Court : Chennai
Decided on : Mar-09-1982
Reported in : (1983)33CTR(Mad)106; 156ITR740(Mad)
..... . rowlatt j.'s decision was upheld by the court of appeal. the principle of this decision has been held to apply to cases arising under our income-tax act - vide cit v. ashok leyland ltd.  86 itr 546. 11. the ruling of courts on this point is but an extension of the principle that ..... the assessee had put for ward this particular point not for the first time before the tribunal but earlier too, before the appellate assistant commissioner of income-tax. that authority rejected the assessee's contention as untenable in law, but said nothing against the facts which the assessee had placed in support. on ..... trade and hence it must be capital in nature. this argument again was inspired by a catch phrase, perhaps the most enduring catch phrase, in income-tax law. we grant that the facts in the present case do leaned countenance to the description of the expenditure as one incurred with a view ..... , written off in portions as the years of the lease roll by. but perhaps, the distinction between premium and rent is too well entrenched in income-tax for rethinking by the judicial process. however, we might at least ensure that every case should proceed on a reasonable view of the facts first, ..... difference between the two is that whereas rent is a recurring payment, premium is an 'once and for all' payment. but nobody who knows his income-tax would set any store by this supposed contrast between the two. and yet, over a period of years, courts have persisted in disallowing premium as capital .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Decided on : Apr-23-1982
Reported in : (1983)35CTR(Del)170; ILR1982Delhi778; 143ITR749(Delhi)
..... i is in the negative' whether the assessed was justified in taking the value of the shares at their original cost under section 45 of the income-tax act, 1961? (7) the point in issue is : how is the cost of the acquisition of the original shares to be determined, when bonus ..... in the two methods only resulted in rs. 18 being either added to or deducted from the ultimate result.' (17) following this decision in commissioner of income-tax, central calcutta v. gold co. ltd., : 78itr16(sc) hidayatullah, c. j. observed that the correct method of valuing the shares was by ..... here, then on the basis of this decision, it would be apparent that the contention of learned counsel for the assessed is correct. but in commissioner of income-tax. calcutta v. gold mohore investment co. ltd. : 74itr62(sc) , the supreme court had occasion, once again, to consider the matter of ..... on a reference, the high court held that the method adopted by the appellate tribunal was erroneous and upheld the method of valuation adopted by the income-tax officer. (15) the supreme court held that the method of valuation adopted by the appellate tribunal was correct and in accordance with law. hidayatullah, ..... shares have been issued subsequently (8) section 45 provides for capital gains on the transfer of a capital asset to be chargeable to income tax. section 48 deals with the mode of computation and deductions applicable to capital gains. the 'capital gains' are to be arrived at after deducting .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Decided on : Apr-23-1982
Reported in : ILR1982Delhi925; 138ITR216(Delhi)
..... (to be referred to in short as the 'the act',) in the first of the two years is as follows : 'whether on the facts and in the circumstances of ..... these six income-tax references at the instance of the commissioner of income-tax, pertain to the assessment years 1965-66 to 1969-70 and 1972-73. the point in issue in each of them pertains to the question of doductibility of royalty. the question posed for our opinion under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961 ..... the technical knowledge in favor of shriram. we have taken a similar view in the triveni engineering works limited v. the commissioner of inconic-tax. new delhi, income-tax reference nos. 106 and 107 of 1974(5) disposed of on 1st april, 1982. we thereforee. do not propose to deal with the ..... the property of the assessed even at the end of he period of agreement.(19) by our judgment in shriram refrigeration-industries ltd. v. commissioner of income-tax, delhi-1, (1981) 127 i.t.r. 745, applying the principles enunciated in ciba (supra) by the supreme court, we have held that ..... a capital nature. the payment of royalty is thereforee being disallowed'.(16) the appellate assistant commissioner affirmed the order of the income-tax officer.(17) on further appeal to the income-tax appellate tribunal, the assessed's appeal was allowed. the tribunal held that it had to look not only at the agreement .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-07-1982
