Year: 1965 Page 1 of about 107 results (0.059 seconds)

Jan 19 1965 (HC)

K.S. Ramchandran Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-19-1965

Reported in : AIR1966Mad57

..... fund which comes into existence on the application of the scheme to be deemed to be a recognised provident fund within the meaning of ch. ix-a of the indian income-tax act. s. 15 also provides that where any employer has established a provident fund scheme for an establishment, and such a scheme is in force before the application of the provident ..... , j.(1) the questions that stand referred to us are :'1. whether the aforesaid provident fund was a recognised provident fund within the meaning of ch. ix-a of the income-tax act, on 16-8-1956, the date of withdrawal by the assessee? 2. if the answer to the question is in the affirmative, whether the aforesaid sum of rs. 6920 is ..... course of the arguments that sometime in 1957, the establishment in question made an application to the commissioner of income-tax under s. 58 of the income-tax act and the commissioner purported to accord recognition to the provident fund under ch. ix-a of the income-tax act. in the view that we take of the various provisions of the relevant enactments and the notifications issued by ..... question had to be deemed to be a recognised provident fund under ch. ix-a of the indian income-tax act, from the date on which the working journalists act was passed, that is, 20-12-1955. he accordingly claimed that under the provisions of the indian income-tax act, the employer's contribution and the interest thereon received by the assessee on 16-8-1956 stood .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 19 1965 (HC)

The Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Madras Vs. G.D. Naidu

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-19-1965

Reported in : AIR1966Mad74; [1965]58ITR301(Mad); (1965)1MLJ539

..... it seems to us that both in fact and in law, the settlement at rs. 6.50 lakhs put an end to the old claim under the income-tax act and brought into existence a new claim altogether. if the provision that if default occurred, the settlement would be void and the government would be restored to ..... rs. 6.50 lakhs. the settlement as far as we can see is not the result of the application of any provision of the income-tax act. it is nothing more than an executive act by which the government, in view of the impossibility of recovering the total amount demanded, was willing to accept a lesser amount, and ..... a suit, for, to our mind, this is not an order made under any of the provisions of the income-tax act, and would not consequently arm the government with any powers of recovery under the act. the correct view to take appears to us to be that this debt came into existence on the date of ..... came into existence, but since the settlement was not one which could be traced to any provisions of the act, it was not one under the act at all, that is to say, it was not an income-tax liability in the form it took, so that whether it was outstanding for more than 12 months or not ..... or interest payable in consequence of any order passed under or in pursuance of this act, or by any law relating to taxation of income and profits, or the estates duty act, 1955, the expenditure tax act 1957, or the gifts tax act 1958--(a) which is outstanding on the valuation date and is claimed by the assessee in appeal, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 20 1965 (HC)

Swami Motor Transports Ltd., Tanjore Vs. the Commissioner of Income-ta ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-20-1965

Reported in : AIR1965Mad516; [1966]36CompCas345(Mad); [1966]60ITR234(Mad)

..... company who represented the company in all the proceedings connected with the application under the companies act. the total of rupees 3,050 was claimed as allowance under s. 10(2).(3) the view taken by the income-tax officer was that the amounts expended in the above fashion during the two years did not ..... under s. 153c of the act could conceivably come within the scope of the allowance. nothing has been stated before us which inclines us to accept the case of the assessee in this regard.(9) the decision of this court in selvarajulu chetty and co., v. commr., of income-tax 1964 1 itj 769: ..... and/or advocate of rs. 4,000 and rs. 3,050 respectively can be claimed as a proper charge on the business income filed under s. 10(2) of the act or on general principles of commercial expediency.'(2) the assessee is a private limited company which carried on transport business. the relevant ..... paid to the commissioner for conducting these meetings would thus appear to be within the scope of allowance either under s. 10(2)(xv) of the act or on general principles of commercial requirements.(8) we are not, however, satisfied that the remuneration paid to the interim administrator or to the advocate ..... normal business expenditure. the audit of the company directed by the court, though it arose in the context of the application under s. 153c of the act, was nevertheless one which could have been undertaken by the company itself in the normal course. equally, it seems to us that the expenditure incurred .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 21 1965 (HC)

P.N. Venkatasubramania Iyer and ors. Vs. P.N. Easwara Iyer and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-21-1965

