Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Sorted by: old Court: kolkata Year: 1985 Page 9 of about 140 results (0.040 seconds)

Jul 09 1985 (HC)

James Finlay and Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Jul-09-1985

Reported in : [1987]163ITR495(Cal)

dipak kumar sen, j.1. in this application under section 261 of the income-tax act, 1961, the petitioner contends that substantial questions of law arise from the judgment in the above reference from which an appeal is sought to be preferred to the supreme court by the assessee.2. relying on a circular issued by the central board of revenue no. 27(44-it/52) dated 6th october, 1952, which was in force at the relevant time, the assessee credited interest receivable from his debtors in a suspense account instead of disclosing it in its return based on accounts kept on mercantile basis.3. the substantial question of general importance which arises is that if there are two views on a particular issue and if the assessee proceeds on the basis of one view, whether there is deliberate concealment so as to attract penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the act ?4. this court in ito v. burmah shell storage and distributing company of india ltd. : [1987]163itr496(cal) and in the case of jeewanlal (1929) ltd. v. ito : [1981]130itr405(cal) , took a view in favour of the assessee on the issue. in the judgment before us, a view in favour of the revenue has been taken.5. we find this is a fit case for appeal to the supreme court and a certificate under section 261 of the act is directed to be issued. there will also be an order in terms of prayer (b).6. let the order directing issue of certificate be drawn up separately.g.n. ray, j.7. i agree.

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 22 1985 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. B.N. Elias and Co. (P.) Ltd.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Jul-22-1985

Reported in : [1986]160ITR45(Cal)

..... they had become barred by limitation and the assessee's liabilities for the claims had ceased. he held that the said amount should be treated asbusiness income of the assesses under section 41(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, in the said assessment years. 2. on an appeal preferred by the assessee, the appellate assistant commissioner held that cessation of a liability need ..... wrongly applied in the case of the assessee. the tribunal allowed the appeal and deleted rs, 1,81,380 from the total income of the assessee. 4. on an application of the revenue under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, the tribunal has referred the following question, as a question of law arising out of its order, for the opinion of this ..... court: 'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a correct interpretation of section 41(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, the tribunal was correct in holding that the sum of rs. 1,81,380 could not be included in the total ..... account represented liability for expenses which had been allowed as deduction in earlier years but the debts had become barred by limitation. the income-tax officer invoked section 41(1) of the act to include this amount in the total taxable income of the assessee. it was held by a division bench of this court following bombay dyeing & . : (1958)illj778sc , j.k. chemicals ltd .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 24 1985 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Babcock and Willcox of India Ltd.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Jul-24-1985

Reported in : [1987]165ITR105(Cal)

..... the case which needs to be considered by this court. we agree with the order of the tribunal rejecting the application of the revenue under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961.4. the application, therefore, fails and we discharge the rule without any order as to costs.d.k. sen, j.5. i agree. ..... ray, j.1. this rule issued on an application of the revenue under section 256(2) of the income-tax act, 1961, calls upon m/s. babcock & willcox of india ltd., the assessee, to show cause why this court should not direct the tribunal to refer the following question, stated to ..... tribunal, for the opinion of this court :' whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was justified in upholding the finding of the commissioner of income-tax (appeals) that the sum of rs. 1,99,781 paid by the assessee-company to its employees as customary bonus was an allowable deduction 'the revenue contends that in view .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 29 1985 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shib Banerji Properties and Constructio ...

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Jul-29-1985

Reported in : [1986]160ITR567(Cal)

..... said order but on a further appeal by the assessee, the tribunal held in favour of the assessee.7. on application by the revenue under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, the tribunal has referred the following question, as a question of law arising out of its order, for the opinion of this court:'whether, on the facts and in ..... the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was justified in cancelling the second order dated may 25, 1972, of the income-tax officer made under section 23a of the indian income-tax act, 1922?'8. the point raised in the question, it appears, is concluded so far as this court is concerned by its decision in ..... was preferred by the assessee to the tribunal.2. while the appeal before the tribunal was pending, the income-tax officer passed an order under section 23a of the indian income-tax act, 1922 ('the act'), on may 19, 1965, by which a further demand of additional super-tax was raised on the assessee on the ground that the assessee had failed to distribute the statutory percentage ..... not that he shall make as many orders as he likes. it is elementary that the income-tax officer is bound to drop the proceedings where no super-tax is payable by the assessee and in this case it has been done by the income-tax officer.further, the indian income-tax act, 1922, expressly provides for initiation of subsequent proceedings in certain matters, to wit section 34 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 06 1985 (TRI)

Todi Properties Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata

Decided on : Aug-06-1985

Reported in : (1985)14ITD119(Kol.)

