Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Apr-27-1967
Reported in : AIR1968SC46; 66ITR590(SC); 3SCR821
..... , no such implication can arise merely because contractual liabilities of a firm may be jointly and severally enforced against the partners. 8. counsel also relied upon section 44 of the income-tax act, which, as it stood at the relevant time, read as follows : 'where any business, profession or vacation carried on by a firm or association of persons has been discontinued, or ..... krishan and the order passed by manchanda, j., was confirmed in appeal by a division bench of the high court. with special leave, the income-tax officer, agra has appealed to this court. 5. section 23(5) of the income-tax act, as it stood at the material time, read as follows : ' (5) notwithstanding anything contained in the foregoing sub-sections, when the assessee is ..... the partners individually if the firm, were assessed as an unregistered firm.' 6. the machinery for assessment to tax the income of a firm in the relevant years of assessment may be noticed. a firm under the income-tax act is a unit of assessment; and the income of the firm is computed as that of the unit irrespective of whether the firm is registered or ..... held that the firm, by the discontinuance of its business, does not cease to be liable to pay tax on the income earned by it; nor can a procedure different from the, one prescribed under ch. iv of the income-tax act, 1922 apply for assessment of the income of such a firm. the firm, after it has discontinued its business, whether it is dissolved or .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Apr-05-1967
Reported in : AIR1967SC1547; 65ITR620(SC); 3SCR425
..... . baliah, and consequently we are unable to comply with your request'. 5. on march 22, 1961, another communication was sent enclosing a notice under s. 46(5a) of the indian income tax act. the notice is in the same form except that the sum to be recovered had increased to rs. 86111/12. the respondent replied on march 25, 1961, , saying that there ..... paragraph of the notice reads as under : 'a sum of rs. 46819-15 is due from shri t. s. baliah on account of income-tax and/or penalty, i am to request you, under section 46(5a) of the income-tax act, 1922, to pay to me forthwith any amount due from you to, or held by you for or on account of the said ..... notice dated june 18, 1959, and march 21, 1961, issued under. 46(5a) of the indian income-tax act, 1922. these notices came to be issued in the following circumstances : 2. one t. s. balaiah, a cine artist, was apparently in areas of income-tax. the iii additional income-tax officer sent a letter dated june 18, 1959 to the respondent saying : 'i understand that you have ..... engaged the services of shri t. s. balaiah for a film being produced by you. as the above gentleman is in arrears of income-tax, i herewith enclose a notice under section 46(5a) of the i. t. act, attaching the remuneration payable by you to shri balaiah. please credit to the government account all amount that is and will become payable to .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Nov-22-1967
Reported in : 70ITR74(SC)
..... held that the assessee-firm was not a partner in bisesar house and had been receiving interest in the capacity of a banker, the income-tax officer decided to take action under section 34(1) (b) of the income-tax act in order to include this amount of interest in calculating the taxable profits and losses of the assessee-firm. the assessees objected on the ..... to believe that the provisions of section 34(1) (b) were attracted. in a recent decision of this court in commissioner of income-tax v. a. raman & co., dealing with the corresponding provision contained in section 147(1) (b) of the income-tax act, 1961, the court held : 'the expression 'information' in the context in which if occurs must. in our judgment, mean instruction or ..... be rectified by him by issuing a notice under section 34 of the income-tax act. the case, how ever, was concerned with the provisions of section 34 as they stoods before the amendment of that section by the income-tax amendment act, 1948 (48 of 1948), which gave the right to an income-tax officer to reopen an assessment only if, as a result of definite information ..... the following question : 'whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case, there was any information before the income-tax officer seeking to reopen the assessment so as to invest him with jurisdiction to issue notice under section 34(1) (b) of the income-tax act ?' 2. the assessee firm consisted of four partners, who were all brothers belonging to the daga family, and three .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-24-1967
Reported in : AIR1967Delhi75
