Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Sorted by: old Court: mumbai Year: 1999 Page 9 of about 248 results (0.034 seconds)

Jul 14 1999 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Govind Poy Oxygen Ltd.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-14-1999

Reported in : [1999]239ITR543(Bom)

..... of rs. 8,72,270 had been adjusted against the cost of specific assets and, therefore, in terms of the provisions of section 43(1) of the income-tax act, the actual cost of the asset would stand reduced by the amount of subsidy.5. in appeal carried by the assessee against the said order, the ..... of actual cost upon receipt of central subsidy of rs. 8,72,270.4. action under section 263 of the income-tax act, 1961, was initiated for the assessment year 1979-80 as the assessment order made by the first income-tax officer, margao, was found to be erroneous in so far as, it was prejudicial to the interests of the ..... machinery for the allowance of depreciation and dismissed the appeal.8. on reference made to the high court under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, the high court took a resume of the relevant case law. the high court relied upon the decision of the supreme court in ..... ranjana desai, j.1. by this reference under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, the income-tax appellate tribunal has referred thefollowing question of law to this court for opinion at the instance of the revenue :'whether, on the facts and in the ..... from the cost of the plant and machinery for the purpose of determining actual cost for allowance of depreciation. the revenue appealed against the said order to the income-tax appellate tribunal. the tribunal held that the subsidies granted on the fixed capital investment of the assessee were not deductible in computing the cost of plant and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 14 1999 (HC)

Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay Vs. M/S. Savailal Maneklal

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-14-1999

Reported in : 2000(2)BomCR426; (2000)2BOMLR861; [1999]239ITR636(Bom); 1999(3)MhLj782

..... as partner of the firm representing his h.u.f., is not payment made to partner of the firm and consequently cannot be disallowed under section 40(b) of the income-tax act, 1961?'2. the facts, which are material for the purpose of this reference are as under :in the assessee firm, there are two partners namely, h.u.fs. of narottamdas ..... amount was credited in the individual account of shri deepak shah. the assessee claimed before the income-tax officer that provisions of section 40(b) of the income-tax act, 1961 ('act') are not applicable and, therefore, the claim regarding payment of interest and commission should be allowed.3. the income-tax officer did not accept the claim of the assessee. he observed that the interest or commission ..... orderranjana desai, j.1. by this reference under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, the income-tax appellate tribunal has referred the following question of law to this court for opinion at the instance of the revenue :'whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the ..... paid to a partner, in any capacity is to be disallowed under section 40(b) to the act. the prohibition contained in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 14 1999 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Gopaldas H. Hansrajani

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-14-1999

Reported in : [1999]239ITR523(Bom)

..... parle for rs. 7.15 lakhs. the controversy arose whether the assessees are entitled to claim exemption in respect of the capital gains under section 54 of the income-tax act, 1961 ('the act'). the income-tax officer rejected the claim of the assessee on the ground that the flat in question was not occupied by the assessees as owners for a period of two years ..... opinion at the instance of the revenue :'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the asses-sees are entitled to exemption under section 54 of the income-tax act for the assessment year 1982-83 ?'2. the material facts giving rise to this reference are as follows :the assessees, who are husband and wife, used to reside in flat ..... , which according to him, was a condition precedent for exemption under section 54 of the act. the assessees appealed to the commissioner of income-tax (appeals). the appeal of the assessees was rejected by the commissioner (appeals). however, in further appeal to the income-tax appellate tribunal ('the tribunal'), the tribunal accepted the contention of the assessees. hence, this reference at the ..... . 70,000 on the ground that he had been occupying the same for a period of two years prior to its sale. the income-tax officer did not accept the claim of the assessee for exemption. the order of the income-tax officer was upheld by the tribunal. on a reference of the assessee, this court held that it was obvious that the property .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 14 1999 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jam Manufacturing Co. Ltd.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-14-1999