..... commissioner had no jurisdiction to revise the present order inasmuch as the assessment had been made in pursuance of the direction of the i ac under section 144b of the income-tax act.12. it has been indicated that unless there is some material to this effect, this could not be considered as a mistake apparent from the record, while a specific finding ..... the assessee stating that in the assessee's appeal nos. 657 and 658 (cal.) of 1983, which was directed against the order of the commissioner under section 263 of the income-tax act, 1961 ('the act'), the assessee raised the point that the assessments having been made in pursuance of the direction of the iac under section 144b of the ..... the first miscellaneous application of the assessee, the tribunal has dealt with the points raised by the assessee and there is no mistake in rejecting the said miscellaneous application. taxing of notional income can only be made as provided under section 23 onwards as discussed in the preceding paragraph. 10 the circumstances of the case as discussed, we find that there is ..... on the dictionary meaning. the ito did not accept the argument of the assessee that the rental income should be determined under the delhi rent control regulation act, 1958, for which the assessee relied before him in mrs. sheila kaushish v. cit [1981] 131 itr 435 (sc) and amolak ram khosla v. cit [1981] 131 itr 582 (sc). the ito, however, allowed the municipal .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 07 1985 (HC)

Gora Chand Porel Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Aug-07-1985

Reported in : 90CWN265,[1986]160ITR158(Cal)

..... apply and shall always be deemed to apply in relation to every notice of demand served upon an assessee by a taxing authority under the indian income-tax act, 1922, whether such notice was served before or after the commencement of the act. 7. another decision referred to by mr. pal is the case of beharilal baldeo prasad v. commissioner, jhansi division : [1967]63itr555(all ..... rs. 5,940-11-0 was paid as tax on march 29, 1956, and subsequently other amounts were also realised. on or about march 21, 1957, the income-tax officer forwarded a certificate under section 46(2) of the income-tax act to the certificate officer of 24-parganas for recovery of the balance of rs. 9,634 ..... reduced amount of government dues. 8. section 29 of the indian income-tax act, 1922, lays down as follows : 'when any tax, penalty or interest is due in consequence of any order passed under or in pursuance of this act, the income-tax officer shall serve upon the assessee or other person liable to pay such tax, penalty or interest a notice of demand in the prescribed form ..... that he is the karta of a hindu undivided family. the income-tax officer, district-vi, calcutta, assessed the income-tax of the family for the year 1955-56 by a notice dated february 25, 1956, under section 29 of the indian income-tax act, 1922, and directed payment of rs. 15,595-7-0 as tax. against the said assessment, an appeal was preferred. a sum of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 09 1985 (TRI)

income-tax Officer Vs. Ganges Printing Co. Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata

Decided on : Aug-09-1985

Reported in : (1986)15ITD212(Kol.)

..... 1. investment allowance under section 32a of the income-tax act, 1961 ('the act'), on phototypesetter and air-conditioner installed by the assessee-company in the year under assessment (1980-81) was disallowed by the ito on the ground that the same were installed ..... on this point.5. while disposing of the second point it appears that the learned commissioner (appeals) overlooked the provisions of sections 80a(2) and 80b(5) of the act. admittedly, the total income of the assessee was nil. the assessee was, therefore, not entitled to deduction of rs. 3,501 under section 80vv. order of the commissioner (appeals) is, therefore, reversed ..... use of a particular premises. any premises or part thereof initially used for office, residence, guest house or industry may be converted from one use to the other and the act places no restriction for such conversion.a portion in the premises of industry or factory may be used for the office purposes and even for residential purposes. thus, the meaning ..... the industrial undertaking for the purpose of business of production. secondly, the ito negatived the claim of deduction of the assessee for rs. 3,501 under section 80vv of the act. the commissioner (appeals) allowed the claim on the ground that it was below rs. 5,000. the department is, therefore, in appeal on both the points which we proceed to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 12 1985 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Karam Chand Thapar and Bros. (Coal Sale ...

