Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Year: 1985 Page 11 of about 2,217 results (0.107 seconds)

Oct 03 1985 (HC)

Bishambar Dayal Sriniwas Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Oct-03-1985

Reported in : (1986)55CTR(Raj)164; [1986]162ITR5(Raj); 1986(2)WLN209

..... were of the view that the term 'status' occurring in clause (c) of section 246 of the income-tax act, 1961, providing for appeal to the appellate assistant commissioner against the order of the income-tax officer cannot take within it a dispute arising out of disallowance of registration of a firm for which special ..... the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a true interpretation of sections 246 and 184(7) of the income-tax act, 1961, an appeal against the order of the income-tax officer passed under sub-section (7) of section 184 lies to the appellate assistant commissioner in terms of section 246 of ..... on business. for the year 1970-71, it was granted registration under the income-tax act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'). it filed its declaration for continuation of registration in terms of sub-section (1) of section 184 of the act in respect of the assessment year 1971-72 on october 8, 1971. the ..... the assessee-firm is liable to be assessed. it is clearly within the ambit of clause (c) of section 246 of the act. the effect of the income-tax officer's order refusing to condone the delay in the filing of the declaration in form no. 12 is refusal to assess the ..... the opinion that looking at the question from the point of view of either section 185(1)(b) or section 185(3) of the act, the order of the income-tax officer refusing 'to allow continuation of registration to the assessee-firm' tantamounts to refusing to register the firm and, therefore, comes within the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 14 1985 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ramdeo Samadhi

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Aug-14-1985

Reported in : (1986)50CTR(Raj)61; [1986]160ITR179(Raj); 1985(2)WLN161

..... the said act. economists have defined the term 'income' as consumption plus (or minus) the net increase (or decrease) in value ..... the payer is not a sine qua non of a receipt to become an income. in h.h. maharaj rana hemant singhji v. cit , a contention was raised that the concept of income is that it must be referable to a source capable of yielding some periodical return. it was observed that the income-tax act has adopted a comprehensive basis for taxation inasmuch as all ..... known as shri ramtleoji or descendants of shri ramdeoji. ' 6. it, therefore, dismissed the appeal of the revenue. an application under section 256(1) of the act was filed by the commissioner of income-tax and the aforesaid questions have been referred to us for our opinion.7. we have heard mr. b.r. arora, learned counsel for the revenue, and mr ..... income coming from whatever source is liable to taxation unless such income fell within the exemptions enumerated in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 22 1985 (HC)

Arvind Singh (Legal Heir of Maharana Bhagwat Singh Who Was Legal Heir ...

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Aug-22-1985

Reported in : (1986)52CTR(Raj)286; [1986]160ITR908(Raj); 1985(2)WLN789

..... by or on behalf of the ruler as privy purse or as a result of any financial agreement with the government and, therefore, exemption under section 10(19) of the income-tax act, 1961, is not available in the hands of the assessee. the covenant is between the ruler and the government whereas hath kharch allowance is between the ruler and the assessee ..... hold that the annual 'hath kharch allowance ' which was being paid to the assessee was in pursuance of an enforceable custom and, therefore, was not exempt from tax under section 10(19) of the income-tax act, 1961 ? 3. whether the tribunal erred in not following the view of the supreme court in the case of kunwar shri vir rajendra singh v. union of ..... kunwar, of udaipur to the tribunal. the same was dismissed. the tribunal considered the question of exemption under sections 10(19) and 10(2) of the income-tax act, 1961 (xliii of 1961) (for short 'the act'), and recorded the following findings:(1) that the deceased-assessee has all along in the past been receiving the said allowance by way of periodical receipts accruing ..... the respective financial years relevant to the assessment years 1970-71 and 1971-72 from maharana bhagwat singh of mewar was exempt from income-tax under the provisions of section 10(19) and/or section 10(2) of the income-tax act, 1961, or otherwise '7. after carefully examining the findings recorded by the tribunal in its order dated april 27, 1976, and the controversial .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 23 1985 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Rajasthan Machinery Mart (P.) Ltd.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Aug-23-1985

