Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Year: 1958 Page 1 of about 475 results (0.093 seconds)

Aug 28 1958 (HC)

The Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ramchandra Lachminarayan

Court : Guwahati

Decided on : Aug-28-1958

..... , i have already shown that objections like these have not found favour in pronouncing upon the validity of the partnership instrument for purposes of registration under section 26a of the income-tax act. in the circumstances, therefore, my answer to the question under reference is, as held by the tribunal, in favour of the assessee. 13. as the department has failed, the ..... respect of cloth business continued to belong to the hindu family or it should be treated as a valid partnership document for purposes of registration under section 26a of the income-tax act, the document contained a resolution to keep the houses and house-sites joint, and that as there was no possibility to divide the cloth business consisting of cloth, furniture, ..... affirmative, then it follows as a matter of course that the assessee would be entitled to registration on the strength of the partnership instrument under section 26-a of the income-tax act. if the partnership is genuine, the partners as mentioned in the deed will be entitled to the benefit of the instrument during the assessment year under consideration. on the ..... of the hindu undivided family and a valid partnership was brought into existence thereafter and in allowing registration to the respondent on that basis under section 26a of the indian income-tax act?' 2. the relevant facts stated may be briefly recapitulated. a hindu undivided family consisting, of lachminarain singhania, the father, and four sons governed by the mitakshara school of hindu .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 14 1958 (HC)

Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City, ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-14-1958

Reported in : AIR1959Bom304; (1958)60BOMLR847; ILR1958Bom1167

..... 'source' what we meant was the specific source from which a particular income sprung or arose. 5. the supreme court had to consider this judgment very recently and, ..... assess income from the other two branches at jalpaiguri and calcutta, because the i. t. o. had brought to assessment the business income of the assessee. therefore, it is clear that what we meant by 'source' was not source in the sense of head of income as used in the income-tax act. by ..... passage from our judgment: 'it is clear that the appellate assistant commissioner has been constituted a revising authority against the decisions of the income-tax officer; a revising authority not in the narrow sense of revising what is the subject-matter of the appeal, not in the sense ..... held by us to be irrelevant. this is perfectly clear, because in our judgment we considered the case of jagarnath therani v. commissioner of income-tax, (1925) 2 itc 4: air 1925 pat 408, and with respect, agreed with that judgment. in that case the assessee had three ..... with respect, it has approved of our judgment in narrondas manordass' case, : air1958bom35 and it has itself deduced the principle which emerges from this judgment. in commissioner of income-tax .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 23 1958 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City I Vs. F.L. Smidth and Co. (Bom ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-23-1958

Reported in : [1959]35ITR183(Bom)

..... deciding whether section 23a is applicable to this case and whether the income-tax officer has rightly exercised his power, this sum of rs. 1,63,377 should be ..... tribunal was concerned. now, in arriving at the assessable income of the assessee, the income-tax officer took into consideration a sum of rs. 1,63,377, which were profits, according to the department, earned by the assessee under section 42 (2) of the income-tax act and the contention of the assessee is that in ..... the trouble arises. now, the view taken by the department is that even under the second part of section 23a (1), the profits which the income-tax officer has to consider are profits which would include the sum of rs. 1,63,377. one has only to state the proposition to realise ..... section 23a. 2. now, let us first look at the scheme of section 23a. the first condition for the exercise of the power of the income-tax officer is the distribution of dividend by the company of less than the statutory percentage, which, at the relevant time, was 60 per cent. and ..... the substance of the matter is this that for the purpose of the second part of section 23a, when the income-tax officer is considering the smallness of the profits, when the income-tax officer is considering the profits and is considering whether it would be reasonable or unreasonable to declare a larger dividend, the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 19 1958 (HC)

Associated Banking Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Incom ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-19-1958