Reported in : AIR1966Mad266

..... "detriment". it was held that the emoluments received by sheel chandra were in the nature of salary, assessable under section 7 of the income-tax act, as the salary was income of the concerned individual and not of the hindu undivided family.in the present context the words "risk of" can have, obviously, ..... would be reopened and adjusted. but the partition is not wholly void. the position is set out thus in meyyappa chettiar v. commr. of income-tax, madras, ."under the mitakshara law the father has the undoubted right and privilege of effecting a partition between himself and his sons, whether they ..... security to the bank of certain properties of the hindu undivided family. the question that arose for consideration was whether for the purpose of income-tax the salary and emoluments received as treasurer of the bank were assessable under the head salaries or under the head profits and gains of business ..... air 1921 pc 35, though without any reference to the subsequently enacted hindu gains of learning act xxx of 1930, and sankaralinga iyer's case. has been doubted in a critical reference.in commr. of income-tax v palaniappa chettiar, 1964-1 mad lj 61 at p. 65, a bench of this ..... of the act means only self-acquired property of the coparcener and not the property which he got on separation as coparcener at the partition of the joint family property. this proposition was found acceptance in a number of decisions, the latest decision of this court being commr of income-tax v. thyagarajan .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 28 1965 (HC)

Lakshmi Nivas and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-28-1965

Reported in : [1965]58ITR9(Mad)

..... the judgment of the court was delivered byvenkatadri j. - on a requisition made by this court under sub-section (2) of section 66 of the indian income-tax act, the tribunal has drawn up a statement of the case raising the followin :'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the disallowance of the assessees claim, ..... viz., that the firm shall not stand dissolved by the taking of new partners, the firm as an entity, in so far as the income-tax act is concerned must necessarily be regarded as continuing for the purposes of that act.'the present deed of partnership dated january 1, 1956, states, after referring to the previous history of the firm from the commencement of ..... bad and doubtful debt. when the assessee claimed that sum as deduction under the provisions of section 10(2)(xi) of the act for the assessment year 1956-57, relevant to the accounting period ending on december 31, 1955, the income-tax officer, holding that the claim for allowance was premature, disallowed the claim of the assessee. the assessee-firm accepted the decision ..... is whether the present partnership firm is entitled to the benefit of that provision of the act.on similar facts, this court in hanumanthappa and sons v. commissioner of income-tax, to which one of us was a party, after reviewing the relevant provisions of the partnership act, hel :'what is clear from all of these provisions is that, since a partnership is the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 01 1965 (HC)

T. S. Srinivasan Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-01-1965

Reported in : [1965]56ITR455(Mad)

..... of division and allocation of joint family properties at a family partition did not imply a transfer which could be brought within the scope of section 16(3) of the income-tax act. their lordships of the supreme court observed :'when instructions are given that the self-acquired property is to be treated as joint family property, in our opinion, at that moment ..... to various members of the family at a partition does not amount to a transfer direct or indirect, so as to attract the application of section 16(3) of the income-tax act.we accordingly answer the question in favour of the assessee. the assessee will be entitled to his costs. counsels fee rs. 250.question answered in favour of the assessee. ..... , in the course, registered the transfer in its books.on march 27, 1958, the assessee intimated the income-tax officer of the division that had taken place in the family, and after an inquiry, the income-tax officer made an order under section 25-a of the income-tax act. for the assessment year 1959-60, the accounting year ending with march 31, 1959, the assessee filed ..... transfer of these shares had been effected by the assessee as an individual. he accordingly invoked section 16(3) of the income-tax act and proceeded to include the dividend income in respect of these 2,000 shares and the interest thereon in the income of the assessee as an individual. the assessee appealed to the appellate assistant commissioner. he pointed out that the so .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 01 1965 (HC)

Murali Santaram and Co. (Madras) Private Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Inco ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-01-1965

Reported in : [1966]59ITR482(Mad)

that an appeal under section 66a(2) of the income-tax act is not competent against an order of this high court dismissing an application under section 66(2) of the act has been decide by this court in omar salay mohammed sait v. commissioner of income-tax. learned counsel suggests that the word 'reference' has not been defined and it should include an 'application to refer' and, so construed, the order of this court dismissing such an application would be a judgment for the purpose of section 66a(2). we are unable to agree. section 66(5) deals with a judgment of the high court on a reference made under either section 66(1) or section 66(2) and it is such a judgment that is contemplated by section 66a(2). in our view, an appeal does not lie and we dismiss the petitions with costs. counsels fee rs. 150. (one set).petitions dismissed.