Reported in : [1986]160ITR952(Raj); 1985(2)WLN142

..... foreign countries with respect to the business of the assessee. a question, arose as to whether it was an allowable expenditure under section 10(2)(xv) of the indian income-tax act, 1922 ('the old act'). the division bench consisting of r. s. pathak j., as he then was, and t.p. mukerjee j. of the allahabad high court held that any expenditure ..... materialise. under the circumstances, the expenditure in question cannot be called as capital in nature... '5. an application under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961 (no. xliii of 1961)('the act'), was filed by the commissioner of income-tax, jodhpur. he desired that two questions of law which have been mentioned in the statement of the case may be referred for the opinion ..... on the basis of the material on record concurred with the finding of the income-tax officer that such expenditure was of capital nature. he, therefore, dismissed, the appeal by his order dated august 31, 1978. a further appeal was filed by the assessee before the ..... considering the evidence on record and contentions of the assessee opined that the tour was undertaken primarily in connection with the farbrication of the test bench. in these circumstances, the income-tax officer held, vide his order dated february 21, 1978, that such expenditure was of capital nature. he, therefore, disallowed it.4. an appeal was taken. the appellate assistant commissioner .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 15 1985 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Alisher Contractors

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jul-15-1985

Reported in : (1986)53CTR(Raj)380; [1986]159ITR534(Raj); 1985(2)WLN401

..... act '). the tribunal allowed the application and referred the aforesaid questions.9. we have heard mr. b.r. arora, for the revenue, and despite service of notice ..... has been received and is since applied.'14. in ratilal b. daftari v. cit : [1959]36itr18(bom) , the question regarding section 23(5)(a) of the indian income-tax act, 1922 ('the old act') arose, which has now been replaced by section 182 of the act. in that case, there was a registered partnership firm consisting of sixteen partners. the partners were to share the profit ..... opinion, he will not be required to pay further tax. if alisher is further required to pay the tax, it would be double taxation on the same income. thus, in my opinion, the finding of the learned appellate assistant commissioner is quite correct.'8. the commissioner submitted an application under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961 (no. xliii of 1961) (for short 'the ..... partners. after the income has been apportioned, the income-tax officer has to find whether it is the partner who is assessable or whether the income should be taken to be the real income of some other person. if it is the real income of another firm, it is that firm which is liable to be assessed under section 23(5)(a) of the act.'17. to .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 03 1985 (HC)

Rasoolji Buxji Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : May-03-1985

Reported in : (1986)50CTR(Raj)215; [1986]158ITR768(Raj)

..... was satisfied during the course of assessment proceedings in respect of all the years under consideration that the assessee had concealed its income or furnished inaccurate particulars of its income within the meaning of section 271(1)(c) of the income-tax act, 1961 ?' 6. the tribunal refused to refer the remaining questions proposed on behalf of the assessee.7. dissatisfied with the order ..... required to be decided by this court:'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the income-tax appellate tribunal, jaipur bench, jaipur, was justified in imposing minimum penalty upon the assessee under section 271(1)(c) of the income-tax act, 1961, merely on the basis of the admission made by the assessee in its letter dated june 11, 1969 ..... , to the commissioner of income-tax for purposes of settlement during the reassessment proceedings '10. question no. 4, proposed to be referred by the ..... dwarka prasad, j.1. these eight applications under section 256(2) of the income-tax act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'), have been filed by the assessee on the ground that the income-tax appellate tribunal, jaipur bench, jaipur (for short 'the tribunal'), has declined to refer to this court some of the questions of law proposed by the assessee as arising out .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 01 1985 (HC)

Janki Devi Bajaj Seva Trust Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : May-01-1985

Reported in : [1985]154ITR445(Raj)

..... direct the income-tax appellate tribunal, jaipur bench, jaipur, to state the case and refer the aforesaid question of law arising out of ..... an application of the income of the assessce for charitable purposes ?'5. we, therefore, ..... in the circumstances of the case, the income-tax appellate tribunal was justified in holding that any expenditure incurred by the assessce trust for making payment of income-tax, wealth-tax or other taxes or for payment of rents, rates or for establishment expenses during the period of three months referred to in the explanation to section 11 of the income-tax act, 1961, could not be considered as ..... 1. this application under section 256(2) of the i.t. act, 1961, has been moved by the assessee on account of the refusal of the income-tax appellate tribunal, jaipur bench, jaipur, to make a reference to this court regarding questions of law arising out of the order of the tribunal dated february 26, 1980.2. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 11 1985 (HC)