..... a subsequent year.'4. since we are concerned with the assessment year 1951-52, the reference has to be answered in the light of section 24(2) of the indian income tax act, 1922 as in existence at that time. section 24(2) at the material time read -'where any assessed sustains a loss of profits or gains in any year, being a ..... was observed 'whether two or more lines of business may be regarded as the 'same business' or different businesses depends nto upon the special methods prescribed by the income tax act for computation of the taxable income, but upon the nature of the business, the nature of their organisation, management, source of the capital fund utilised, method of book keeping and a host of ..... and the demand made on the partners individually.9. slight change was introduced in 1956 by the finance act, 1956 schedule i part d which has no bearing on the present controversy inasmuch as the change was to levy income tax at special low rates on a registered firm also. by virtue of the proviso sections 16(1)(b), and section 23(5 ..... the second and third steps are concerned. by virtue of section 23(5) of the said act, the ttoal income of the firm has to be computed under earlier sub-sections of section 23. that having been done, in case of an unregistered firm, the tax payable by the firm as a distinct entity is levied and demanded from the firm. if, on .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Oct-09-1967
Reported in : (1968)0GLR765
..... interest paid to the banks on moneys borrowed and utilised in payment of estate duty. the claim was founded on section 57(iii) of the income-tax act, 1961, corresponding to section 12(2) of the income-tax act, 1922. the income-tax officer and the appellate assistant commissioner disallowed the claim but on appeal the tribunal held that the claim was well-founded and allowed the deduction ..... the assessee cannot draw any support from the australian decision. moreover, it must be noted that this reasoning, though permeably justified by the terms of section 51 of the australian income tax act - a matter with which we are not concerned - has no validity in the determination of a claim for deduction under section 57(iii) of our ..... accounts were admittedly utilized exclusively for payment of estate duty and there was no indiscriminate utilisation of the borrowed moneys for different purposes as was the case in commissioner of income-tax v. jagmohandas j. kapadia. the position was as if there were two borrowings from the same lenders, one borrowing being for the purpose of construction of an immovable property and ..... the same deduction, it was pleaded, should also he recognized by us. in support of this contention the assessee landed heavily on the following observation in mr. gunn's commonwealth income tax law and practice, seventh edition, page 684, paragraph 1741 : '1741. interest on money borrowed to pay death duties - in begg v. deputy federal commissioner of taxation, it was held that .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Sep-27-1967
Reported in : AIR1969Mad69; 70ITR240(Mad)
..... (2)(xv). the supreme court in the second case pointed out'--'in determining whether an amount expended by the assessee is deductible under section 10(2)(xv) of the indian income-tax act, the nature of the expenditure or outgoing must be adjudged in the light of accepted commercial practice and trading principles- the expenditure must be incidental to the business and must ..... dividend income and interest in the relative previous year and paid wealth tax in a certain sum on his holding of stock. the sum paid as wealth ..... comprised of dividends and interest as an allowable expenditure under section 57(iii) of the income-tax act 1961, but unsuccessfully before the revenue.the tribunal relied on kumbakonam electric supply corporation ltd. v. commissioner of income-tax madras. : 50itr809(mad) and dismissed the aseessee's appeal in each case. that was of course a case under section 10(2)(xv) in which a ..... and in the circumstances, the claim for deduction of wealth tax paid by the assesses as an admissible expenditure is lawful. the revenue as well as the tribunal negatived the claim and the references have come before us under section 66 (1) of the income-tax act 1922 or under section 256(1) of the income-tax act 1961. each of the assessees as an individual received .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jan-18-1967
Reported in : AIR1968Mad231; 67ITR553(Mad)
