Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Year: 1961 Page 1 of about 642 results (0.092 seconds)

Mar 09 1961 (HC)

The Central Provinces Syndicate (Private) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Inc ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-09-1961

Reported in : [1962]45ITR6(Bom)

..... , but in the interest of the union. the object of the commissioner in making applications before the court is with a view to obtain a proper collection of the income-tax under the income-tax act. in the applications which an assessee makes, the assessee is concerned with his own individual interest. the attitude of the commissioner in making applications under section 66(2) or ..... offends against article 14 of the constitution. the third contention is that the right of the petitioners to make an application to the high court under section 66 of the income-tax act is a substantive right which is vested in them when the assessment proceedings, out of which the application arises, are commenced. this right of the petitioners cannot be taken away ..... , and a sur-rejoinder by the state. we have been requested to take these affidavits on record. we have granted all these requests and made orders accordingly. 3.under the income-tax act, an advisory jurisdiction has been conferred on the high court in connection with questions of law arising on certain orders passed by the appellate tribunal. thus, where the appellate tribunal ..... case and to refer to this court certain specified questions of law. in some of these applications, the aforesaid relief is claimed only under section 66(2) of the indian income-tax act, while in others, the said relief is also claimed in the alternative by an appropriate writ or direction under article 226 of the constitution. all these applications have been filed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 11 1961 (SC)

Kishori Mohanlal Bakshi Vs. Union of India

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-11-1961

Reported in : AIR1962SC1139; [1962]44ITR532(SC)

..... who was appointed an income-tax inspector in the income-tax department of the government of india in 1943 became an income-tax officer in the same department on promotion in 1946. it appears that the income-tax services were reconstituted by an order of the government of india dated september 29, 1944, and later on in 1953 section 5 of the income-tax act was amended in accordance ..... with this decision to reconstitute. one of the feature of the reconstitution was that in place of the one class of income-tax officer, two classes came into existence, one consisting of income-tax officers of class i service and the other class in which all ..... that article 16(1) has been violated. no such complaint can however be reasonably made, if for example, all income-tax officers while income- tax sub-inspectors are eligible for promotion only as income tax inspectors but not directly as income-tax officers.similarly, it of the income-tax officers of the same grade, some are eligible for promotion to a superior grade, and others are not, the ..... the creation of different grades in the government service, that is what the petitioner's argument amount to. the contention that art. 16 has been violated because class ii income-tax officers are not eligible for promotion to higher posts, like the posts of commissioners and assistant commissioners directly is, therefore wholly unsound.3. the only other contention raised .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 05 1961 (HC)

General Construction and Supply Co. Vs. Income-tax Officer (8th) C-war ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-05-1961

Reported in : [1962]44ITR16(Bom)

..... appellants under section 23 (3) read with section 34 (i) (a) of the indian income-tax act for the assessment year 1947-48. he included in the assessable income a sum of rs. 85,000 as the income of the appellants from some undisclosed sources. the amount was found to have been received by the ..... ought to have held that if the said notice was not issued under section 34 (i) (a) but under section 34 (i) (b) of the income-tax tax act, the said notice was obviously time barred being issued beyond the period of four years prescribed for a notice under section 34 (i) (b) and as ..... by encashing high denomination notes of the value of rs. 85,000 on january 25, 1946. the appellants appealed against the order made by the income-tax officer to the appellate assistant commissioner. in their appeal they raised three contentions. the first was that the fact of encashment of the high denomination ..... -47 and not 1947-48. the income-tax officer subsequently issued a notice under section 34 of the act calling upon the appellants to submit a return of their income for the year ending march 31, 1947, as he had reason to believe that the income assessable to income-tax for that year had escaped assessment or ..... notes was known to the income-tax officer at the time of the original assessment and that consequently he had no authority to proceed under section 34 of the act. the second contention was that the amount in question did not represent the income of the appellants, but formed part of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 08 1961 (HC)

