Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Year: 1968 Page 5 of about 650 results (0.308 seconds)

Aug 19 1968 (SC)

Balchand Vs. Income-tax Officer, Sagar

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-19-1968

Reported in : AIR1969SC496; [1969]72ITR197(SC); 1969MhLJ855(SC); [1969]1SCR704

..... no notice for the assessment year 1946-47 calling upon him to submit a return for that year was issued, a notice under section 34 of the income-tax act, 1922, or under section 148 of the income-tax act, 1961, was incompetent so long as the return submitted by the appellant in august, 1959, for the assessment year 1946-47 was not considered and disposed ..... court has held in ranchhoddas's case : [1959]36itr569(sc) that where no return has been filed by the assessee within the period prescribed by section 22(1) of the income-tax act, 1922, the assessee is entitled in law to submit a voluntary return in answer to the general notice under section 22(1) before assessment is completed, for a return in ..... of. reliance in support of this contention was placed upon two decisions of this court : commissioner of income-tax v. ranchhoddas karsondas : [1959]36itr569(sc) and commissioner of income-tax v. s. raman chettiar : [1965]55itr630(sc) . 4. under section 22(1) of the income-tax act, 1922, the income-tax officer was required before the 1st day of may in each year to give notice, by publication in ..... , sagar, assessed the appellant to pay under section 23(3) of the income-tax act, 1922, tax on his income computed for the assessment years 1945-46 and 1946-47. on june 24, 1959, the income-tax officer issued a notice of reassessment under section 34 of the income-tax act, 1922, reciting that the income of the appellant had escaped assessment and requiring the appellant to submit a return of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 22 1968 (SC)

Daffadar Bhagat Singh and Sons Vs. the Income-tax Officer, A-ward, Fer ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-22-1968

Reported in : AIR1969SC340; [1969]71ITR417(SC); [1969]1SCR828

..... prayer was also made for the issue of a writ of certiorari for quashing the notices under section 23(2) and 22(4) of the income-tax act, 1922, hereinafter called 'the act', which had been issued by the income tax officer in that connection. the appellant firm filed a return of the assessment year 1952-53 on march 31, 1953. it also applied that it ..... giving a direction that the assessment should be not be proceeding with owing to the statutory bar created by section 34 (3) of the act. as the income-tax authorities did not accede to the request of the request of the appellants, a petition under articles 226 and 227 was filed in the high court. the high court dismissed ..... all the three partners filed their returns of profit and loss on march 31, 1953, with the income-tax officer and also made an application under section 26a of the act for registration of the firm. it is true the in the assessment order of the income-tax officer the status of the assessee is shown hindu undivided family but that has been apparently shown ..... is a given which was necessary for the disposal of the appeal the second proviso to section 34 (3) of the act would be attracted and the bar of limitation would be lifted. in n. k. sivalingam chettiar v. commissioner of income-tax madras : [1967]66itr586(sc) this court after referring to the relevant observations in murlidhar bhagwan das's : [1964]52itr335(sc .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 24 1968 (SC)

Jaipur Udyog Ltd. and anr. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi, Raja ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-24-1968

Reported in : AIR1969SC470; [1969]71ITR799(SC); [1969]2SCR193; 1968()WLN23

..... three petitions. against the orders passed by the high court, these three appeals have been preferred by the company. 6. section 141 of the income-tax act, 1961, authorises the income-tax officer to make a provisional assessment of the income of the assessee on the basis of the return made under section 139 and the accounts and documents, if any, accompanying the return. the assessment ..... of loss which it claimed it had suffered in the previous years and was entitled to set off against the income of that year. the income-tax officer made a provision assessment of the tax under section 141 of the income-tax act, 1961, and against the income returned by the company he allowed deduction of rs. 39,89,731 as loss carried forward from the earlier years ..... relying upon sub-section (2) of section 141, that the assessee cannot claim, and the income-tax officer cannot, allow, loss in respect of previous years in excess of the loss certified by the income-tax officer. that he says is the effect of sections 72 and 80 of the income-tax act, 1961. section 72 provides : '(1) where for any assessment year, the net result of ..... filed its returns under the income-tax act, 1922, and after the repeal of that act under the act of 1961. the following chart sets out the income or loss returned by the company for the years 1954-55 to 1964- 65 and the income or loss computed for the years by the income-tax officer on assessment : year of income or loss returned income or losscomputedassessment. by the company .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 04 1968 (SC)

Juggi Lal Kamlapat Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U.P.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-04-1968

