Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Year: 1958 Page 5 of about 475 results (0.090 seconds)

Oct 01 1958 (HC)

H.N.S. Iyengar Vs. First Additional Income-tax Officer, Mysore City

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Oct-01-1958

Reported in : ILR1958KAR712; [1960]38ITR109(KAR); [1960]38ITR109(Karn)

..... proceed under the said section. the main contention of the petitioner before the authority concerned was that the notice was given beyond the period mentioned in section 34 of the income-tax act. the income-tax officer did not accept that contention. the present petition has been filed as a result thereof. 2. two points were urged before us by mr. krishnamurthi appearing on behalf ..... view which we have taken in this matter. we permitted him to argue the case on this point. 11. the learned government pleader placed before us section 34 of the income-tax act as it now stands after its amendment in 1956 and contended that on a proper construction of the said section, we should hold that the period of eight years mentioned ..... of the learned advocate for the petitioner must fail. 8. the return, therefore, is that this petition succeeds and is allowed. the notice issued under section 34 of the indian income-tax act dated november 27, 1956, is quashed and the proceedings which have taken place pursuant to the said notice are also quashed. the petitioner is entitled to costs of this petition ..... year.' in order to understand, therefore, what is the year which is mentioned in the earlier part of clause (a) we shall have to refer to section 22 of the income-tax act, because the failure in question as mentioned in the said part of clause (a) should be the failure on the part of the assessee 'to make a return of his .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 19 1958 (HC)

S. Narayanappa and Brothers Vs. Income Tax Officer, Urban Circle and a ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Aug-19-1958

Reported in : AIR1960Kant40; AIR1960Mys40

..... . 46(1) of the income-tax act.(7) mr. srinivasan has also contended that income-tax is the tax that is charged on the income tax a person of the previous year and the advance tax being really a tax on the income of the year in which the advance tax is demanded, such advance tax cannot be regarded as income-tax. mr. srinivasan of s. 46(1) of the income-tax act are unconstitutional for the reason ..... (mad) this is what rajamannar c. j. said about it:'it is impossible to accept the contention of mr. vidyasankar that the amount demanded as advance income-tax under s. 18a of the income-tax act is not a tax. a tax in the general understanding of the term..... signifies an exaction for the support of the government' (vide united states v. butler (1935) 80 law ed ..... s. 29, it is, i think abundantly clear that the amount demanded by that notice is a tax. if what is demanded under s. 18a is admittedly a tax, no other tax being payable by an assessee under the provisions of the income-tax act other than income-tax or super tax, the tax so required to be paid in a notice of demand issued under s. 29 of the ..... act is, it is plain, income-tax or super-tax.(22) indeed that that would be the correct view to take is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 15 1958 (HC)

H.N.S. Iyengar Vs. First Additional Income-tax Officer, Mysore City

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Sep-15-1958

Reported in : AIR1960Kant77; AIR1960Mys77

..... proceed under the said section. the main contention of the petitioner before the authority concerned was that the notice was given beyond the period mentioned in section 34 of the income-tax act. the income-tax officer did not accept that contention. the present petition has been filed as a result thereof.(2) two points were urged before us by mr. krishnamurthi appearing on behalf ..... view which we have taken in this matter. we permitted him to argue the case on this point.(10) the learned government pleader placed before us s. 34 of the income tax act as it now stands after its amendment in 1956 and contended that on proper construction of the said section, we should hold that the period of 8 years mentioned therein ..... of the learned advocate for the petitioner must fail.(7) the result, therefore, is that this petition succeeds and is allowed. the notice issued under section 34 of the indian income-tax act dated 27-11-56 is quashed and the proceedings which have taken place pursuant to the said notice are also quashed. the petitioner is entitled to costs of this petition ..... 'that year'. in order to understand, therefore, what is the year which mentioned in the earlier part of clause (a) we shall have to refer to section 22 of the income-tax act, because the failure in question as mentioned in the said part of clause (a) should be 'the failure on the part of the assessee' to make a return of his .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 12 1958 (HC)

Chennuru Venkataramanaiah Chetty and Bros. Vs. Income Tax Officer

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Dec-12-1958

Reported in : [1959]37ITR533(AP)

..... in pursuance of the notice issued to the petitioner in respect of the assessment year 1947-48 under notice issued under section 28 of the indian income-tax act (xi of 1922). the section 28 of the indian income-tax act on march 21, 1952, and the assessment in respect of those years was completed on the same date, i.e., on march 21, 1952. the ..... because of the orders of the appellate assistant commissioner cancelling the order of penalty. while observing so, the learned judge also stated that section 31(3) (b) of the indian income-tax act provided for appeal to the appellate tribunal against such an order and that no action was taken under sub-section (2) of section 33. under those circumstances, it was held ..... had deliberately failed to disclose it and this was on 23rd january, 1941. on the subsequent day, a notice under section 28(3) of the indian income-tax act was served on him to show cause why penalty should not be imposed. the contention that was raised was that the notice under sub-section (3) of section 28 ought ..... question raised in that case was whether the imposition of the penalty without notice being served under section 28(3) of the indian income-tax act was valid, and as notice was not served as required by law, it was held that the imposition of penalty by the commissioner was invalid. the question now under consideration .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 08 1958 (HC)

