Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Sorted by: old Year: 1958 Page 1 of about 475 results (0.106 seconds)

Jan 02 1958 (HC)

Raja Jagdish Pratap Pd. Sahai Vs. the State.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jan-02-1958

Reported in : [1958]34ITR426(All)

..... . the questions arose in the course of two applications in revision before the board and the reference has been made under section 24(1) of the u.p. agricultural income-tax act. the circumstances in which the reference has been made can be stated very shortly.the assessee was the taluqdar of the deara estate in the district of sultanpur, and in ..... referred two questions to this court, namely :'(1) whether the price received on the sale of stray fruit bearing trees and grove trees is income ?(2) whether it is an agricultural income assessable under the u.p. agricultural income-tax act ?'the principal contention on behalf of the assessee in this court is that in the circumstances of this case the price received by the ..... case of commissioner of income-tax, bengal v. shaw wallace & co., sir george lowndes delivering the judgment of the privy council said :'income, their lordships think, in this act' - that is the indian income-tax act - 'connotes a periodical monetary return coming in with some sort of regularity, or expected regularity, from definite sources ..... assessee on the sale of the trees and groves was not income at all; and we think that that contention is right. in the well known .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 06 1958 (HC)

L.R. Brothers Vs. the Agricultural Income-tax Board, U.P., Lucknow and ...

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jan-06-1958

Reported in : AIR1958All528; [1960]39ITR687(All)

..... sought to raise were identical.2. the appellant is a firm which carries on business of supplying seeds and plants at saharanpur. the appellant was assessed to agricultural income-tax under the u. p. agricultural income-tax act, 1949. it was not found assessable for the year 1947-48 but was assessed for the years 1948-49, 1949-50, 1950-51, 1951-52 and 1952 ..... is not entitled to do.17. learned counsel for the respondent pointed out in this connection that unlike section 33 of the income-tax act section 22 of the agricultural income-tax act does not contain the word, 'subject to the provisions of this act'. on that basis he argued that the revisional powers of the board of revision could not be subject to the provisions of ..... section 25. it is difficult to accede to this contention.it cannot be said that the powers of the commissioner under section 33 of the income-tax act would not be subject to the other provisions of the act if those words had not been there in the section. the words appear to have been put in there only as a matter of abundant ..... actually amended.8. the main contention pressed in appeal is that the revisional powers of the board of revision under section 22 of the agricultural income-tax act are subject to the provisions of section 25 of the act and after the expiry of the period of limitation mentioned in the latter section it was not open to the board of revision, in the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 14 1958 (HC)

Kuver Bank Ltd. (In Liquidation) Vs. State of West Bengal

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Jan-14-1958

Reported in : AIR1960Cal81,63CWN21

..... order of attachment in favour of the patuakhali bank ltd., was made absolute. thereafter, on the 21st of april 1952, the income-tax department issued a notice under section 46 (5a) of the income-tax act to the chief secretary, government of west-bengal for rs. 3812/8/- due from the state of west bengal to messrs. ..... the said sums on the basis that they have, by virtue of the decrees obtained against the partnership firm, and by virtue of the assessment of income-tax, stepped into the shoes of the judgment-debtor and are therefore, entitled to claim the amounts lying in the government departments in pro tanto satisfaction of ..... p. 409); sheodoyal khemka v. joharmul manmull : air1924cal74 ; broja lal saha v. budh nath : air1928cal148 and to the decision of the supreme court reported in commr. of income-tax, west bengal v. a. w. figgis & co., : [1953]24itr405(sc) . mr. deb referred to a decision of the privy council reported in bhagwanji v. alembic ..... 18-11-1947 and the execution of which the petitioner seeks in this application was a valid decree, then, in that case, the claim of the income-tax department pursuant to the notice given on 21-4-1952 for the sum of rs. 3812/8/- must be postponed to the claim of the petitioner ..... passed in favour of the said tarapada das against k. g. ahmed and co. in suit no. 4284 of 1949 are not payable to the income-tax department or the said tarapada das but they should be made over to the petitioner. this tarapada das has not appeared at the hearing of this .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 14 1958 (HC)

Haji Abdul Shakoor Vs. the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Kanpur a ...

