Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 261 to 274 of 274 Records
-
1989 (1) TMI 14 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Business Expenditure, Company ... ... ... ... ..... s for extra-commercial considerations. The Tribunal noted that the Reserve Bank of India circular only gave direction to the banks that if they were satisfied about the financial capacity of the borrowers and the loan proposals, personal guarantees need not be insisted upon. But the Tribunal found, after taking the Reserve Bank of India circular dated July 29, 1970, into consideration and the insistence of the banks, as above noticed, to get personal guarantees of the directors, that the assessee had no choice but to get the guarantees or else it would affect its business. This is a finding of fact. In this view of the matter and the further fact recorded by the Tribunal that the guarantee commission was neither irregular nor unauthorized nor excessive nor unreasonable heaving regard to commercial expediency and legitimate business needs, we are of the opinion that no question of law arises. Consequently, these applications are rejected. However, we make no order as to costs.
-
1989 (1) TMI 13 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Penalty, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... cause to invoke the power of rectification. In this decision, it was further pointed out that a glaring and obvious mistake of law can be rectified under section 35 as much as mistake of fact apparent from the record. Being satisfied that a subsequent event can be taken note of and that glaring and obvious mistake of law can also be rectified under the provisions of section 35 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, whose language is in pari materia with section 35 of the Act, we are satisfied that pursuant to the decision of this court in T. K. Roy 1978 115 ITR 746, which formed part of the record of the present case also, the assessee had rightly approached the Tribunal to rectify the orders imposing penalties on him in tune with the decision of this court in T. K. Roy 1978 115 ITR 746. In the result, the petition is allowed and the learned Tribunal is directed to rectify the orders imposing penalties keeping in view the law laid down by this court in T. K. Roy 1978 15 ITR 746.
-
1989 (1) TMI 12 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Advance Tax, Penalty, Regular Assessment ... ... ... ... ..... g in the context of section 273 which would require the words regular assessment to be given a meaning different from the one given by the Legislature when these words were defined. I respectfully agree with the views expressed by Chandurkar J. Moreover, there is another aspect to this case. This is a case of penalty under section 273(b). The charge against the assessee is that he has failed to furnish an estimate of advance tax or failed to pay advance tax as required by section 212. The Income-tax Officer can take steps for imposition of penalty in the course of any proceedings in connection with the regular assessment . If there is any doubt about the meaning of the phrase regular assessment or if two equally good interpretations are possible, then the interpretation which is favourable to the assessee must be preferred. In the premises, the question is answered in the negative and in favour of the assessee. There will be no order as to costs. BABOO LALL JAIN J. - I agree.
-
1989 (1) TMI 11 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Offences And Prosecution ... ... ... ... ..... y the statute. The word election has been held to connote the entire procedure to be gone through to return a candidate to the Legislature inclusive of rejection or acceptance of the nomination paper. These are matters relating to the post-election stage and the sole remedy of an aggrieved party is an election petition. The details relating to the facts which led to this prosecution and the acceptability thereof may have to be considered at a proper stage by the trial court or this court and they do not require consideration at this stage at the instance of the petitioner whose petition for impleading is not maintainable. On my reasoning in the light of the authoritative pronouncements aforementioned, the petition for impleading is liable to be dismissed and is, accordingly, dismissed. In view of my conclusion dismissing the petition for impleading, the petition for vacating the stay already granted by this court (petition not yet numbered) is also obviously not maintainable.
-
1989 (1) TMI 10 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Assets, Right To Live In A House, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... nterest appears to be of a permissive nature and cannot be called property, however widely the expression may be interpreted. We are of the opinion that the said reasoning applies equally to the interest of the assessee concerned herein. Here too the interest of the assessee is in the nature of a licence. He can only live there. He cannot dispose of the said interest nor can he deal with it in any manner to his benefit. It cannot also De said that he has a proprietary interest therein. Learned standing counsel for the Revenue brought to our notice decision of the Bombay High Court in CWT v. Purshottam N. Amersey 1969 71 ITR 180 and certain English decisions referred to therein, but we find that this decision was also considered by the Bench in the aforesaid decision and the said conclusion arrived at. We see no reason to take different view now. For the above reasons, we answer the question in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. No costs.
-
1989 (1) TMI 9 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Firm, Reference, Registration, Sub-Partnership ... ... ... ... ..... anner. The application for registration of the firm under section 185 of the Act was refused by the Income-tax Officer on the ground that no genuine partnership had come into being. The Tribunal, following the principle laid down in the case of Murlidhar Himatsingka v. CIT 1966 62 ITR 323 (SC), held that the concept of sub-partnership had been recognised India and registration should be accorded to such sub-partnership under the Act. The Tribunal further held that this view was also accepted by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. R. B. Jodha Mal Kuthiala and Co. 1970 77 ITR 341. The Tribunal merely followed the principles of law laid down by the Supreme Court. Therefore, we answer the questions in the following way. Questions Nos. 1 and 2 do not arise out of the order of the Tribunal and we decline to answer the same. Question No.3 is answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. There will be no order as to costs. BABOO LALL JAIN J. -I agree.