Reported in : AIR1959Bom272; (1958)60BOMLR987; ILR1959Bom262

..... two sums of rs. 10,15,000/- and rs. 98892/- as a business loss or as a deduction under section 10(2)(xv) of the indian income-tax act?'11. with regard to question no. 1 also some amendment is necessary because the amount of rs. 48,50,689/- mentioned in question no. 1 ..... says at p.284 (of itr): (at p.602 of air) is:'i am entirely unable to hold that section 10(2)(xi) of the income-tax act imperatively requires that in order that any amount may be allowed as irrecoverable in any particular year, such amount or a larger amount must be 'actually written ..... that the other view was not tenable and the position which was accepted was incontrovertible.4. now, turning to these decisions -- in commr. of income tax and excess profits tax central, bombay v. jwalaprasad tiwari : air1954bom277 the department took up the extreme attitude that because the debts which were claimed as bad debts were ..... of rupees. now, it seems to us that such construction is illogical. if the intention of the legislature was to restrict the power of the income-tax officer not to allow bad debts exceeding the amount written off by the assessed himself in his books of account, logically the restriction must be applied ..... bad debts must arise in respect of loans made by the assessee. only such debts are allowed as bad debts as the income-tax officer may estimate to be irrecoverable. therefore the income-tax officer must be satisfied that in the year of account in which bad debts are claimed, the debts could not be recovered. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 17 1958 (HC)

Purshotamdas Thakurdas Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City I

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-17-1958

Reported in : AIR1959Bom303; (1958)60BOMLR980; ILR1958Bom1172; [1958]34ITR204(Bom)

..... . joshi says that the legislature wanted to tax this income whether in fact the income was received by the assessee or not; and, therefore, ..... that date, and therefore, it must be included in the total income of the assessee for the assessment year 1953-54. we agree with mr. joshi that there are various provisions in the income-tax act under which an assessee has to pay tax on an income which is purely notional and which he has never received, and mr ..... therefore, answer the first question submitted to us in the negative. 8. questions 2 and 3 must be answered in the light of the decision in commr. of income-tax, bombay city ii v.shanti k. maheshwari, : air1958bom478 . 9. question no. 2 in the affirmative. 10. question no. 3 in the affirmative in the light ..... if in law, the dividend has been paid, then it must be considered to be the income of the year in which it is paid. 4.the tribunal relied on a judgment of this court reported in commissioner of income-tax, bombay city v. laxmidas mulraj khatau 1948 16 itr 248 : (air 1948 bom 404), ..... has been made. as soon as a declaration of a dividend is made, the assessee must be deemed to have been paid the dividend income and he must pay tax on that income.5. now, turning to the judgment in khatau mills's case, (1948) 16 itr 248: (air 1948 bom 404), that was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 19 1958 (HC)

Associated Banking Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Incom ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-19-1958

Reported in : [1958]34ITR557(Bom)

..... claim two sums of rs. 10,15,000 and rs. 98,892 as a business loss as a deduction under section 10(2)(xv) of the indian income-tax act ?' 16. with regard to question no. 1 also some amendment is necessary because the amount of rs. 48,50,689, mentioned in question no. 1 ..... 2)(xi). what the learned chief justice says at page 284 is : 'i am entirely unable to hold that section 10(2)(xi) of the income-tax act imperatively requires that in order that any amount may be allowed as irrecoverable in any particular year such amount or a larger amount, must be 'actually written ..... that the other view was not tenable and the position which was accepted was incontrovertiable. 5. now, turning to these decisions, in commissioner of income-tax and excess profits tax v. jwala prasad tiwari. the department took up the extreme attitude that because the debts which were claimed as bad debts were not be ..... rupees. now, it seems to us that such a construction is illogical. if the intention of the legislature was to restrict the power of the income-tax officer not to allow bad debts exceeding the amount written off by the assessee himself in his books of account, logically the restriction must be applied ..... an assessee carrying on a banking or money-lending business, such sum in respect of loans made in the ordinary cause of such business as the income-tax officer may estimate to be irrecoverable but not exceeding the amount actually written off as irrecoverable in the books of the assessee.' 3. therefore, in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 01 1958 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City I Vs. Shoorji Vallabhdas and C ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Oct-01-1958

Reported in : [1959]36ITR25(Bom)

..... is in the affirmative, whether they represent an item of expenditure permissible under the provisions of section 10(2)(xv) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, in computing the assessee's income of that 'previous year' from its managing agency business ?' 13. although we have dwelt on the facts at some length, the ..... is placed on the effect of the entries against the assessee firm, we may refer to what their lordships of the privy council said in an income-tax case though in a somewhat different context. what their lordships in effect opined was that the revenue is not entitled to take a mere book entry ..... strenuously argued before us by mr. g. n. joshi, learned counsel for the revenue, firstly that what the assessee did was in the eye of income-tax law nothing else than a voluntary gift by the assessee firm to the shipping companies of which they were the managing agents. it is also argued ..... later in our judgment. the judicial member accepted both the contentions of the assessee. in this view, the decision in the case of commissioner of income-tax v. chamanlal mangaldas wholly applied to the facts of the case. his opinion was that the agreement relating to payment of commission with the two ..... decidendi of that case. of this more hereafter. 2. the assessee, in this reference under section 66(1) made at the instance of the commissioner of income-tax, is the firm of messrs. shoorji vallabhdas & co. the assessment year is 1948-49 and the previous year ended on 31st march, 1948, during .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 24 1958 (SC)