Murali Krishna Rice Mill Vs. Additional Income Tax Officer

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Feb-08-1958

Reported in : [1959]36ITR239(AP)

..... assessment on the ground of want of jurisdiction.5. the petitioner has relied upon a decision of the calcutta high court in commissioner of income-tax v. bhim chandra ghosh as supporting his construction of section 44 of the income-tax act and has argued that if that decision was followed the assessment cannot stand. for the department has however brought to my notice two ..... , tenali. on a consideration of these decisions, i find that there can be two possible views on the construction of section 44 of the income-tax act. therefore the want of jurisdiction, which according to the learned counsel for the petitioner gives jurisdiction to this court to quash the assessment order itself at this stage, cannot be ..... need be, from the orders of the appellate assistant commissioner, the petitioner has a right of appeal to the income-tax appellate tribunal. he has a further right under section 66(1) of the income-tax act to ask for a reference to the high court. the act thus provides a hierarchy of tribunals where the petitioner can agitate his contentions. mr. ranganathachari, however, has submitted ..... not have treated the petitioner as a defaulter and that he should have stayed the collection of tax till the disposal of the appeals pending before the appellate assistant commissioner of income-tax.3. mr. ranganathachari has contended that the construction of section 44 of the income-tax act by the respondent is wrong and that it is a clear case of absence of jurisdiction apparent .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 15 1958 (HC)

Edara Venkaiah and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-15-1958

Reported in : [1959]35ITR24(AP)

..... jaganmohan reddy, j.1. this writ petition seeks to have the orders of the commissioner of income-tax, hyderabad, passed in revision under section 33a of the income-tax act, quashed and prays for suitable directions that the amounts of rs. 8, 449 for 1947-48 ..... is not necessary for the commissioner to give full and sufficient reasons for rejecting the revision petitions. in the counter filed by the income-tax officer, s. i. b., on behalf of the respondent, it was submitted that the petitions are liable to be dismissed for ..... commissioner in exercise of his revisional powers has not considered the main contention raised by him in his revision petition, viz., that the income-tax officer as well as the appellate assistant commissioner had not treated the turnover of the head office and the branch offices as one unit, ..... with this power, their lordships of the privy council in commissioner of income-tax v. tribune trust held that this power intended to provide administrative machinery by which the higher executive officer may review the acts of his subordinates and take the necessary action upon such review. lord ..... acted judicially and stated that he had considered the contentions of the petitioner, and found no merit in them. even on the merits, it was submitted, that the petitioner had not availed himself of a remedy provided under the law, namely, an appeal to the appellate tribunal and consequently, he cannot invoke the jurisdiction on the ground that the commissioner of income-tax .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 14 1958 (HC)

Vuppala China Sambamurthy and ors. Vs. the Addl. Income-tax Officer, V ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Apr-14-1958

Reported in : AIR1959AP174; [1960]38ITR685(AP)

..... or final one. the answer to this depends upon the interpretation of section 23b of the indian income-tax act. section 23-b recites:'(1) the income-tax officer may at any time after the receipt of a return made under section 22, proceed to make in a summary manner, a provisional assessment of the ..... relevant for the purpose of this enquiry. one is whether the order can be said to have teen made under section 23-b of the indian income-tax act (hereinafter called the act) and whether section 35 of the act is attracted to the instant case.3. the first problem to be solved is whether the assessment made in the year 1951 is a provisional ..... assessment provisionally subject to it being reopened when the final assessment of the firm was made, having succeeded in making the department act upon his assurance he wants to turn round and question the legality of the order of the income-tax officer for which he was himself responsible. in such circumstances, it would be a perverse exercise of jurisdiction under article 226 ..... this argument is admissible. it is not by virtue of section 35 that the department is empowered to levy the income-tax. the charging sections are sections 3 and 4 of the act and it is by force of these provisions that the concerned officers are competent to low the income-tax. the other sections only provide a machinery for quantifying the liability and the .....

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!

Sep 09 1958 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Hyderabad Vs. G.M. Chennabasappa

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Sep-09-1958

Reported in : AIR1959AP668; [1959]35ITR261(AP)

..... additions. however, that is not very material as, in our opinion, this court has power to recast the questions. 8. section 66 (5) of the income-tax act which confers jurisdiction on the high court in this behalf reads thus : 'the high court upon the hearing of any such ease shall decide the questions of ..... to have a case referred to this court by the tribunal proved futile. thereupon, the petitioner approached this court for reference under section 66(2) of the income-tax act. 3. the petitioner wanted the following questions of law arising out of the order of the tribunal to be referred to the high court. (1) ..... p. chandra reddy, c.j. 1. this is a reference under section 66(2) of the indian income-tax act, which arises in the following circumstances. 2. the assessee, a hindu undivided family, is a manufacturer and dealer in groundnut kernel and oil ..... view that peak credits alone should be added which amounted to rs. 19,968/-. there was a further appeal to the income-tax appellate tribunal by the assessee. the tribunal thought that all the four accounts should be rearranged and the peak credits as rearranged should be taken into ..... of these transactions in the four ledger accounts annexed as annexures a to d. as the assesses was unable to prove them to his satisfaction, the income-tax officer added these sums to the assessment to cover the unsatisfactory features of the case. on appeal by the assessee, the appellate assistant commissioner took the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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