Reported in : AIR1969SC932; [1969]73ITR702(SC); [1969]1SCR988

..... of rs. 2 lakhs was paid to the assessee on october 31, 1943. the amount was claimed by the assessee as compensation for loss of office not liable to tax under the income-tax act as a capital receipt. the receipt of this sum of rs. 2 lakhs, though incorporated in its books by the assessee, was not disclosed at the time when the ..... receipt liable to tax under the income-tax act and the excess profits tax act ?' 12. by its judgment dated july 10, 1962, the high court answered the question against the assessee and in favour of the commissioner of ..... tribunal no loss was sustained by the assessee. at the instance of the assessee the appellate tribunal stated a case to the high court under s. 66(1) of the income tax act on the following question of law : 11. 'whether there was material on which the tribunal could hold that the receipt of rs. 2,00,000 by the assessee was revenue ..... and by the appellate assistant commissioner in appeal. the assessee thereafter preferred second appeals to the income tax appellate tribunal. in these appeals the assessee abandoned the contention regarding the legality of the proceedings under s. 34 of the income tax act and s. 15 of the excess profits tax act and confined its argument merely to the point that the sum was not liable to be .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 03 1968 (SC)

Mansukhlal and Brothers Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City Ii

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-03-1968

Reported in : AIR1969SC835; [1969]73ITR546(SC); [1969]1SCR970

..... .r. 505; (1961) 42 i.t.r. 800 , in which certain observations were made which are quite apposite for the purpose of the present case. section 25(3) of the income-tax act, 1952 (15 & 16 geo. 6 & 1 eliz. 2, c. 10) provided, inter alia, that a person who neglects or refuses to deliver, within the time limited in any notice served ..... grover j.1. this is an appeal by special leave from a judgment of the bombay high court in a reference made under section 66(1) of the income-tax act, 1922, hereinafter called the act, answering the following question which had been referred to it in the negative and against the assessee : 'whether in computing for purposes of levy of penalty under section 28 ..... the assessee had transferred valuable assets to foreign companies. he did not dispute that the transactions were of the kind described in the preamble to section 18 of the finance act, 1936, namely, to avoid income-tax by transfer of income to persons abroad. the court of appeal affirmed the judgment of mac-naghten j. that the assessee was liable to be assessed to ..... brought an action claiming from him, under section 25(3)(a), the fixed penalty of 20 and also 'treble the tax which he ought to be charged under this act', which sumthey computed at 418 14s. 6d., being three times his income tax for the year in question. diplock j. held that the judgment should be entered for the crown for a sum of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 10 1968 (SC)

Premier Automobiles Ltd. Vs. S.N. Shrivastava Income-tax Officer, Acom ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-10-1968

Reported in : AIR1970SC1386; [1970]76ITR1(SC); [1969]2SCR353

..... an assessee in the financial year. section 210 provides by sub-section (1) : 'where a person has been previously assessed by way of regular assessment under this act or under the indian income-tax act, 1922, the income-tax officer may, on or after the 1st day of april in the financial year, by order in writing, require him to pay to the credit of the ..... of liability for and determination of the quantum of advance tax in respect of income which is chargeable to income-tax in the hands of a person on regular assessment. 6. under the income-tax act, 1961, a person is liable to be assessed to tax in respect of his own income, and also in respect of certain classes of income received by or accruing or arising to other. he ..... ) that under section 209 and 210 of the (indian) income-tax act, 1961, no order for payment of advance tax can be made against an agent of non-resident; and (2 ..... section 156, for the assessment year 1965-66 and for an injunction or prohibition restraining the income-tax officer from enforcing or implementing the order under section 163 and the notice under section 156 read with section 210 of the income-tax act, 1961. the petition was resisted by the income-tax officer. 2. in support of the petition counsel for the company raised two contentions : (1 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 04 1968 (SC)

C.R. Nagappa Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-04-1968

Reported in : AIR1969SC888; [1969]73ITR626(SC); [1969]1SCR979

..... presumable intended to remove the conflict of judicial opinion which arose in the interpretation of the analogous provisions of sections 40 and 41 of the indian income-tax act of 1922. in saifudin alimohamed v. commissioner of income-tax : [1954]25itr237(bom) . the bombay high court expressed the opinion (which was not necessary for the ultimate decision of the reference) that section 41 conferred an ..... recover it in the manner laid down in section 41.' the same considerations must apply in the interpretation of section 161(2) of the income-tax act, 1961. 15. sub-section (2) of section 161 merely enacts that when income is assessed in the hands of a representative assessee in his own name, the assessment shall be deemed to be made upon him in ..... . in our view chagla c.j. was right in observing in balwantrai jethalal vaidya's case in dealing with the scheme of section 41 of the income- tax act, 1922, that '....... it is clear that every case of an assessment against a trustee must fall under section 41, and it is equally clear that, even though a trustee is ..... the high court of mysore : '(1) whether having regard to the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 161, section 64(v) of the income-tax act was applicable to the assessee's case for computing the assessee's income for the assessment year 1962-63 ?' (2) whether the assessments on the minor beneficiaries for the assessment year 1962-63 are a bar for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 28 1968 (SC)

ishwar Lal and R.B. Suraj NaraIn (Represented by Bishan NaraIn and anr ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-28-1968