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jan-14-1958

Reported in : AIR1959All440

..... coparceners. the decision to disrupt the family is taken reluctantly and the sole motive is to reduce the rate of tax on the individual members--to evade the income-tax act, in one sense. but the partition is a valid transaction provided it has been acted upon, and the 'motive' of the coparceners is irrelevant. the parties have kept the transaction out of the mischief ..... could give many examples of cases where a citizen can legitimately make arrangements or reduce his obligations under a statute or avoid them altogether. the steep rise in the income-tax and super-tax in recent years has compelled many hindu joint families to resort to partition.this is usually effected by a deed of partition, followed by a division of the assets ..... these earlier statements made by him and left it to the court to discover them. this is not the conduct of a frank and candid petitioner. in rex v. kensington income-tax commr., 1917-1 kb 486, lord cozens-hardy quoted with approval the headnote of another case, dalglish v. jarvie, (1850) 2 mac and c 231, decided by lord langdale and ..... commissioners v. duke of westminster, 1936 ac 1 at p. 19, cord tomlin observed,'every man is entitled, if he can, to order his affairs so that the tax attaching under the appropriate acts is less than it otherwise would be.'it was observed by lord cranwortli, l. c. in edwards v. hall, (1856) 25 lj ch 82 at p. 84 :'i .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 17 1958 (HC)

K.P. Chagganlal Oil Mills Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and anr.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jan-17-1958

Reported in : [1959]36ITR337(AP)

..... . there is a clear distinction, both in the hyderabad income-tax act and the indian income-tax act, between tax and penalty and special provisions have been inserted in these acts relating to the recovery by this procedure. while sections 57 and 58 of the hyderabad income-tax act, corresponding to sections 45 and 46 of the indian income-tax act, deal with the recovery of tax payable of a notice of demand, section 59 ..... point of view.7. it appears to us that on a reference to the high court under section 82(1) and (2) of the hyderabad income-tax act corresponding to section 66(1) and (2) of the indian income-tax act the high court is bound to decide the question of law referred to it under sub-section (5) after which the appellate tribunal is enjoined ..... . the following questions were referred by the tribunal to the high court :'(1) whether the notice under section 46(1) of the hyderabad income-tax act was validly issued ?(2) whether the notice under section 46(1) of the hyderabad income-tax act was validly served upon the assessee ?(3) if the answer to the question (1) and (2) is in the negative, whether the assessee ..... trust corporation ltd. where their lordships of the privy council held :'the high court has no jurisdiction under section 45(g) of the specific relief act to direct the commissioner under the income-tax act to refund a tax paid.the court cannot claim even in appearance to command the crown, and where and obligation is cast upon the principal the court cannot enforce it .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 17 1958 (HC)

K.P. Chagganlal Oil Mills, Secunderabad Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jan-17-1958

Reported in : AIR1959AP263

..... is a clear distinction, both in the hyderabad income-tax act and the indian income-tax act, between tax and penalty and special provisions have been inserted in these acts relating to the recovery by this procedure. while sections 57 and 58 of the hyderabad income-tax act, corresponding to sections 45 and 46 of the indian income-tax act, deal with the recovery of tax payable on a notice of demand, section 59 corresponding ..... point of view.8. it appears to us that on a reference to the high court under section 82 (1) and (2) of the hyderabad income-tax act corresponding to section 66 (1) and (2) of the indian income-tax act the high court is bound to decide the question of law referred to it under sub-section (5) after which the appellate tribunal is enjoined ..... . the following questions were referred by the tribunal to the high court:(1) whether the notice under section 46(1) of the hyderabad income-tax act was validly issued?(2) whether the notice under section 46(1) of the hyderabad income tax act was validly served upon the assessee ?(3) if the answer to the questions (1) and (2) is in the negative, whether the assessee ..... 1936 pc 269) where their lordships of the privy council held:'the high court has no jurisdiction under section 45(g) of the specific relief act to direct the commissioner under the income tax act to refund a tax paid. the court cannot claim even in appearance to command the crown, and where an obligation is cast upon the principal the court cannot enforce it .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 17 1958 (HC)

M.C.T.M. Corporation, by Director M.C.T. Muthia Chettiar Vs. Income-ta ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-17-1958

