|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 181 to 194 of 194 Records
-
1982 (9) TMI 14 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Exemptions, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... h 9, 1982, and had held that the Appellate Tribunal was not justified in holding that there was no rectifiable mistake apparent from the record in the order of the AAC and that the AAC had no jurisdiction to take action under s. 35 of the W.T. Act. As regards question No. (2) we had noticed two conflicting decisions of this court and had referred the same for decision by a larger Bench. The Full Bench by its order dated August 6, 1982 (CWT v. Tarabai Kanakmal 1983 140 ITR 374 (MP) FB ), has held that for assessment years prior to 1st April, 1972, jewellery will not include gold ornaments not studded with precious or semi-precious stones within the meaning of s. 5(1)(viii). In accordance with the opinion recorded by the Full Bench on question No. (2), we hold that for assessment years prior to April 1, 1972, jewellery will not include gold ornaments not studded with precious or semi-precious stones. Question No. (2) is answered accordingly. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1982 (9) TMI 13 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Exemptions, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... n referred to us for answering the question of law mentioned above. In CWT v. Smt. Tarabai (M.C.C. No. 128 of 1978) this court was called upon to consider two questions on identical facts. Both the questions were answered separately but the effect of the answer was that the AAC had jurisdiction under s. 35 of the W.T. Act to rectify the earlier order, after the amendment to s. 5(1)(viii) of the Act. It was further held that in view of the Explanation to the provision which was not retrospective, the word jewellery , before the amendment, was susceptible of different meanings and if one meaning was accepted by the AAC, there was no rectifiable error within the purview of s. 35 of the W.T. Act. We, therefore, hold that, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate tribunal was justified in holding that the value of the ornaments and jewellery could not be included by invoking the provisions of s. 35 of the W.T. Act, 1957. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1982 (9) TMI 12 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Advance Tax, Notice, Penalty ... ... ... ... ..... se, the Tribunal has felt that it is unnecessary to go into that aspect finally as they had upheld the invalid order levying penalty on the other ground of non-compliance with s. 221(1), proviso. As a result of our answer being against the assessee, the Tribunal has to necessarily consider the other contention put forward by the assessee and accepted by the AAC, that as the demand for advance tax itself is invalid for non-issue of a show-cause notice before invoking the power of rectification, the order levying penalty for non-payment of such advance tax is invalid. It is also seen from the order of the Tribunal that the assessee in his cross-objections sought adjudication on several issues, but it has considered and decided only the first question. Now that the assessee is not successful on the question referred before us, the matter has to be remitted to the Tribunal for its adjudication on the other contentions advanced by the assessee. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1982 (9) TMI 11 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Annual Value, Income From Property ... ... ... ... ..... . 55,500. This is the amount on which the petitioner had to be taxed under the head Income from property subject to such deductions as may be permissible under law. We cannot agree, because of the absence of evidence, that the total annual income from the property had to be fixed at the same, figure as represented the annual letting value fixed by the Municipality. If there had been evidence to show that the annual letting value had been fixed by the Municipality on the basis of the standard rent then that alone would have been the sum for which the property might reasonably be expected to let from year to year. The AAC, no doubt, directed the ITO to compute the income from the property on the basis of the annual letting value, being Rs. 46,061. In law his direction is correct. We, however, have no facts on the record to find out whether the annual letting value was fixed on the basis of standard rent. The reference has, accordingly, to be answered in the negative. No costs.
-
1982 (9) TMI 10 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Estate Duty ... ... ... ... ..... roller has merely rejected the petition for stay filed by the accountable persons on the ground that the appeal filed by them is not maintainable, which is not relevant for application of s. 70, we have to quash that order as having been passed on irrelevant consideration with a direction to him to pass fresh order, in exercise of his discretion u/s. 70 taking into account the hardship that will be caused to the accountable persons if the entire amount of estate duty of Rs. 4,48,403 is sought to be collected in lump sum and other relevant circumstances. In this view, we allow the writ petition and direct the respondent to consider the petitioners request for stay u/s. 70 and pass orders thereunder in accordance with law and reason after taking into account all the relevant circumstances. There will be no order as to costs. The question whether an appeal lies u/s. 62 against the order of rectification is left open as that question is now pending before the Controller himself.
-
1982 (9) TMI 9 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Estate Duty ... ... ... ... ..... 2,00,000, because he will not be entitled to an exemption under s. 33(1)(n) as his share did not pass on the death of the deceased. Thus, for rate purposes, the principal value of the deceased s share comes to Rs. 1,25,000 and that of the lineal descendant comes to Rs. 2,00,000. This inequality will not arise, if, as already stated, s. 39(3) is properly given effect to, that is the exemption under s. 33(1)(n) is given at the stage of determination of the principal value of the properties of the joint family in entirety and then apportioning the shares of all the coparceners including that of the lineal descendants. We are, therefore, of the view that Rs. 19,500 being the value of the accountable person s half share in the family residential house should have been excluded even while computing the value of the deceased s share in the family properties. Therefore, the question is answered in the affirmative and against the Revenue. There will, however, be no order as to costs.
-
1982 (9) TMI 8 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Income, Trusts ... ... ... ... ..... h of the survivor, for the eldest son of the intended marriage for life, and, after his death for A s second son, the interest created for the benefit of the eldest son is said to be bad for the reason that it does not extend to the whole of A s remaining interest in the property as he is given only a life interest. In this case, the entire interest in the property goes to the benefit of the prospective daughter-in-law through the second son and if that fails, the entire benefit goes to the benefit of the daughter-in-law by the first son. Thus, the trust deed in this case cannot be held to be bad for uncertainty or vagueness (1) as regards the object, and (2) as regards the beneficiaries nor does it offend the rule against perpetuity. We have to, therefore, hold that the trust deed is legally valid. The result is that both the questions are answered in the affirmative and against the Revenue. The assessee will have his costs from the Revenue. Counsel s fee Rs. 500 (one set).
