|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 121 to 132 of 132 Records
-
1978 (12) TMI 12 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Income From House Property ... ... ... ... ..... did not contain any provision that the firm will continue undissolved notwithstanding the death of any of the partners. The result of it was that s. 42(c) of the Partnership Act, 1932, came into operation, and the death of Govindaraja Mudaliar brought about the dissolution of the firm. Once the firm came to an end, what happened subsequently was merely the succession of a new firm to the business in question, and will not constitute a change in the constitution of the firm as contemplated by s. 187 of the Act. Therefore, even with regard to the firm of V. Munuswamy Mudaliar and Company, the Tribunal was right in holding that no single assessment could be made under s. 187 of the Act, and only two assessments could be made for the two periods on the two firms. In these circumstances, we answer the question referred to this court in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. The assessee is entitled to its costs from the department. Counsel s fee Rs. 250 in each reference.
-
1978 (12) TMI 11 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Appeals, Commissioner, Firm, Registration, Revision ... ... ... ... ..... nce with law, in consequence whereof the lawful revenue due to the State has not been realized or cannot be realized. It can mean nothing else. If as a result of an error committed by the ITO there is a diminution in the quantum of tax payable by an assessee, it is clearly a case of an error being prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. In Amritlal Bhogilal s case (1958 34 ITR 130, the Supreme Court upheld that the Commissioner could exercise his revisional powers in a case where the ITO erroneously grants registration. The interests of the revenue are prejudicially affected because if the firm is assessed in the status of an unregistered firm, the entire income is assessed in its hands, yielding larger revenue, as compared to it being assessed as a registered firm. In the result both the questions of law referred for our opinion are answered in favour of the department and against the assessee. The Commissioner would be entitled to costs, which are assessed at Rs. 200.
-
1978 (12) TMI 10 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e the owner of those properties. There is absolutely nothing to indicate that the, properties were inherited by the assessee from his father as the self-acquired properties of the father and further that was not the case of the assessee even. On the other hand, there is a clear finding by the Tribunal that these properties were already allotted to and taken over by the assessee even during the lifetime of his father and that the settlement deed merely confirmed the continued enjoyment and possession of those properties by the assessee. If that be the case, the question of inheritance did not come anywhere near the facts of the present case. Under these circumstances, we are clearly of the opinion that the conclusion of the Tribunal is erroneous. Consequently, we answer all the three questions referred to this court which flow from a single position, in the negative and against the assessee. The department will be entitled to its costs of this reference counsel s fee Rs. 500.
-
1978 (12) TMI 9 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Estoppel, Exemptions ... ... ... ... ..... mstanced cases are and how the petitioner and the other Rulers concerned have been dissimilarly treated. A challenge to executive action on the ground that it violates art. 14 must be pleaded and proved if it is to succeed. Factual averments in this behalf must be made with sufficient specificity, so that the respondents have notice of the petitioner s allegations and have an opportunity to meet the same. In the present case, we are constrained to hold, the allegations on which the plea of hostile discrimination is founded, lack specificity and do not measure up to the required standards of pleadings and in view of the respondents denials cannot be considered sufficient to sustain the plea. Thus, on point (c) also the petitioner fails. No other contentions were urged. In the result, for the reasons stated above, this writ petition fails and is dismissed. Rule is discharged. However, having regard to the circumstances of the case, parties are directed to bear their own costs.
-
1978 (12) TMI 8 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Firm, Inclusions In Total Income, Total Income ... ... ... ... ..... so as to disentitle registration. Overall performance of the firm by including the result of the three branches was a profit. The minor in fact got a share in the profit. He did not get any share of the loss. The Tribunal was right in taking the view that the provisions of the partnership deed were not violated, because no part of the loss was allocated to the minor. The second question also fails. In respect of the third question, the minor s father did sign the deed. Merely because he did not add the phrase on behalf of the minor , it will not make the deed defective. It was admitted that the minor was admitted to the partnership. The guardian of the minor has signed the document. It should be deemed that he had signed the document on behalf of the minor. In the result, all the three questions referred to us are answered in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the department. As no one appears on behalf of the assessee, there will be no order as to costs.
-
1978 (12) TMI 7 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... d be validly imposed for 5 months only instead of 19 months as calculated by the Income-tax Officer and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax? In the place of these questions, the following questions are ordered to be substituted (1) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in allowing the assessee to raise before the Tribunal a ground which had not been raised before or adjudicated upon by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner? (2) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that penalty in the instant case could be imposed only in respect of the delay that occurred after service of the notice under section 148, Income-tax Act ? If any copy is required to be issued the deleted questions need not be mentioned but the following note after giving the substituted questions should be recorded Note As substituted by way of amendment by order of the court dated December 4, 1978.