Navnitlal C. Javery Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-08-1961

Reported in : [1962]46ITR550(Bom)

y.s. tambe, j.1. the is a reference under section 66(1) of the income-tax act (hereafter referred to as the 'act') on two applications made by the assessee and the question referred to this court is in the following terms : 'whether on the facts ..... each in accordance with the sixth terms of the agreement which we have already reproduced above. the contention of the assessee was not accepted by the income-tax officer. the income-tax officer held that the assessee was legal owner of the dividends on the date the dividends were declared and, therefore, the entire amount of rs. ..... decisive factor was the nature and character of the obligation attached to the ownership of the property. in the case of seth motilal manekchand v. commissioner of income-tax, a managing agency belonged to a hindu joint family composed of a, his son b, and a's wife. in a partition between the members of ..... equal force to the present case. the principle and test to be applied have now been laid down by their lordships of the supreme court in commissioner of income-tax v. sitaldas tirathdas. at page 374, it has been observed : 'in our opinion, the true test is whether the amount sought to be deducted, in ..... in our opinion, has no application to the facts of the present case and is distinguishable on facts. the facts in provat kumar mitter v. commissioner of income-tax were that the assessee, who was the registered holder of 500 ordinary shares in a limited company, assigned to his wife, by a deed of settlement, the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 11 1961 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay Vs. Mogul Line Ltd., Bombay

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-11-1961

Reported in : [1962]46ITR590(Bom)

..... appeal and directed the assessment to be modified on the lines indicated in its order. on an application for reference made under section 66(1) of the income-tax act by the department, it drew up a statement and referred to this court the following question : 'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of ..... accounting year, but whether the said item can be regarded either as a profit or loss under the provisions of the income-tax act (see, in this connection, henriksen (inspector of taxes) v. grafton hotel ltd. and commissioner of income-tax v. c. parekh & co. (india) ltd. moreover, even apart from this consideration, the entries made by ..... v.s. desai, j.1. this is a reference under section 66(1) of the indian income-tax act at the instance of the commissioner of income-tax. the assessee concerned in this reference is a limited liability company having its head office in india. its business is plying ..... not regarded as the entry of the profit realised by him even on the mercantile system of accounts maintained by him during that year, by the income-tax officer in assessment of that year. if in was an entry of the profit accrued, then mr. palkhivala says, the profit had accrued not in ..... not be said to have realised a profit of rs. 3,22,869 on devaluation. he therefore, directed that from the amount added back by the income-tax officer, a sum of rs. 3,22,869 should be deleted. the department appealed to the tribunal against the decision of the appellate assistant commissioner. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 22 1961 (HC)

Harilal Harjivan Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-i

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-22-1961

Reported in : [1962]46ITR1129(Bom)

..... v.s. desai, j.1. this is a reference in compliance with the requisition of this court under section 66(2) of the indian income-tax act at the instance of the assessee. 2. the assessee, shri harilal harjivan, is a partner in a firm known as 'f. cornaglia & co ..... the revenue, has argued that the tribunal had refused to allow this contention to be raised before it, because it has not been raised before the income-tax officer or the appellate assistant commissioner. whether to allow a new contention to be raised for the first time in the appeal before the tribunal, or ..... its return and also an application under section 26a for the registration of the firm, which was constituted under the deed of the 4th april, 1950. the income-tax officer was of the opinion that the partnership firm was not genuine, and the business belonged exclusively to the assessee, and not to the firm. he, ..... not belong to the assessment year 1951-52 and, therefore, could not be assessed to tax during that year. this contention was rejected by the tribunal, firstly, on the ground that since it was not raised before the income-tax officer or before the appellate assistant commissioner, it would not be allowed to be raised ..... , the amount was made up by the contributions made by himself, his father and his two brothers, was not accepted by the income-tax officer. he, therefore, held that the amount of rs. 50,000 was income from an undisclosed source in the hands of the assessee and accordingly brought the said amount to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 25 1961 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City I Vs. E. Francescanto

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Oct-25-1961

Reported in : [1963]47ITR402(Bom)

..... tambe, j. 1. this is a reference under sub-section (1) of section 66 of the income-tax act. we are here concerned with the assessment year 1949-50, the account year ending 31st march, 1949. the assessee was appoint as manager as ..... to the reasons or the ground on which the claim of the employer to allow this amount as revenue expenditure was rejected by the income-tax officer. the reasons given by the income-tax officer in short are : the employer was a shrewd man of business. in the year 1948, there was a big increase in ..... . 8 dated 24th march, 1928. we would hereafter refers to this notification as the 'notification'. this claim of the assessee was rejected both by the income-tax officer and the appellate assistant commissioner, the appellate assistant commissioner taking the view that the commission paid to the assessee was not paid out of profits, but ..... purpose of business within the meaning of section 10(2) (xv) of the act. he also referred us to two decisions of this court in commissioner of income-tax v. mulraj karsondas and ramanlal c. parekh v. v. krishnamachari, commissioner of income-tax and the decision of the madras high court in v. narayanaswami iyer v. commissioner ..... (xv) of the act. it is indeed true that the employer had shown in the profit and loss account payment of commission as expenses and had claimed it in his assessment as revenue expenditure and that has been disallowed. but that by itself is not sufficient to hold that the income-tax officer had disallowed the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 27 1961 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-i Vs. Ramnath A. Podar