Moti Ram Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-24-1958

Reported in : AIR1959SC63; [1958]34ITR646(SC)

..... s order of july 23, 1951, and the only question is whether the appellant is liable under section 4(1)(b)(iii) of the income-tax act to pay tax on rs. 1,20,000 remitted by him from srinagar in kashmir to british india in the relevant accounting year as his profits accumulated outside ..... was said that the appellants had in fact produced the affidavits and certificate. these are actually included in the printed records. the respondent, the commissioner of income-tax, punjab, contended that the tribunal had never asked for affidavits or certificate. we are included to think that the respondents is right, for we do ..... that the present contention was raised by the appellant for the first time when the case came back to the tribunal on the report of the income-tax officer. indeed it is quite clear to us that if this contention had been raised earlier, the remand to that officer would have been ..... funds of the current year. in view of the this admission, the only materials available on which the further enquiry could be made by the income-tax officer were those which had been produced at the time of the first assessments and that officer having considered these materials, reported that the appellate ..... in the purchase of goods included preceding year's profits available for remittance to british india. 5. when the matter thus came back to the income-tax officer for the enquiry, it was admitted by the appellant that the profits in srinagar were mixed up with the working funds there and it .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 25 1958 (HC)

H.A. Shah and Co., Bombay Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-25-1958

Reported in : AIR1959Bom93; (1958)60BOMLR1046; ILR1958Bom1213

..... a.c. must be exercised within a specific period, then the legislature would have so provided. but we look in vain for any provision in the income-tax act which lays down any period of limitation for the exercise of the appellate powers of the a.a.c. in our opinion, in exercising his discretion ..... second question is whether the addition of the sum of rs. 1,50,000/- by the appellate assistant commissioner was barred by section 34(3) of the income-tax act? now, the contention urged by mr. palkhiwalla is that section 34(3) lays down a period of limitation for making an order of assessment and that ..... the a.a.c. to exercise that power at any time.5. mr. palkhiwalla has referred to a judgment of the lahore high court, commr. of income-tax v. shah nawaz khan, reported in (b). that was a case which dealt with entirely different facts, and the principle which can be deduced from that ..... . would be debarred, according to mr. palkhiwalla, from making any order to the prejudice of the assessee which might result in the assessment made by the income-tax officer being increased. this is not a case of enhancement, and even though it is not a case of enhancement, mr. palkhiwalla argues that merely because ..... in the books of the assessee. the assessee appealed to the appellate assistant commissioner. the a.a.c. held in favour of the assessee that the income-tax officer was not justified in adding these two sums. but on looking to the accounts, he found that two items of sales had not been accounted for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 13 1958 (HC)

Maharaj Shri Govindlalji Ranchhodlalji Vs. Commr. of Income-tax, Ahmed ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-13-1958

Reported in : AIR1959Bom100; (1958)60BOMLR926; ILR1958Bom1149

..... for 1954-55 was rs. 17,591/-. the contention of the assessee was that these amounts were not subject to tax. the tribunal held that these amounts constituted an income and were liable to tax under section 10 or 12 of the indian income-tax act.2. now, every receipt that a man receives is either a revenue receipt or a capital receipt, and in this ..... receipts come in with a fair regularity. but even if a receipt is a revenue receipt, it may bot be subject to tax if the assessee establishes that the receipt is exempted from tax under one of the provisions of the income-tax act, and mr. thakkar, on behalf of the assessee, has strongly pressed upon us that these particular receipts are personal gifts made ..... our opinion, it is an untenable proposition that the amounts received by the assessee were income which was exempted under the provisions of the indian income-tax act. 7. now, mr. thakkar wanted to argue that even if these receipts constituted 'income', he was entitled to deductions permissible under the income-tax law. no question has been raised on this reference and we cannot go into it ..... practice of religion can become a vocation and more so, when it brings in a steady income. if the assessee does practise a vocation, then the case falls under section 10; but even otherwise the income would fall in any case under section 12 of the income-tax act. 9. we answer the question submitted to us in the affirmative.10. assessee to pay the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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