-
1978 (12) TMI 6 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Firm, Inclusions In Total Income, Total Income ... ... ... ... ..... rms and conditions to which they mutually agreed. It is thus apparent that the old partnership deed does not clearly indicate as to who the incoming partner will be in the case of the death of an existing partner and it fails to indicate what their shares would be. These things are made dependent upon a fresh agreement between them. The terms and conditions to which they mutually agree will be the governing ones. Under the circumstances, it cannot be said that the old partnership did indicate the intention which is requisite in the case of a change in the constitution of the firm. That document was hence not helpful. In our opinion, the Tribunal was justified in its conclusion that, under the circumstances, the firm was not entitled to continuance of registration for the year 1969-70. The question referred to us is hence answered in the affirmative, in favour of the department and against the assessee. The Commissioner will be entitled to costs which are assessed at Rs. 200.
-
1978 (12) TMI 5 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Income From House Property ... ... ... ... ..... chin Bench, as required by law. GOPALAN NAMBIYAR C.J.-These cases were posted to be spoken to , today, because, although three cases, I.T.Rs. Nos. 64 and 65 of 1976 and I.T.R. 33 of 1977 were heard together, the judgment delivered related only to I.T.R. No. 33 of 1977. That was apparently on account of the fact that the order of reference related only to I.T.R. No. 33 of 1977 and I.T.Rs. Nos. 64 and 65 of 1976 were called up as connected with it. These cases (I.T.Rs. Nos. 64 and 65 of 1976) relate to the same assessee for the assessment years 1972-73 and 1973-74 and raise the same question. Following our decision in I.T.R. No. 33 of 1977, we answer the question referred in these cases also in the negative, i.e., in favour of the revenue and against the assessee. There will be no order as to costs. A copy of this judgment under the signature of the Registrar and the seal of the court, will be communicated to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, as required by law.
-
1978 (12) TMI 4 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Agricultural Income Tax, Deduction ... ... ... ... ..... l income. In I.T.R. No. 50 of 1977, a sum of Rs. 1,894 was claimed as remuneration paid to the auditors. In I.T.R. No., 108 of 1977, a sum of Rs. 7,925.08 was claimed as legal charges., The scope of section 5(j) of the Act fell for examination before a Division Bench of this court in Commr. of Agrl. I.T. v. Malayalam Plantations Ltd. 1978 115 ITR 624. The decision was referred to and followed in I.T.R. No. 107 of 1977. In the light of the principle laid down by the above decisions, we have no doubt that the amounts claimed in these cases are deductible under section 5(j) of the Act. The questions formulated for our opinion in these references are accordingly answered in the affirmative, that is, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. There will be no order as to costs. A copy of this judgment under the signature of the Registrar and the seal of this court will be communicated to the Kerala Agricultural Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Trivandrum, as required by law.
-
1978 (12) TMI 3 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Agricultural Income Tax, Deduction ... ... ... ... ..... nses considered as an antithesis of agricultural income. It was pointed out that section 5(j) of the Agricultural Income-tax Act and section 10(2)(xv) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, represent conceptions which are allied, though distinct and, while there should no doubt be a connection between the incurring of the expenditure and the earning of the income, that connection should not be remote or indefinite or fanciful. Whether the connection was sufficient and adequate is a question of fact depending on the facts and circumstances of each case. In the light of the above exposition of the law, we feel that a fresh look by the Tribunal at the facts and circumstances disclosed is necessary. We would accordingly decline to answer the question of law referred for our determination and would direct the Tribunal to rehear the appeal in accordance with law and in the light of the observations made in this judgment and pass appropriate orders. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1978 (12) TMI 2 - SC ORDER
The question whether a particular expenditure on rent is excessive and unreasonable or not is essentially a question of fact and does not involve any issue of law and hence we are of the view that the second question ought not to have been directed to be referred by the High Court
-
1978 (12) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the expression " salary " as defined in r. 2(h) in Part A of the Fourth Schedule to the Act includes "commission" paid by the assessee to its salesmen in terms of their contracts of employment - Whether Employer's contribution on the basis of monthly salary as well as commission to the individual account of these employees in the recognised provident fund is allowable as a deduction in the assessee employers - both the questions are answered in favour of the assessee
....
|
