Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Oct-08-1985
Reported in : (1986)51CTR(Raj)14; 163ITR316(Raj)
..... that the payment of rs. 35,000 was made under exceptional circumstancesand, therefore, it was not hit by section 40a(3) of the income-tax act. the commissioner of income-tax, jaipur, filed an application under section 256(1) of the income-tax act requiring the tribunal to draw up a statement of the case and refer the question quoted above to the high court for its opinion ..... supreme court has observed as under (headnote) :'it is well established that the high court is not a court of appeal in a reference under section 66 of the indian income-tax act, 1922, and it is not open to the high court in such a reference to embark upon a reappraisal of the evidence and to arrive at findings of fact contrary ..... trading co. were also filed along with the reply dated may 14, 1974. the assessing authority disallowed the payment as it contravened the proviso to section 40a(3) of the income-tax act as it found that the three letters produced did not bear any reference number and they were only an after-thought. the assessee preferred an appeal and the appellate assistant ..... finding of fact was not challenged by the department before the tribunal in the reference application under section 256(1) of the income-tax act nor has it been challenged before us in the application under section 256(2) of the income-tax act and, therefore, we are bound by the same and cannot go behind the finding arrived at by the tribunal. moreover, it cannot .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Nov-04-1985
Reported in : (1986)55CTR(Raj)203; 163ITR540(Raj); 1985(2)WLN772
..... consideration i. t. reference no. 20 of 1976. question no. 8 mentioned above relates to charging of interest under section 139 of the income-tax act when extension application is not moved by the assessee for late filing of the return and whether interest can legally be charged under section 139 in ..... or carried forward by him under the various provisions as contemplated under sub-section (2) of section 77.9. in the law and practice of income tax, seventh edition, by kanga and palkhivala, the learned commentators deal with the matter as under (at p. 634 of vol. 1):'likewise, if ..... as regards question no. 10, the tribunal expressed that it does not arise out of the order of the tribunal. income-tax reference number is 20 of 1976 and the income-tax case number is 189 of 1975 which is an application made by the assessee for directing the tribunal to submit the ..... assessee is not unjustified. 10. whether annuity deposit should be deducted while calculating interest under section 139 treating the assessee as unregistered firm.' 2. the income-tax appellate tribunal made a reference to this court for its opinion on questions nos. 8 and 9 which, according to the tribunal, are questions of ..... accounting year relevant to the assessment year 1967-68 is not perverse and is not based on surmises, conjectures and imaginations. 7. whether the income-tax officer is correct, after having accepted diwali year in respect of cotton business for the assessment year 1968-69, not to have accepted diwali year .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Oct-03-1985
Reported in : (1986)55CTR(Raj)164; 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!
Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Jul-15-1985
Reported in : (1986)53CTR(Raj)380; 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 : 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!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Apr-25-1985
Reported in : 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!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Nov-28-1985
Reported in : (1986)51CTR(Mad)256; 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 : 120itr33(mad) , the facts were these. the assessee which was carrying on business of arranging exhibition of advertisement and .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Mar-14-1985
Reported in : 156ITR751(Mad)
..... following question to this court : 'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in holding that the commissioner of income-tax had jurisdiction to act under section 263 of the income-tax act, 1961, as it could be said that prima facie the assessment order was erroneous in law and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue ?' 2. however ..... acquisition of all the shares on the basis of the market value as on january 1, 1964, to the prejudicial to the revenue, initiated proceedings under section 263 of the income-tax act and after giving show-cause notice to the assessee, determined by his order dated december 22, 1982, the total cost of acquisition of the shares at rs. 1,60,640 ..... . in doing so, the commissioner of income-tax act substituted the market value as on january 1, 1964, only for 493 shares said to have been acquired on april 1, 1968, at the partition, and in respect of 263 ..... computation of the cost of acquisition of shares acquired after january 1, 1964, is on erroneous basis. therefore, the tribunal is justified in upholding the jurisdiction of the commissioner of income-tax under section 263 of the income-tax act. we are not, therefore, direction a reference in this case. the petition is dismissed. there will, however, be no order as to costs.Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Dec-18-1985
Reported in : (1986)53CTR(Mad)181; 166ITR308(Mad); 25TAXMAN120(Mad)
..... contention. in the appeal filed by the department before the tribunal, the revenue relied on section 10(5a) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, and the corresponding section 28(ii) of the income-tax act, 1961, and contended that the compensation received by the assessed shall be deemed to be profits and gains of business carried ..... decree dated august 23, 1957, for the period from april 1, 1957, to march 31, 1958, is assessable under section 10(5a) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, for the assessment year 1958-59 ?' 8. it may be seen from the facts stated above that the original sales organisation agreement did not ..... the assessee received a sum of rs. 12,000 in the financial year 1955-56 and the income-tax officer taxed this amount in the assessment year 1956-57 as profits under section 10(5a) of the act. the contention of the assessee was that the entire compensation amount of rs. 96,000 accrued to ..... suit claiming rs. 28,00,000. the suit was decreed only for a sum of rs. 2,34,000. relying on section 10(5a), the income-tax officer as well as the appellate assistant commissioner held that the amount of rs. 2,34,000 with interest decreed and received in december, 1955, ..... on and shall be liable to tax accordingly. in answer to this contention, the assessee contended that the provisions of section 10( .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Apr-08-1985
Reported in : 159ITR182(Mad)
..... no share income actually received from the partnership, there is no question of deduction of interest paid on the capital invested ..... referred to as 'the act', only against the assessee's share income from the partnership and when there is ..... got no share income from the said partnership. the assessee claimed deduction in respect of the interest paid on the capital borrowed as against his total income, which is mainly from his profession as a cine artiste. the assessing authority rejected the said claim on the ground that deduction can be allowed under section 67(3) of the income-tax act, 1961, hereinafter ..... in the partnership. the matter was taken in appeal to the commissioner of income-tax (appeals). the appellate authority also agreed .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Apr-23-1985
Reported in : (1985)87BOMLR337; 165ITR460(Bom)
..... the commencement of this act, a refund falls due after such commencement or default is made after such commencement in the payment of any ..... , this submission cannot be sustained. sub-s. (c) of s. 297 deals with a case where any proceeding is pending on the commencement of the act of 1961, namely, on 1-4-1962 before any income-tax authority, the appellate tribunal or any court by way of appeal, reference or revision. it is quite clear that the claim for interest made by the ..... (2)(i), but by the provisions of s. 297(2)(c). clause (c) of sub-s. (2) of s. 297 of the act of 1961 runs as follows :'any proceeding pending on the commencement of this act before any income-tax authority, the appellate tribunal or any court, by way of appeal, reference or revision, shall be continued and disposed of as if the ..... . (1) of s. 297 states that the indian it act, 1922 is repealed. sub-s. (2) of s. 297 contains the saving provisions. clause (i) of sub-s. (2) of s. 297 reads as follows :'297(2) notwithstanding the repeal of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (11 of 1922) hereinafter referred to as the repealed act -(i) where in respect of any assessment completed before .....Tag this Judgment!