Reported in : [1999]240ITR167(Bom)

ranjana desai, j. 1. by this reference under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, the income-tax appellate tribunal has referred the following question of law to this court for opinion at the instance of the revenue ;'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the ..... case, payment of damages of rs. 6,06,544 under section 14b of the employees' provident funds and family pension fund act, 1952, was allowable deduction if the assessee had acted in ..... of deduction of the payment of damages amounting to rs. 6,06,544 by the assessee under section 14b of the employees' provident funds and family pension fund act, 1952, in computing the income of the assessee.3. we have heard mr. r. v. desai, learned counsel for the revenue, who fairly stated before us that the controversy in the above question ..... decisions of the supreme court in prakash cotton mills p. ltd. v. cit : [1993]201itr684(sc) and swedeshi cotton mills co. ltd. v. cit : [1998]233itr199(sc) , wherein it has been held that the amount of damages for delayed payment of contributions under section 14b of the employees' provident funds act, 1952, comprises both the element of penal levy as well as compensatory .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 16 1999 (TRI)

Savitri and Co. Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-16-1999

Reported in : (2000)74ITD225(Mum.)

..... the apex court in the case of podar cement (p.) ltd. (supra) is only in the context of deciding who is the owner for the purpose section 22 of the income-tax act, i.e., whether it is the allottee of a flat in a co-operative society or the co-operative society itself in whose name the property stands. the apex court ..... hands of the co-owners. the learned counsel for the assessee has also argued that a partnership firm is not a separate legal entity, though it is assessed under the income-tax act separately, and the business of the firm is the business of the partners and as such no particular formalities need be observed when an asset of the firm is taken ..... the requirements of the law such as the transfer of property act, the registration act, etc., in the context of section 22 of the income-tax act, 1961, having regard to the ground realities and further having regard to the object of the income-tax act, namely, to tax the income, "owner" is a person who is entitled to receive income from a property in his own right. the requirement of ..... pleaded that from 1992 onwards, there has been a change in section 27 of the income-tax act by virtue of which it is the beneficial owner of the house property that has to be assessed in respect of the income from house property under section 22 of the income-tax act and not the legal owner. it is also claimed that the amendment introduced by the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 20 1999 (HC)

Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay Vs. Smt. Prabhavati D. Mehta

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-20-1999

Reported in : 2000(3)BomCR133; [1999]240ITR447(Bom); 1999(3)MhLj527

..... orderdr. b.p. saraf, j.1. by this reference under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, the income-tax appellate tribunal has referred the following question of law to this court for opinion at the instance of the revenue :'whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the ..... for the payment of the same had been issued by the municipal corporation and received by the assessee in the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration. the income-tax officer did not allow the deduction on the ground that the demand did not related the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration. aggrieved by the order of ..... the income-tax officer, the assessee appealed to the appellate assistant commissioner of income-tax. before the appellate assistant commissioner, it was contended by the assessee that though the municipal taxes related to earlier years, the liability on account thereof accrued in the relevant previous year on receipt ..... commissioner was rejected by the income-tax appellate tribunal ('tribunal'). hence this reference at the instance of the revenue. 3. we have heard the learned counsel for the revenue mr. r.v. desai. there is no dispute about the fact that in determining the annual value of any property for the purposes of section 22 of the act, municipal taxes levied in respect of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 20 1999 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. J.N. Vas

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-20-1999

Reported in : [1999]240ITR101(Bom)

..... company to the assessee nor was it a salary paid or allowed to the assessee in the year under consideration and, therefore, cannot be taxed under section 15 of the income-tax act. it is against this background that the present question of law is referred to this court for its opinion.9. we have heard at length ..... annuity policy on the life of the assessee cannot be regarded as a perquisite within the meaning of section 17(2) of the income-tax act, 1961, and consequently cannot be included in the assessee's income under the'head 'salaries' ?'2. the facts which are relevant for the purposes of this reference may be summed up as follows ..... ranjana desai, j. 1. by this reference under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, the income-tax appellate tribunal has referred the following question of law to this court for opinion at the instance of the revenue ;'whether, on the ..... allowed. however, it was partly allowed on some other count with which we are not concerned in this reference.8. the matter was carried to the income-tax appellate tribunal by the assessee. the tribunal came to a conclusion that in the facts and circumstances of the case the premium of the insurance policy paid ..... mr. r. v. desai, learned counsel for the revenue. none appeared for the assessee. our attention is drawn to the decision of this court in j. h. doshi v. cit .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 20 1999 (HC)

Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay Vs. M/S. Ruia Stud and Agricultural ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-20-1999

Reported in : 2000(2)BomCR428; [1999]240ITR312(Bom); 1999(3)MhLj848

..... of depreciation under section 32 of the income-tax act, 1961 ("act"). the material facts are in a narrow compass. the assessee is engaged in the business of live stock breeding. for that purpose, it purchases and ..... was right in law in holding that horses used for stock-breeding constitute 'plant' so as to be eligible for depreciation under section 32 of the income-tax act, 1961?"2. this reference pertains to assessment year 1978-79. the controversy is whether the horses used for stock-breeding constitute "plant" for the purpose ..... been used for the purposes of its business constituted "plant" and, therefore, depreciation was allowable on the cost thereof under section 32 of the act. the income-tax officer rejected the claim of the assessee on the ground that the horses were held by the assessee as stock-in-trade. the assessee appealed to ..... 1. by this reference under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, the income-tax appellate tribunal has referred the following question of law to this court for opinion ;"whether on the facts and in the ..... rejected the appeal of the assessee. he held that horses did not constitute "plant". on further appeal, the claim of the assessee was accepted by the income-tax appellate tribunal ("tribunal"). the tribunal accepted the contention of the assessee that horses were not its stock-in-trade but fixed assets. the tribunal also held .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 20 1999 (HC)

Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay Vs. M/S. Borosil Glass Works Ltd.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-20-1999

Reported in : 2000(3)BomCR131; [1999]240ITR288(Bom); 1999(3)MhLj522

..... ordermrs. ranjana desai, j.1. by this reference under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961 read with section 18 of the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964, the income-tax appellate tribunal has referred the following question of law to this court for opinion at the instance of revenue;'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case ..... therefore, those amounts should not be deducted in the computation of the capital of the assessee-company for the purpose of surtax. on appeal, the order of income-tax officer was confirmed by the commissioner of income-tax (appeals) and the tribunal. thereafter, at the instance of the assessee, a reference was made to this court on the question whether tribunal was right in ..... matter before the commissioner of income-tax (appeals). the commissioner of income-tax (appeals)allowed the appeal and directed the income-tax officer to re-compute the capital on the lines of the decision of the bombay high court ..... rule 1 of the second schedule to the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964. for the assessment year 1977-78 similar claim was made in respect of the sum of rs. 9,01,411/- representing provision for doubtful debts and for the sum rs. 60,164/- representing doubtful advances. the income-tax officer disallowed the claim of the assessee. the assessee carried the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 20 1999 (HC)

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Smt. Prabhavati D. Mehta

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-20-1999

Reported in : [2000]106TAXMAN680(Bom)

..... saraf, j.by this reference under section 256 (1) of the income tax act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'), the tribunal has referred the following question of law to this court for opinion at the instance of the revenue:'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the ..... for the payment of the same had been issued by the municipal corporation and received by the assessee in the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration. the income tax officer did not allow the deduction on the ground that the demand did not relate to the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration. aggrieved by the order ..... of the income tax officer, the assessee appealed to the appellate assistant commissioner. before the appellate assistant commissioner, it was contended by the assessee that though the municipal taxes related to earlier years, the liability on account thereof accrued in the relevant previous year on receipt of ..... -3-1976. the assessee filed a return of income for the above assessment year on 9-9-1976, disclosing total income of rs. 38,970. the above total income included net income of rs. 13,669 under the head 'income from house property'. on examination of the return, the income tax officer found that in computing her house property income during the assessment year under consideration, the assessee .....

Tag this Judgment!


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