-
1989 (1) TMI 8 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Business Expenditure, Expenditure On Sales Promotion ... ... ... ... ..... d to the preceding words advertisement and publicity . According to him, these three words advertisement, publicity and sales promotion constitute a single concept while learned standing counsel for the Revenue says that the context does not permit the application of the rule of ejusdem generis. He says that the two words advertisement and publicity preceding the words sales promotion do not form a class for applying the said principle. We are of the opinion that before we express our opinion on the question, it is just and proper that the Tribunal should express its opinion on the question whether the said expenditure can be treated as expenditure incurred on sales promotion or not. There should be a factual finding first. Either the Tribunal confirms the finding of the authorities below or differs. We, therefore, call upon the Tribunal to record its finding on the question whether the aforesaid expenditure can be treated as an expenditure incurred on sales promotion or not.
-
1989 (1) TMI 7 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Industrial Undertaking, New Industrial Undertaking, Special Deduction ... ... ... ... ..... ition under section 256(2) of the Incometax Act, 1961. We heard counsel for the Revenue as also counsel for the respondent-assessee. In CIT v. Marwell Sea Foods 1987 166 ITR 624, a Bench of this court held that processing of prawns amounts to production of an article and the business will be an industrial undertaking for the purpose of section 80HH of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The reasoning which persuaded this court to hold that processing of prawns, etc., will amount to production of an article and so the assessee therein is an industrial undertaking will apply with equal force for the purpose of section 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961, also. In this view of the matter, we hold that no referable question of law as formulated in paragraph 7 of the original petition arises for consideration. The ratio of the decision of this court in Marwell Sea Foods case 1987 166 ITR 624 should apply to the instant case as well. There is no merit in this original petition. It is dismissed.
-
1989 (1) TMI 6 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Advance Tax, Reassessment, Return ... ... ... ... ..... tion 147. When the expression regular assessment is defined to mean only assessments made under certain sections of the Act, it would be beyond the jurisdiction of any court to give it a wider and comprehensive meaning so as to include all assessments done under the Act, whether under section 143/144 or completed after issue of notice under section 148. Assessments under section 143/144 fall under a distinct category of assessments and the assessments made under section 147 are not covered by the expression regular assessment as defined in section 2(40). Therefore, interest under sections 139(8) and 217 cannot be levied in the case of an assessment or reassessment made under section 147. The ratio of the said decision is applicable to the facts of this case. 1, therefore, pass the following order. The writ petition is allowed and orders in annexures A, B and are hereby quashed to the extent they purport to charge and recover interest under sections 139(8) and 215 of the Act.
-
1989 (1) TMI 5 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Cinema Theatre, Developement Rebate, Plant ... ... ... ... ..... gainst the order made in Santosh Enterprises case, reference was made to this court in I T. R. C. Nos. 184 to 187 of 1982 (Santosh Enterprises v. CIT 1993 200 ITR 353 ) and, in those cases also, a similar question had arisen for consideration and this court held that the screening wall and ceiling of the auditorium having been constructed with requisite installations so as to have a proper control of the sound effect and for the efficient screening of the films may be treated as part of plant but no other part of the building can be included in the said term. In so far as the furniture, fittings and fixtures consisting of wooden walls including false ceiling and wooden panelling of the walls and the chairs would also come within the purview of plant for development rebate. However, the case of the chairs outside the auditorium would be different and they cannot come within the definition of plant Following the said decision, we answer the question referred to us accordingly.
-
1989 (1) TMI 4 - SUPREME COURT
Settlement Commission - composite application for settlement of assessments for A.Y. 1948-49 to 1975-76 - application for settlement was still pending when amendment came into effect and commission has power to overrule CIT's objections - remand the matter to the Settlement Commission
-
1989 (1) TMI 3 - SUPREME COURT
Co-operative Society - Whether, the sum received by the assessee-society from the Madras Government under an agreement for stocking and distribution of ammonium sulphate was exempt u/s 14(3)(iv) - Whether, on the construction of the agreement between the assessee and the State Government, the Tribunal's finding that the receipts were mostly for letting out the godowns and that the servicing was an insignificant portion of the whole amount is reasonable
-
1989 (1) TMI 2 - SC ORDER
Application for extension of time to file return is not made - leviability of interest on delayed return - questions referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to the High Court are answered in the affirmative, in favour of the Revenue
-
1989 (1) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT
Wealth Tax On Transferred Assets - includibility of gifts in net wealth - effect of proviso to section 4(1) (a) of Wealth-Tax Act
....
|