Reported in : [1969]72ITR399(SC)

..... to the assessee according to the notification no. 878-f dated march 21, 1922, as amended by notification no. 8 dated march 24, 1928. under section 66(2) of the income-tax act, 1922, the appellate tribunal made a statement of the case to the high court on the following questions of law : '(1) whether the director's remuneration of rs. 10,000 ..... notification no. 878-f,dated march 21, 1922, as amended and issued by the finance department of the government of india under section 60 of the indian income-tax act or otherwise under the act (2) whether it was a necessary condition for the application of the terms of the notification referred to in question no. (1) to the facts of the present case ..... ?' 4. by its judgment dated february 5, 1962, the high court answered the questions in favour of the commissioner of income-tax and against the assessee. this appeal is brought by certificate granted by the high court under section 66a(2) of the income-tax act, 1922. 5. it is necessary at this stage to set out the terms of the notification no. 878-f ..... dated march 21, 1922, as amended by notification no. 8 of march 24, 1928, which is to the following effect: 'incomes included in total income but exempt from income-tax and not from super-tax.--the following classes of income shall be exempt from the tax payable .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 22 1968 (SC)

Estate of the Late A.M.K.M. Karuppan Chettiar Vs. Commissioner of Inco ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-22-1968

Reported in : [1969]72ITR403(SC)

..... order of assessment was valid.4. the tribunal, at the instance of the assessee, submitted the following question to the high court of madras under section 66(1) of the income-tax act, 1922 :'whether the aforesaid assessments for 1950-51, 1951-52 and 1952-53 are valid '5. the high court recorded an answer in the affirmative. in the view of the ..... hindu undivided family of himself and his minor sons, on the other, the appellate assistant commissioner by order dated december 18, 1954, recorded the partition under section 25a of the income-tax act and cancelled the assessments of the family for the three years in question. the appellate assistant commissioner observed in his order :'as such the present assessment requires to be annulled ..... ]42itr589(sc) 9. the appeals are allowed. the answer recorded by the high court is discharged and is substituted by the answer that the assessments made by the income-tax officer pursuant to the notice under section 34 of the income-tax act, 1922, were invalid. the appellants will be entitled to their costs in this court and in the high court. one hearing fee. ..... of the hindu undivided family of karuppan chettiar and his descendants and cancelling the orders of assessment of the family, the income-tax officer issued notices on march 2, 1957, under section 34 of the income-tax act to karuppan chettiar for assessment of his income as a separated member for the assessment years 1950-51, 1951-52 and 1952-53. in compliance with the notices .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 02 1968 (SC)

J.K. Woollen Manufacturers Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U.P.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-02-1968

Reported in : AIR1969SC609; [1969]72ITR612(SC); [1969]1SCR525

..... an amount claimed as expenditure was laid out or expended wholly or exclusively for the purpose of business, profession or vocation as required under section 10(2)(xv) of the income-tax act has to be decided on the facts and in the light of the circumstances of each particular case. but, as observed by this court in swadeshi cotton mills co, ltd ..... question against the assessee. against the judgment of the high court the present appeal is brought by special leave.3. sections 10(2)(x) and 10(2)(xv) of the income-tax act, 1922, at the relevant time, read as follows :'10. (2)(x) any sum paid to an employee as bonus or commission for services rendered, where such sum would not have ..... by its order dated july 10, 1950, dismissed the appeal. as directed by the high court the appellate tribunal submitted a statement of case under section 66(2) of the income-tax act, 1922, on the following question of law :'whether, in the circumstances of the case, the sum of rs. 37,733 paid to the general manager, shri j. p. vaish, which ..... of the assessee within the meaning of section 10(2)(xv) of the income-tax act, 1922.5. we should make it clear that in this case we are not called upon to decide whether the income-tax officer could exercise the power he exercised under section 10(2)(x) of the income-tax act. the question referred by the tribunal and answered by the high court only .....

Tag this Judgment!


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