Reported in : ILR1982Delhi399; 142ITR826(Delhi)
..... assessment the value of the above amenity thus provided by the club free of cost to the assessed and his wife. this order of the income-tax officer was revised by the commissioner of income-tax under section 263 ofthe income-tax act, 1961. in response to the notice under section 263 it was contended on behalf of the assessed before the commissioner that the value of ..... 'salaries'. the computation of income under this head is governed by sections 15 to 17. under section 15 any salary due from an employer ..... income from salaries from all employers and former employers put together and not the income under the head 'salaries' received from the employer which granted the perquisite. (4) under section 14 of the income-tax act all income for the purposes of income tax and for computation of total income is classified under six heads the first of which is ..... of the assessed the following question has been referred to us for decision : whether on a correct interpretation of the provisions contained in section 17(2)(iii)(e) of the income-tax act the tribunal was right in holding that the limit of rs. 18.0001- mentioned in the said section refers to the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Oct-06-1982
Reported in : (1983)33CTR(Mad)301; 140ITR562(Mad)
..... whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in view of the provisions contained in section 36(1)(v) of the income-tax act, 1961, the appellate tribunal was right in holding that the claim of the assessee for allowance of provision of gratuity was liable to be deducted subject ..... thus: 'in a sister company which is also running a textile mills in coimbatore, the commissioner, of income-tax u/s. 264 had deleted the mahimi collection as not taxable. when the commissioner of income-tax himself has no case that it is taxable, we fail to see why this point should be taken ..... that mahimai collections effected by the assessee in this case cannot be regarded as taxable business incomes of the assessee or, for that matter, as the assessee taxable incomes under any head of income whatever under the act. as we earlier mentioned, the one and only ground on which the ito had disallowed the ..... cryptic observation to the effect 'that there is no separate collection'. the ito accordingly added back this sum of rs. 17,610 to the income of the assessee. the ground of rejection apparently was that the collection made by the assessee towards mahimai were not by way of separate hundial ..... ltd. : 116itr60(sc) . in cit v. n. s. pandaria pillai : 73itr457(mad) , the court observed that if the payment made by the customers was not voluntary and not intended as a gift to charity, the collections would form part of the income of the persons who received the same, notwithstanding .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Feb-05-1982
Reported in : (1982)28CTR(Bom)252; 137ITR339(Bom); 10TAXMAN14(Bom)
kania, j.1. this is a reference under s, 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, (referred to hereinafter as 'the said act').2. the relevant facts are as follows :the assessee-company owned a building known as 'bombay house' at bruce street, bombay. the said building was constructed in 1920 and since ..... the nature of trade, commerce or manufacture. section 14 deals with the heads of income under the said act. the said section provides that there are six heads of income that, unless otherwise provided by the said act, all income shall, for the purposes of charge of income-tax and computation of total income, be classified under the said heads. one of these heads is 'profits and gains ..... of business of profession'. the last is 'income from other sources' the aforesaid head, namely, 'income from other sources' is a residuary ..... head and it is the well settled position in law that no income can .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Feb-12-1982
Reported in : (1982)28CTR(Bom)193; 143ITR67(Bom)