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Oct-27-1961

Reported in : [1963]47ITR423(Bom)

..... tambe, j.1. this is a reference under sub-section (1) of section 66 of the income-tax act. the assessee is shri ramnath a. podar, sole surviving executor of the will of seth anandilal bansidhar podar. we are concerned with the assessment ..... 37,455-3-6 (rs. 1,00,000 by ramdev and rs. 37,455-3-6 by ramnath) and partly out of the opening balance. although the income-tax officer took the latter view, the departmental representative frankly conceded that, according to this instructions, the former possibility was acceptable to the department.' 5. after making this ..... i.e., at the close of diwali of 1941, the amount standing to the credit of seth anandilal podar charity account was rs. 2,13,000. the income-tax officer, in dealing with the assessment cases of the trusses, fund that before the beginning of samvat year 1999, the total amount expended on charitable purposes amounted ..... deceased) created and, therefore, interest credited in that account on that sum was liable to be taxed in the hands of the executors. in this view of the matter, the income-tax officer served notices under section 34 of the act, on the sole surviving executor reopening assessments for the assessment years 1947-48 to 1956-57. ..... the hands of the assessee in his capacity as the executor in those respective years. the assessee took appeals against the orders of the income-tax officer for all those years. the appellate assistant commissioner accepted the contention raised by the assessee. he held that rs. 1,00,000 and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 11 1961 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay North Vs. Viramgam Mills Co. Ltd.

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Apr-11-1961

Reported in : (1961)GLR588; [1961]43ITR270(Guj)

..... and the total of the balances in the aforesaid three accounts amounting to rs. 9,38,335, considered that the first proviso to section 23a of the income-tax act was applicable to the case. he considered the balance in the three accounts as reserves representing accumulation of past profits. he directed that the balance of ..... calendar year 1951. the assessee company is one in which at the relevant time the public were not substantially interested as envisaged under section 23a of the income-tax act. the balance-sheet of the company for the accounting year showed the paid up capital of the company as rs. 6,98,000. on the ..... the company concerned would be unreasonable for the purpose of deciding whether a distribution order should be made under section 23 a of the income-tax act. in that case it was observed that the difference between the written down value of an asset and the price realized by the sale thereof was ..... not really income, but was made taxable income for the purpose of computation of the assessable income by the fiction in the second proviso to section 10(2)(vii) of the income-tax act, read with section 2(6c), and that on that account it did ..... k.t. desai, c.j.1. this reference has been made under section 66(1) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, at the instance of the commissioner of income-tax, bombay north, ahmedabad. the assessee in this case is the viramgam mills co. ltd. the relevant assessment year is 1952-53, the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 20 1961 (HC)

Ramanlal C. Parekh Vs. V. Krishnamachari, Commissioner of Income-tax, ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Feb-20-1961

Reported in : [1961]41ITR757(Bom)

..... mills for the assessment years 1945-46 to 1948-49 were concluded by the final decisions of the tribunal, the petitioner preferred claims for refund under section 60 of the income-tax act. it was the petitioner's case that must get refund in respect of the amount which has been disallowed as the legitimate expense of the mills and yet has been ..... the mills was not by reason of such mode of payment, but was a disallowance because the income-tax authorities considered it to be not a permissible deduction under section 10 (20 (xv) of the income-tax act. there is no clear, specific finding of any of the income-tax authorities that the disallowance was on the ground that it was not a permissible deduction under section ..... mills. this, according to the petitioner, is not permissible under the notification no. 878f (i. t.) dated march 21, 1922, issued by the finance department under section 60 of the income-tax act. this contention of the petitioner has not been accepted by the income-tax authorities and the petitioner, therefore, has preferred this application, wherein he seeks to get quashed the orders of the ..... 10 (2) (xv) of the act. on the other hand, we find that the tribunal has allowed payment of an .....

Tag this Judgment!


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