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 02 1965 (HC)

N. Naganatha Iyer Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Madras.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-02-1965

Reported in : [1966]60ITR647(Mad)

judgementthe judgement of the court was delivered byvenkatadri j. - the tribunal has submitted a statement of the case, directed under section 66(2) of the indian income-tax act, and the statment of the case discloses the following facts :the assessee, naganatha iyer, is a member of a hindu undivided family consisting of himself, his father, narayanaswsami iyer, and ..... lawful. the reference, therefore, involves the true construction of section 34 of the income-tax act. lord normand, while considering the scope of section 34, delivered his opinion thus in commissioner of income-tax v. mahaliram ramjidas :'the section, although it is part of a taxing act, imposes no charge, on the subject, and deals merely with the machinery of assessment. in interpreting provisions of this ..... if there was sufficient justification for it, to hold that the amount noted in the foot-note was really the assessees income, in which case an assessable income would have been found and the tax could be charged thereon. if the income-tax officer had acted on that return and assessed the assessee before 31st march, 1950, the assessment would have been valid. he chose to ..... to this court relating to 1945-46. therefore, we feel that the assessee is entitled to claim before us that the action of the income-tax officer in reassessing his income for 1949-50 under section 34 of the act is invalid.for the reasons stated above, we answer the question in the negative and hold that, on the facts and circumstances of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 12 1965 (HC)

India Motor Parts and Accessories Ltd. (P), Madras Vs. the Commissione ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-12-1965

Reported in : AIR1966Mad411; [1966]60ITR531(Mad)

..... , therefore, not includible in the computation of the capital of the company for the assessment year 1963-64, under the second schedule to the super profits tax act, 1963 ?"assessment year 1964-65:"whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, it has been rightly held in law that the sum ..... 5. the questions that have been referred to us arise in construing the provisions in sch. ii to the super profits tax act, 1963, and in sch. ii to the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964. at the outset we may point out that a bench of this court, to which one of us was ..... was subjected to the super profits tax act of 1963. for the other two assessment years, the assessee was subjected to surtax under the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964. the dispute arose for all these assessment years regarding the computation of capital to work ..... not includible in the computation of the capital of the company for the assessment year 1964-65, under the second schedule to the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964?"2. the brief details relating to the above three assessment years may be stated thus : with regard to the assessment year 1963-64, the assessee ..... a copy of this judgment under the signature of the registrar and the seal of this court will be sent to the income-tax appellate tribunal. ..... 1. the income-tax appellate tribunal, madras bench, has referred the following questions relating to the assessment years 1963-64, 1964-65 and 1965-66, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 15 1965 (HC)

A. S. K. Rathnaswamy Nadar Firm Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-15-1965

Reported in : [1965]58ITR312(Mad)

..... court was delivered byp. chandra reddy c.j. - the two questions that call for decision in this reference under section 66(1) of the indian income-tax act are framed in the following word :'(1) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the disallowance of the salary of the ..... for a period of three years at a fixed salary of rs. 6,000 per annum.the income-tax officer considered that this claim offended against the provision of section 10(4)(b) of the act since kathiresa nadar was a partner of the firm. on appeal by aggrieved assessee the appellate assistant ..... hindu family was a partner of messrs. a. s. k. rathnaswamy nadar firm, justifiable under section 10(4)(b) of the indian income-tax ac ?'in computing the income of the partnership the assessee claimed the deduction of rs. 6,000 paid as salary to one of its partners by name kathiresa nadar. ..... partnership. the learned judges were unconcerned with the applicability of section 10(4)(b) of the act. we cannot, therefore, derive much assistance from these two decided cases. gurunath v. dhakappa v. commissioner of income-tax is of the same category and does not help us in finding a solution to the problem ..... rendered by is beyond the pale of section 10(4)(b) of the act, our attention has been drawn by mr. srinivasan to two decision of this court, knightsdale estate v. commissioner of income-tax and mathew abraham v. commissioner of income-tax. we do not think that these pronouncements tough the question we are called .....

Tag this Judgment!


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