..... on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal erred in holding that even where the explanation to section 271(1)(c) of the income-tax act, 1961, comes to the aid of the revenue in raising the presumption mentioned therein for the purpose of proving the requirements of clause (c) of section ..... the circumstances of the case, the tribunal erred in holding that the penalty imposed on the assessee under section 271(1)(c) of the income-tax act, 1961, for the assessment year 1967-68 was not tenable ?'4. we had occasion to deal with this question when the reference arising out of ..... income-tax appeal no. 2306 of 1970-71 was decided by us, being income-tax reference no. 152 of 1972 decided on january 20, 1982 cit v. devandas perumal & co. : 140itr943(bom) . in that reference, we have endorsed the ..... had taken the view that 'merely because the accounts of the assessee did not commend to the income-tax officer and that he had rejected the book results, it would not ipso facto follow that the difference in the returned income arose due to any gross or 'wilful neglect' or 'fraud' on the part of the ..... explanation to s. 271(1)(c) of the act. a penalty of rs. 50,035 was, therefore, levied.3. when the appeal before the tribunal was heard, the tribunal found that a similar question in respect of plantain dealers was dealt with by it in income-tax appeal no. 2306 of 1970-71, in which .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Apr-26-1982
Reported in : (1982)30CTR(Bom)229; 142ITR175(Bom); 11TAXMAN51(Bom)
..... by the assessee during the relevant years over the payments thereof made during the same years as the income of the assessee and liable to tax under the provisions of the income-tax act, 1961 ?'3. the assessee had contested its sales tax liability in respect of the excess amounts collected, in this high court. at the date when the tribunal gave its decision, the matter ..... that aspect of the matter.7. we are required to decided whether the excess sales tax recovered by the assessees can be treated as a trading receipt of the assessees and hence as a part of the income liable to tax under the provisions of the i.t. act, 1961. in this connection, the supreme court in the case of chowringhee sales bureau p ..... . ltd. v. cit : 87itr542(sc) , has held that the excess sales tax which was collected by the assessee in that case, which was neither ..... account' did not make any material difference because the true nature and the quality of the receipt was a trading receipt. it was, therefore, subjected to income-tax. the supreme court observed that the assessee would, of course, be entitled to claim deduction of the amount in question as and when it paid the amount to the state .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jun-24-1982
Reported in : (1983)36CTR(Bom)388; 141ITR494(Bom); 14TAXMAN65(Bom)
..... ) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was justified in law in holding that the income-tax officer was right in passing an order under section 23a of the indian income-tax act, 1922, against the applicant ? (ii) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal ought to have held 'that the amount of ..... income-tax and super-tax payable by the company in respect of its total income' was the gross amount of rs. 2,18,069 and not ..... subsection (1) of section 4 computed in the manner laid down in this act'.9. section 3 of the act, which is the charging section, provides that income-tax shall be charged for the assessment year in accordance with and subject to the provisions of the act in respect of the 'total income' of the previous year of every individual, huf, company and local authority, etc ..... be deducted for the purpose of s. 23a was the total tax payable on the total income of rs. 3,50,342. if this amount of income-tax together which super-tax is deducted and further a deduction of wealth-tax under s. 23a(1)(b) of the act is made, the balance would come to rs. 1,28,722, 60% of which came to rs. 77 .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jun-22-1982
Reported in : (1982)31CTR(Bom)313; 138ITR455a(Bom); 12TAXMAN92(Bom)
..... , that penalty proceedings should be taken., in that case notice to show cause against the levy of penalty was issued by the ito under s. 271(1)(c) of the income-tax act, 1961, but the penalty was levied by the iac not on the conclusion of the ito but on a different conclusion arrived at by the aac. in the case before ..... concealment of income. as the amount of penalty livable would be more than rs. 1,000, he referred the case to the iac. on appeal from the assessment order ..... upon by mr. dastur. in cit v. lakhdhir lalji p : 85itr77(guj) , the ito added a sun of rs. 58,000 to the disclosed income which he held the assessee has realised by the sale of 1,383 began of garlic and has concealed, and issued a notice to the assessee under s. 274 of the income-tax act, 1961, for levying penalty for ..... so on. the relevant portion of s. 271 runs thus :'271. (1) if the income-tax officer or the appellate assistant commissioner, in the course of any proceedings under this act, is satisfied that any person-...... (c) has concealed the particulars of his income of furnishes inaccurate particulars of such income. he may direct that such person shall pay be way of penalty-......'11. sub .....Tag this Judgment!