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Aug-12-1985

Reported in : (1986)53CTR(Cal)38,[1987]163ITR40(Cal)

..... -68 to 1968-69 and 1971-72. in the assessment year 1973-74, an application of the revenue under section 256(2) of the income-tax act, 1961, seeking to raise the same question was rejected by this court.13. it was contended that the matter was concluded so far as ..... of the assessee.8. on an application by the revenue under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961 ('the act'), the tribunal has referred the following question as a question of law arising out of ..... undercharges account' were transferred to the profit and loss account of the assessee.6. the income-tax officer treated the said amounts as trading receipts of the assessee and brought them to tax. the order of the income-tax officer was upheld by the appellate assistant commissioner on appeal.7. on a further appeal by ..... transferred to the profit and loss account of the relevant previous years, did not constitute trading receipts and could not be assessed as the income of the assessee in the assessments for the assessment years 1969-70 and 1970-71, respectively?'at the hearing, the learned advocate for the ..... the assessee, the tribunal, following its earlier decision in the assessment years 1953-54, 1956-57 to 1962-63, 1964-65 to 1966-67 in the case of the same assessee, deleted the additions of the said amount from the taxable income .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 13 1985 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. United India Fire and General Insurance ...

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Aug-13-1985

Reported in : [1986]161ITR295(Cal)

..... only to the profits and gains as determined under section 10 of the indian income-tax act and did not refer to profits and gains arrived at or determined in a manner other than that provided by the said section. it was also ..... particular manner. the question arose whether the cess had been levied on the assessee on profits within the meaning of section 10(4) of the indian income-tax act, 1922.17. it was held by the supreme court that in the context, the words 'profits and gains of any business' could have reference ..... the assessee had failed to recover from the non-resident could not be regarded as a bad debt under section 10(2) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, inasmuch as the assessee was bound to deduct the said amount from the amount payable. it was further held that the payment was ..... [1985]155itr120(sc) . we direct the tribunal to consider the decision of the supreme court, if any, while disposing of the case under section 260 of the income-tax act, 1961.4. the facts on record relevant to question no. 1 as found or admitted are, inter alia, that the united india fire & general insurance co. ..... : [1958]33itr245(sc) , for the proposition laid down by the supreme court that persons bound under the indian income-tax act, 1922, to make deduction of income-tax at the time of making payment of any income, profits or gains, are not concerned with the ultimate result of the assessment of the person to whom the payment .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 14 1985 (HC)

Santimoy Bhattacharyya and anr. Vs. Lakshmi Pada Dutt and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Aug-14-1985

Reported in : 1986(1)CHN299,90CWN69,[1986]159ITR637(Cal)

..... . sanjoy bhattachayya, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the defendant/appellant, has strenuously urged that the lower appellate court has misread and misinterpreted the provision of section 281a of the income-tax act. it is submitted by him that sub-section (2) is controlled by sub-section (1) of section 281a. further, it is submitted that the two sub-sections should be considered ..... stands benami in the name of his nephew, kali kinkar mitra, defendant no. 2. at this stage, it is necessary to refer to the provisions of section 281a of the income-tax act, 1961. section 281a provides as follows:'281a. (i) no suit to enforce any right in respect of any property held benami, whether against the person in whose name the property ..... suit. if the plaintiff/respondent no. 1 had not given such a notice to the income-tax officer, the suit would be definitely barred by section 281a(1)(c) of the income-tax act. in the plaint, the plaintiff has categorically stated about the giving of such a notice to the income-tax officer. in our opinion, in the face of such a statement in the plaint ..... disclosed in any return of net wealth furnished by the claimant under the wealth-tax act, 1957 (27 of 1957); or (c) notice in the prescribed form and containing the prescribed particulars in respect of the property has been given by the claimant to the income-tax officer. (2) the income-tax officer shall, on an application made by any person in the prescribed manner and .....

Tag this Judgment!


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