-
1982 (9) TMI 7 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Assessment, Writ ... ... ... ... ..... ould quash the proceedings before the IAC in exercise of its powers under arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. We are not satisfied that this is a fit case for exercise of our jurisdiction under arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution. Admittedly, there are remedies of appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal, available to the petitioner. If a question of law arises, a reference can be made to this court. Prima facie it appears that the ITO by rectifying his order, brought the draft assessment within the requirements of s. 144B, and, therefore, the IAC had jurisdiction to take further steps in accordance with the above provision. Whether the rectification was proper or not is, as already observed, the subject-matter of a pending appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). If the rectification is legal and valid, the proceedings before the IAC are prima facie valid and within his jurisdiction. In the circumstances, this petition is dismissed summarily.
-
1982 (9) TMI 6 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the resolution dated November 7, 1962, only permitted the issue of 24,500 equity shares and that November 7, 1962, was not the date of issuance of all 24,500 equity shares ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the 4,799 shares (the value of which was Rs. 4,79,900 allotted to the assessee would form part of the initial issue of the company subsequent to March 31, 1964, as evidenced by the balance-sheet ? 4. Whether the Tribunal s interpretation of the resolution on the basis of the balance-sheet is sustainable in law and on the materials on record ? Our answers to all these questions are against the assessee and in the negative. The references are disposed of accordingly. The Department will have their costs in all the tax cases. Counsel s fee Rs. 500 (One set).
-
1982 (9) TMI 5 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Deduction, Estate Duty, HUF ... ... ... ... ..... thin any of these exceptional clauses, such a debt or encumbrance is per se deductible. In our judgment, the liability of ancestral or coparcenary property of a Hindu to pay for the marriage expenses of unmarried daughters in the family would be a proper debt or encumbrance deductible under the general provisions of s. 44 where the deceased dies possessed of such property. This liability does not fall under any of the special categories covered by cls. (a) to (d) of s. 44, and is not subject to the limitations found therein. The only condition for claiming a deduction in this kind of case is that which the Hindu law itself imposes, namely, that the deceased s estate must comprise ancestral or coparcenary property of the requisite value to bear the liability for the marriage expenses claimed. In the circumstances, we answer this reference in favour of the accountable person and against the Department. The Department shall pay the costs of this reference. Counsel s fee Rs. 500.
-
1982 (9) TMI 4 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... een made on an agreed basis, it cannot be the sole ground for initiating proceedings under s. 271(1)(c) and it has decided the question of concealment on the materials available in this case. In our view, the question as framed does not appear to arise from the order of the Tribunal since the Tribunal itself has not proceeded only on the basis of the assessment which has been made on agreed basis. We have to, therefore, reframe the question to reflect the exact dispute between the parties in these cases and we reframe the question accordingly as follows Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the cancellation of penalty in the case of each of the assessees for the assessment year 1967-68 and part of the penalty for the year 1968-69 is justified? Having regard to the above discussions, we have to answer the question as reframed in the affirmative and against the Revenue. The assessees will have their costs from the Revenue. Counsel s fee Rs. 500 (one set).
-
1982 (9) TMI 3 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... lly ascertained on a consideration of the prices obtained by sale of adjacent lands with similar advantages. If there are no sales of comparable lands, the value must be found from some other way. One method is to take the annual income which the owner is expected to obtain from the land and to capitalise it by a number of years purchase and the capitalised value is then taken as the market value which a willing seller may reasonably expect to obtain from a willing buyer. If this also is not possible, the court can adopt the method of reinstatement value. Thus the determination of the value of the excess lands at Rs. 1,650 per acre for wet lands and Rs. 900 per acre for dry lands as against the rate of Rs. 3,000 per acre for retained wet lands and Rs. 1,000 per acre of retained dry lands appears to be correct. The question is, therefore, answered in the affirmative and against the Revenue. The assessees will have their costs from the Revenue. Counsel s fee Rs. 500 (one set).
-
1982 (9) TMI 2 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
HUF, Reference ... ... ... ... ..... e born. From this, the intention of the testator is clear that he is not giving the properties absolutely to the assessee with full power of alienation. Even without any reference to the presumption arising from a gift by a parent to his son, which makes the properties in the hands of the son ancestral, in the absence of any contrary intention expressed in the will by the testator, in this case, the testator has made his intention clear by saying that the assessee will take the properties and share the same along with a son to be born. Thus, giving due regard to the terms of the will, the conclusion arrived at by the Tribunal that the assessee is to be assessed in his capacity as an HUF and not as an individual appears to be reasonable and consistent with the terms of the will. In this view of the matter, we do not see any warrant for issuing a direction to the Appellate Tribunal to state a case on the question set out above. The petitions are, therefore, dismissed. No costs.
-
1982 (9) TMI 1 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Closely Held Company, Rule Against Double Taxation ... ... ... ... ..... n only once. There could be double taxation if the Legislature distinctly enacted it, but upon general words of taxation, and when you have to interpret a taxing Act, you cannot so interpret it as to tax the subject twice over to the same tax. Thus, if an association or unregistered firm is taxed in respect of its income, the same income cannot be charged again in the hands of the members, individually and vice versa. It is this principle which, in my considered view, should be made applicable to this case as well. Needless for me to say that this is because the character of the income does not get changed as contended on behalf of the Revenue as though charged over the source of income in the hands of the assessee. That argument overlooks the fact that the very income at the hands of the company which as a legal entity, has suffered tax under section 104 of the Act. For all these reasons, the revision petitions will stand allowed. However, there will be no order as to costs.
....
|
