Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Year: 1955 Page 1 of about 307 results (0.120 seconds)

Apr 21 1955 (HC)

Bai Bhuriben Lallubhai Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay North, K ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Apr-21-1955

Reported in : (1955)57BOMLR880; [1956]29ITR543(Bom)

..... interest. the assessee claimed to deduct these two sums from the interest earned by her from her fixed deposit and her claim was based on section 12(2) of the income-tax act. the tribunal has negatived her claim and the assessee has come on this reference.3. before we examine the facts, it is necessary first to turn to the section itself ..... loan or the payment of interest on that loan.7. the next authority on which reliance is place is a well known decision of this court reported in commissioner of income-tax, bombay presidency v. tata sons ltd. sir john beaumont, c.j., at page 203 deals with the question of the assessees having paid part of the commission to which they ..... that we have taken on the question raised in this reference. mr. mehta has relied on a decision of the supreme court reported in eastern investments ltd. v. commissioner of income-tax, west bengal, and what he relies on are certain observations in the judgment of mr. justice bose. the learned judge enunciates certain relevant principles for determining whether a particular expenditure ..... . the deduction which is permissible under sub-section (2) of section 12 is an expenditure incurred solely for the purpose of making or earning the income which has been subjected to tax. therefore in order to decide whether a deduction is permissible under sub-section (2), we have to examine the nature of the expenditure. the purpose for which .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 23 1955 (HC)

Joseph Kay, K.B.E. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City, Bombay

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-23-1955

Reported in : [1956]29ITR774(Bom)

..... annuitant. the annuity that he receives stands on the same footing as the dividend received by a shareholder, and we are not permitting the income-tax authorities to tax sir joseph kay with the help of some legal fiction introduced into our income-tax act for the purpose of dealing with shareholders who have received dividends from companies here. we are upholding the action of the ..... or a proportionate refund. it is impossible to contend that sir joseph kay should obtain a refund with regard to payment of tax in respect of something which is not his income. the answer given by mr. palkhivala is that the income tax act of 1918, schedule v, paragraph 17, statutorily makes the deduction which has been made by the payer of the annuity part ..... income-tax act authorities in taxing sir joseph kay on the simple finding that in substance and in fact the income of sir joseph kay is $ 500, that it accrued to him outside the taxable territories and that as he is a resident he is ..... is the profit made during the working of the company, and the shareholder pays tax on his income which is the dividend. but in order that relief should be given to the shareholder and in order that the same income should not be taxed twice, a machinery is introduced into the income-tax act by section 16(2) and section 18(5) by which the shareholder is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 23 1955 (HC)

ismailia GraIn Merchants Association Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-t ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Feb-23-1955

Reported in : AIR1958Bom32; (1957)59BOMLR521

..... only by a section of the members and not by all the members, the surplus receipt in the hands of the association-constituted income within the meaning of the income-tax act.8. it is then urged by mr. pandit that the fund in the hands of the association was not at its free disposal ..... , and the assessee has never contended that the income which it received was exempt on the ground that it was spent for charitable purposes. in our opinion, therefore the tribunal ..... an intermediary the association got paid for its services, then clearly what it received and what it was paid constituted income within the meaning of the income-tax act. undoubtedly, the association did do some work in possibly getting the ration cards and collecting the money from those members who ..... income has attached to it certain legal obligation. trustees who receive income with an obligation to spend it according to the terms of the trust are still liable to pay tax. a trustee is only exempt when the money he has to spend is to be spoilt for charitable purposes within the meaning of the income-tax act ..... only question is the application of the principle to the facts of each case.3. this principle was clearly enunciated by the supreme court in commr. of income-tax v. royal western india turf club ltd. : [1953]24itr551(sc) , to which mr. pandit has referred. in that case they referred with approval .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 27 1955 (HC)

The North Deccan Transport Ltd. Nasik Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-27-1955

Reported in : [1956]29ITR937(Bom)