..... received by the bank in the previous years ending 31-12-1955, 31-12-1956, 31-12-1957 and 31-12-1958, were chargeable to income-tax under section 8 of the income-tax act read with the notification issued under section 60 as amended in 1954? 2. whether, if the answer to the first question is in the affirmative and if ..... under section 10, on foot that no part of the overhead expenses and interest on borrowed capital is attributable to government securities under the explanation to section 8 of the income-tax act?'in the other reference, at the request of the assessee, the questions referred to us by the tribunal under the same provision, are--'1. whether the interest on mysore securities ..... references, the main question for consideration is as to the applicability, to the facts and circumstances, of the first proviso to s. 8 and the two explanations thereto in the income-tax act 1922. the assessee is a well known banking company with its registered office at madras. it holds securities issued by the then mysore durbar of the value of about 21 ..... ) deducted from such interest by way of commission by a banker realising such interest on behalf of the assessee. this new proviso was expanded by section 9 of the indian income-tax (amendment) act 1939, the effect of which was, so far as the present references go, that a similar benefit, as in the case of deduction of expenses, was given in respect .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Mar-03-1967
Reported in : 64ITR588(Bom)
..... of his nephew, should be excluded from his income. the income-tax officer refused to do so on the ground that the said income would be liable to be included in the assessee assessment under the provisions of section 16 (3) (a) (iv) of the income-tax act. the appellate assistant commissioner agreed with the view taken by the income-tax officer and dismissed the assessee appeal. in the ..... further, appeal to the tribunal however, the tribunal held in favour of the assessee that the income was not liable to be included in the assessee assessment. according to the ..... section 16 (3) (a) (iv) of the act ?' 3. in our opinion the answer to the question must be in the negative, though not for the reason given by the tribunal in its order. the view taken by the tribunal cannot be sustained in the light of the supreme court decision in commissioner of income-tax v. c. m. kothari, where in dealing ..... tribunal, the income which was sought to be included did not arise form the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Feb-20-1967
Reported in : 65ITR291(Bom)
..... the assessment years 1957-58 and 1958-59. thereafter, on applications made by the assessee under the income-tax act for a reference in the income-tax assessment and under the wealth-tax act in the wealth-tax assessments, the tribunal has made a consolidated reference and referred to this court the questions of law ..... of being claimed as a deduction under section 10(2) (iii) of the indian income-tax act. 3. in the wealth-tax of the assessee for the assessment years 1957-58 and 1958-59, the wealth-tax officer included the amount of rs. 3,00,000 together with the accumulated interest thereon ..... referred to by him are : chimanbhai lalbhai v. commissioner of income-tax, commissioner of income-tax v. new digvijaysinhji tin factory, k. p. brothers v. commissioner of income-tax and e. s. hajee abdul kareem and son v. commissioner of income-tax. all these cases related to the question of delivery of the movable ..... the amount, which he had gifted over to him. according to the assessee, therefore, this position should have been clarified by the income-tax officer, although did not dispute that the amount of rs. 22,531 was capable of being included in his account under the provisions of ..... which arise on its orders in the said matters. the two questions relating to the income-tax assessment are as follows : .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Mar-07-1967
Reported in : 65ITR308(Bom)
..... to the extent of its claim to set off the amount of rs. 16,200 against its business income. both the assessee and the department applied under section 66(1) of the income-tax act for a reference and the tribunal drew up a statement of the case and referred to this court the ..... following two questions : '1. whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, in computing the income from business assessable under section 10 ..... section 66(1) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, arises out of the assessee's assessment for the assessment year 1958-59, the relevant accounting year being the financial year ending on the 31st march, 1958. the assessee is a hindu undivided family. it has income from property, business in shares both ..... to be adjusted against the speculative profits in the subsequent years. 3. the assessee appealed to the tribunal against the order passed by the income-tax officer and confirmed in appeal by the appellate assistant commissioner. both the contentions, which it had urged before the department authorities, were also agitated ..... held that, in view of the binding authority of keshavlal premchand v. commissioner of income-tax, the assessee was not entitled to set off rs. 2,29,597 against other business income failing under section 10 of the act. as to the second continuities, however, it disagreed with the view taken by the .....Tag this Judgment!