Surana and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jan-11-1985

Reported in : (1985)48CTR(Raj)193; [1985]153ITR190(Raj); 1985(2)WLN24

..... tribunal was justified in holding that the case of the assessee fell within the exception provided in section 188 of the income-tax act, 1961, and was, therefore, covered by the provisions of section 187(1) lead with section 187(2) of the income-tax act, 1961, and that, therefore, only one assessment should have been framed on the firm for the entire accounting period corresponding ..... diwali day and no attempt was made to bifurcate the profits in two parts, i.e., one preceding the death of fatehlal and the other succeeding his death. before the income-tax officer (ito), it was submitted that two different assessments should be framed on the firm, one for the period up to the date of death of the partner (fatehlal) and ..... chettiar : [1962]44itr739(sc) as under (p. 92 of 148 itr): '...that where a special provision was made in a taxing statute in derogation of the provisions of the partnership act, effect should be given to it and where no such provision had been made, liability for payment of tax could be determined by taking into consideration the general provisions of the partnership ..... act. therefore, where the provisions of the i.t. act are clear, resort cannot be had to the provisions of another statute like the partnership act. therefore, section 187 of the i.t. act overrides theprovisions of section 42 of the partnership .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 25 1985 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. J.K.K. Sundararajah

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-25-1985

Reported in : [1986]160ITR370(Mad)

..... the various partnerships was equally divided between the assessee and his two sons. the partition has also been accepted by the income-tax officer under section 25a of the income-tax act. in the wealth-tax assessment, he claimed that 2/3 rds of the capital in the various partnerships belonged to the minors and, therefore, ..... , respectively ?' m.n. chandurkar, c.j. 33. this reference which was made at the instance of the revenue under section 256(1) of the income-tax act has been placed before me because there is a difference of opinion between ramanujam j. and (late) fakkir mohammed j. on the answer to be given ..... to the fact that though the export firms themselves were to be treated as registered firms for the purpose of assessment under the income-tax act, the aggregate of the share income of the relative partners was to be equally assessed in the hands of the assessee and his three brothers. paragraph 3 of ..... is not a question which was referred to the high court. the scope of a reference under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, is a very limited one and the high court must take the facts as stated in the statement of the case. in karnani properties ..... , manickam, equally, each of them being allotted rs. 1,86,296.10. the said partition was recognised by the income-tax officer by an order dated august 31, 1967, passed under section 171 of the income-tax act. besides the above firms, there were certain other firms, namely, messrs. colombo stores, messrs. ashoka textiles, messrs. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 28 1985 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Late G.D. Naidu and ors. (by Lrs. G.D. ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-28-1985

Reported in : (1986)51CTR(Mad)256; [1987]165ITR63(Mad)

..... facts and in the circumstances of the case, there was a transfer of assets within the meaning of the words ' otherwise transferred ' occurring in section 34(3)(b) of the income-tax act. the high court answered the second question in the affirmative and against the assessee and in view of that answer, declined to answer the first question. on a further appeal ..... that an amount referable to the restrictive covenant agreed to by the parties should be allowed as a deduction in the hands of the assessee under section 37 of the income-tax act (7) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in holding that the compensation paid by the assessee firm to shri. g. d ..... observed that the payment was not for business considerations and, therefore, it could not be allowed as deduction, under section 37 of the income-tax act, in the hands of the firm. in the case of the recipients, the income-tax officer found that the entire amount was receivable and was received by the two assessees and that, therefore, there was no evidence to substantiate ..... the outgoing partners was being carried on by the new partners and we have already pointed out that even the income-tax officer has registered the firm under the income-tax act for the subsequent years also. 27. in blaze and central (p.) ltd. v. cit : [1979]120itr33(mad) , the facts were these. the assessee which was carrying on business of arranging exhibition of advertisement and .....

Tag this Judgment!


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