..... of appeal is provided under orders made under section 28. on principle also there seems to be no reason why when in every case under the income-tax act where a penalty is imposed, a right of appeal is conferred up on the assessee, in this particular case that important right should not be conferred ..... , the tribunal was in error in holding that the appeal was not competent. therefore we must answer the question as follows : 'the order of the income-tax officer imposing the penalty was passed under section 28(1)(c) read with section 18a(9) and an appeal against that order lay to the appellate assistant ..... deliberately used this draftsmanship in order to avoid the necessity of amending section 30. if the power of imposing the penalty had been conferred up on the income-tax officer by section 18a(9) itself, then unless section 30 had been amended and an appeal against that order had been provided, no appeal would lie ..... far as may be, shall apply accordingly. the very significant feature of this section is that it does not itself confer any power up on the income-tax officer to levy a penalty. the power to levy a penalty only arises under the provision of section 28 and it is by a legal fiction ..... commissioner and thereafter to the tribunal.'4. the commissioner to pay the costs. 5. income-tax reference no. 27 of 1955.chagla, c.j.6. for the reasons given in the last reference, the north deccan transport ltd., nasik v. commissioner of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 22 1955 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City Vs. Homi Mehta's Executors

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-22-1955

Reported in : [1955]28ITR928(Bom)

..... the transfer of his stock-in-trade of shares to homi mehta & sons.' the case was then referred to the president under section 5a (7) of the indian income-tax act. the president referred the case to mr. aggarwal. the president held that profit accrued to the assessee on the transfer of his stock-in-trade to homi mehta ..... parties and refer it to the high court of judicature at bombay under section 66(1) of the indian income-tax act. 2. the late sir homi mehta, hereinafter referred to at times, as the assessee, was assessed by the income-tax officer for the year 1942-43, the year of account being the calendar year 1941 on a total ..... 97,000 which was their market value. according to the assessee, the excess of the transfer price over the cost price was rs. 10,51,983, but the income-tax officer taxed rs. 11,00,000 inasmuch as in his opinion, the cost price of these shares, which according to the assessee was rs. 30,45,017 was not ..... deduction of e. p. t was rs. 16,53,939 which included a sum of rs. 11,00,000 taken by the income-tax officer as surplus realised by the assessee on the transfer of certain shares to a private limited company called homi mehta & sons ltd. the shares were ..... annexure 'b' and forms part of the case. 8. the question of law that, therefore, arises out of the facts stated above is :- 'whether any income liable to tax accrued to the assessee on the transfer of the shares of the remaining 20 joint stock companies to homi mehta & sons ltd'. the advocate-general with g. n .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 24 1955 (HC)

Bipinchandra Maganlal and Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bom ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Feb-24-1955

Reported in : AIR1955Bom402; (1955)57BOMLR471; ILR1955Bom797; [1955]28ITR1(Bom)

..... be considered to be actual profits or not.4. when we turn to the income-tax act, what seems to conclude the matter is the definition of 'income' in section 2(6c). this is an inclusive definition & it includes in the definition of 'income' any sum deemed to be profits under the second proviso to clause (vii) ..... have been allowed in the year of account. in our opinion it is not open to the advocate general to take up that contention, because the income-tax authorities have allowed depreciation with regard to this asset in the year of account, nor have they contended that by reason of the fact that the ..... of account its past accumulated profits or its past reserves. that is not the scheme of section 23a and that is not the factor that the income-tax officer has got to consider in determining the reasonableness or the unreasonableness of the dividend declared by the company.7. it is then pointed out that ..... in that year. the excess may be set off against the reserves accumulated by the assessee in the past.but section 23a does not require the income-tax officer to consider the reserves built up by the company in the past. what it requires him to consider is what is the extent of the ..... company in which (sic) public is not substantially interested within the (sic)eaning of section 23a of the act, and in the assessment (sic)ar it showed as its net profit rs. 33,245. the income-tax authorities assessed the profit at rs. (sic)761, and apart from other minor adjustments, (sic)ibstantially the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 23 1955 (HC)

Joseph Kay Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City, Bombay

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-23-1955

Reported in : AIR1956Bom577; (1956)58BOMLR126; ILR1956Bom165

..... annuitant the annuity that he receives stands on the same footing as the dividend received by a shareholder, and we are not permitting the income-tax authorities to tax sir joseph kay with the help of some legal fiction introduced into our income-tax act for the purpose or dealing with shareholders who have received dividends from companies here. we are upholding the action of the ..... or a proportionate refund. it is impossible to contend that sir joseph kay should obtain a refund with regard to payment of tax in respect of something which is not his income. the answer given by mr. palkhivala is that the income-tax act of 1918, schedule v, para 17 statutorily makes the deduction which has been made by the payer of the annuity part ..... the profit made during the working of the company, and the share-holder pays tax on his income which is the dividend. but in order that relief should be given to the shareholder and in order that the same income should not be taxed twice, a machinery is introduced into the income-tax act by section 16(2) and s, 18(5) by which the share-holder ..... income-tax authorities in taxing sir joseph kay on the simple finding that in substance and in fact the income of sir joseph kay is 500/-, that it accrued to him .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 11 1955 (HC)

Goverdhan Lal Jagdish Kumar Vs. Commr. of Income-tax, U.P., Lucknow an ...