Reported in : (1958)1MLJ344

..... thereon, with the consequence that it was not chargeable with interest under section 18-a (8) of the act. this was rested primarily on the ground that the petitioner had been assessed to tax under the provisions of the indian income-tax act before the assessment year 1951-52, and that this took it out of the operation of section 18-a (3); (2) and ..... ascertained by order dated 31st march, 1954, the addition being stated to be interest chargeable under section 18-a (8) of the income-tax act, which by mistake had been omitted to be included. the petitioner objected to the proposed rectification on several grounds to the details of which, we shall refer presently. but these ..... that if the advance tax was payable by it, still the failure to include it in the final assessment order ..... 31st march, 1954. the validity of this assessment or demand is not now in controversy. subsequently by a communication dated 13th march, 1956, the income-tax officer issued notice to the petitioner under section 35 of the act to show cause why his assessment should not be rectified by the addition of a further sum of rs. 15,104-2-0 to the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 17 1958 (HC)

M. C. T. M. Corporation Private Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer, Pudukotta ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-17-1958

Reported in : [1958]33ITR573(Mad)

..... thereon, with the consequence that it was not chargeable with interest under section 18a(8) of the act. this was rested primarily on the ground that the petitioner had been assessed to tax under the provisions of the indian income-tax act before the assessment year 1951-52, and that this took it out of the operation of section 18a(3); (2) and that if ..... tax as ascertained by order dated march 31, 1954, the addition being stated to be interest chargeable under section 18a(8) of the income-tax act, which by mistake had been omitted to be included. the petitioner objected to the proposed rectification on several grounds ..... the advance tax was payable by it, still the failure to include it in the final assessment order dated ..... march 31, 1954. the validity of this assessment or demand is not now in controversy. subsequently by a communication dated march 13, 1956, the income-tax officer issued notice to the petitioner under section 35 of the act to show cause why this assessment should not be rectified by the addition of a further sum of rs. 15,104-2-0 to the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 21 1958 (HC)

Esthuri Aswathaiah Vs. Income-tax Officer, Kolar Circle

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Jan-21-1958

Reported in : [1959]37ITR518(KAR); [1959]37ITR518(Karn)

..... time, no doubt, no appeal was in fact filed against the order of assessment and, therefore, there was no question of the income-tax officer exercising his discretion under section 45 of the income-tax act. the said application was refused by the income-tax officer. it appears, however, that an appeal the inspecting assistant commissioner was requested to grant time till the disposal of the appeal ..... the relevant portions of sections 45 and 46 of the income-tax act. section 45 inter alia provides as follows : 'any amount specified as payable in a notice of demand under sub-section (3) of section 23-a or under section 29 ..... he did exercise his discretion, the same was exercised arbitrarily. on these grounds the learned advocate contended before us that no penalty could be imposed under section 46 of the income-tax act and the order imposing such penalty should be quashed. 3. before i deal with these contentions of the learned advocate for the petitioner, it would be necessary to set out ..... petition, which he had made to the commissioner of income-tax, to the income-tax officer. before any order was made by the commissioner of income-tax on the said application the income-tax officer on 11th june, 1956, levied the penalty under section 46 of the income-tax act upon the assessee. from these facts, it is clear that the income-tax office must have known and it is not disputed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 21 1958 (HC)

Esthuri Aswathaiah Vs. the Income-tax Officer, Kolar Circle, Kolar

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Jan-21-1958

Reported in : AIR1959Kant44; AIR1959Mys44

..... lime, no doubt, no appeal was in fact filed against the order of assessment and, therefore, there was no question of the income-tax officer exercising his discretion under section 45 of the income-tax act.the said application was refused by the income-tax officer. it appears, however, that an appeal was in fact filed on 5-4-1956 and after filing the said appeal the ..... the relevant portions, of sections 45 and 46 of the income-tax act. section 45, inter alia provides as follows :... any amount specified as payable in a notice of demand under sub-section (3) of section 23a or under section 29 or an ..... he did exercise his discretion, the same was exercised arbitrarily. on these grounds the learned advocate contended before us that no penalty could be imposed under section 46 of the income-tax act and the order imposing such penalty should be quashed.3. before i deal with these contentions of the learned advocate for the petitioner it would be necessary to set out ..... petition, which he had made to the commissioner of income-tax, to the income-tax officer. before any order was made by the commissioner of income-tax on the said application the income-tax officer on 11-6-1956 levied the penalty under section 46 of the income-tax act upon the assessee. from these facts, it is clear that the income-tax officer must have known and it is not disputed before .....

Tag this Judgment!


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