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Nov-11-1955

Reported in : AIR1956All130; [1956]29ITR591(All)

..... and this court, in the exercise of its power under article 226 of the constitution, should set aside the discretion exercised by the income-tax officer.section 45, income-tax act provides that-'any amount specified as payable in a notice of demand under sub-section 3 of section 23a or under section 29 or ..... to ask this court for a writof mandamus.4. two points have been urged by the petitioner: firstly, it is contended that under section 45, income-tax act, as the petitioner had filed appeals against the orders of assessment, he could not be regarded as being in default and no penalty could thereafter ..... applicant was ordered, by an order dated 27-5-1955, to deposit the whole amount of tax, within three days. thereafter the penalty was to be imposed upon the applicant under section 46(1), income-tax act at 10 per cent. against the aforesaid order the present petition was filed.3. notices were ..... up the amount. out of the huge amount of rs. 75,477/-, the petitioner had paid very little towards the tax. in those circumstances it cannot be said that the income-tax authorities acted arbitrarily in rejecting the application of the petitioner.further, as has been pointed out by the opposite parties in the counter ..... 1955, in reply to the aforesaid notice, an application was filed by the applicant which was pressed by his counsel before the income-tax officer on 27-5-1955. the income-tax department was also informed that there was a sum of rs. 7,500/-, which was alleged to have been due to the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 18 1955 (HC)

G. Venkataswami Naidu and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-18-1955

Reported in : AIR1955Mad714; [1955]28ITR405(Mad)

..... the assessment year 1948-49. the tribu-nal ultimately confirmed that assessment. on the application of the assessee wider section 66(1), income-tax act, the tribunal referred to this court the following question :'whether there was material for the assess-ment of the sum of rs. 43,887 being the differ-ence between the ..... the mills and not to the assessee itself.13. in : [1951]20itr176(cal) , after referring to the test of continuous activity laid down by the privy council in -- 'commissioner of income-tax bengal v. shaw wallace & co , the learned chief justice observed :'the only way in which the exposition given by the judicial committee can perhaps be adjusted to a casual receipt ..... and sale, can he viewed only as an adventure in the nature of trade. that was what satyanarayana rao j. pointed out in -- 'shri gajalakshmi ginning factory v. commissioner of income-tax : [1952]22itr502(mad) (a),'it is however not possible from an examination of these decisions to evolve a satisfactory definition or draw the line of demarcation between a capital receipt ..... cited before us by the learned counsel for the assessee we shall refer only to the two, -- 'commissioners of inland revenue v. rein-hold', (1953) 34 tax cas 389 and -- 'radha debi v. commissioner of income-tax, calcutta : [1951]20itr176(cal) . it was not such an unqualified proposition of law, as the learned counsel for the assessee urged for our acceptance, that was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 05 1955 (HC)

S.C. Prashar Vs. Vasantsen Dwarkadas

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Oct-05-1955

Reported in : [1956]29ITR857(Bom)

..... if effect could be given to that expression of opinion by the income-tax authorities the income-tax authorities should do so by including this income in the assessment of purshottam laxmidas. armed with this opinion of the income-tax tribunal, the income-tax officer issued a notice under section 34 of the income-tax act on april 30, 1954, and by this notice the firm of ..... kolah, for the respondents. chagla, c.j.57. this appeal arises out of a petition filed challenging a notice issued by the income-tax officer under section 34 of the income-tax act and praying for a writ restraining the income-tax officer from proceeding further pursuant to that notice. 58. it appears that the firm of purshottam laxmidas, who are petitioners no. 2 ..... lays down this important proposition that an illegal threat to assess can be challenged otherwise than by the machinery provided by the income-tax act. therefore, to the extent that the advocate-general argued that when the income-tax act provides a particular machinery the aggrieved party can challenge a threat to assessment only by means of that machinery. that contention has ..... 1946. dwarkadas vussonji and parmanand odhavji (respondent no. 3) carried on business in partnership in the name of purshottum laxmidas, which was a firm registered under the indian income-tax act. another firm in the name of vasantsen dwarkadas was started by dwarkadas. the partners in that firm were vasantsen dwarkadas (petitioner no. 1), narandas shivji and nandlal odhavji .....

Tag this Judgment!


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