Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 1973 1973 (2) This

Law	-- All -- GST Income Tax Benami Property Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy FEMA PMLA Service Tax Central Excise CST, VAT & Sales Tax Wealth tax Indian Laws
Court	-- Any -- Supreme Court SC Orders / Highlights High Court Appellate Tribunal Tribunal Appellate authority for Advance Ruling Advance Ruling Authority National Financial Reporting Authority Competition Commission of India ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY Commission Central Government Board DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court Commissioner / Appellate Authority Other
Citation	--Year-- 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982 1981 1980 1979 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1973 1972 1971 1970 1969 1968 1967 1966 1965 1964 1963 1962 1961 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 1953 1952 1951 1950 Upto 1949 - -Volume- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -
Landmark	Nil - N/A Referred in >= 3 Cases Referred in >= 4 Cases Referred in >= 5 Cases Referred in >= 10 Cases Referred in >= 15 Cases Referred in >= 25 Cases Referred in >= 50 Cases Referred in >= 100 Cases
Order by	TMI Citation Date of Decision

Advanced Search Options

Case Laws

Showing 41 to 60 of 89 Records

• 1973 (2) TMI 49 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
  

  Banking Company

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... assessee s answer was in the negative then undoubtedly it would have been a false statement by the assessee. But, since no such specific enquiry was made by the Income-tax Officer, I do not see how the assessee could be said to have made any false statement. This decision of the Madras High Court is, therefore, of no assistance to the revenue. This disposes of all the contentions raised on behalf of the parties. In the result, this application succeeds and the rule is made absolute. There will be a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to forthwith recall and cancel the notices dated the 4th May, 1965, and the 1st July, 1965, respectively, issued under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment years 1950-51 to 1960-61, and to forbear from giving effect thereto in any manner whatsoever. There will be no order as to costs. Operation of the order is stayed for 8 weeks from date. Interim order granted herein will continue for the same period.

  ---

• 1973 (2) TMI 48 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
  

  Assessment Order, Rectification Proceedings

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... r years of the order of assessment made in the assessment proceedings of the firm on February 29, 1960. Section 35 requires such proceedings to be commenced and completed within four years of the date from which the assessment order in regard to the firm was made. When the notice was given beyond the time, the Income-tax Officer had no jurisdiction to commence the proceedings. The notice, therefore, is bad in law and has, in our judgment, rightly been ignored by the learned judge. He was right, in our view, in directing the Income-tax Officer not to carry on the correction proceedings in pursuance of such notices because he would have had no jurisdiction to proceed with the cases as they would be time-barred. We thus agree with the conclusion of the learned single judge although we have reached that conclusion through altogether a different route. The appeals are accordingly dismissed. In the circumstances, we make no order as to costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 100 in each appeal.

  ---

• 1973 (2) TMI 47 - KERALA HIGH COURT
  

  Best Judgment Assessment

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... rule of law that the superior court must deny the writ when an inferior court or Tribunal passes an order discarding all principles of natural justice. In the second decision, the Supreme Court has followed its earlier decision and affirmed the principles contained therein. In the case before us, the appeal and revision were to two departmental officers, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Commissioner of Income-tax and the complaint now is that the principle of natural justice of audi alteram partem was not complied with. Moreover, the single judge has considered this question elaborately and has chosen to exercise his discretion in favour of issuing a writ. In these circumstances, we do not think it is proper to interfere in appeal and disturb the discretion exercised by the single judge. Therefore, this contention is also rejected. In the result, we confirm the decision of the single judge and dismiss the appeal. However, we do not pass any order regarding costs.

  ---

• 1973 (2) TMI 46 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
  

  Assessment Order, Assessment Proceedings, Assessment Year, Income Tax, True Nature

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... n possession of any information during the course of original assessment proceedings. As such, this case is of no help. The same is the position with regard to the decision of the Punjab High Court in the case of S. D. Sachdeva v. Commissioner of Income-tax . If proper information is not disclosed to the Income-tax Officer during the course of the proceedings for the relevant assessment year nor does he acquire such information from other sources, then section 34(1)(a) is clearly applicable. There is no difficulty in such a case. In the instant case, the Income-tax Officer had acquired the information when the proceedings for the relevant assessment year were still pending. That makes the whole difference. For the reasons stated above, we answer the question No. 1 in the negative, in favour of the assessee and against the department. In view of our answer to question No. 1 question No. 2 need not be answered. The assessee is entitled to its costs, which we assess at Rs. 200.

  ---

• 1973 (2) TMI 45 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
  

  Individual Income

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in the case of Shri Kesar Dev Sanganeria, who was also a director of Messrs. Sanganeria and Co. Ltd., and had received remuneration of Rs. 3,000 in each of the years in question that the articles of association of the said company did not provide any specific qualification for being appointed as a director and that it was not necessary to hold any share in the company for being appointed as a director. The tests laid down by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Raj Kumar Singh Hukam Chandji s case 1970 78 ITR 33 (SC) are not satisfied in the instant cases in order to hold that the remuneration received by Shri Mohan Lal Sanganeria as director of Messrs. Sanganeria and Co. Ltd., was the income of the Hindu undivided family and not his own individual income. The question referred to us in each case is consequently answered in the negative, that is, in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. We, however, make no order as to costs.

  ---

• 1973 (2) TMI 44 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
  

  Penal Interest, Penal Interest, Reduction Or Waiver, Reduction Or Waiver, Revision By Commissioner, Revision By Commissioner, Waiver Of Interest, Waiver Of Interest

  ---

• 1973 (2) TMI 43 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  

  Assessee derived income from property as also from other sources. Besides, he was one of the two partners in a firm - That firm carried on money-lending business and also derived income from its house properties - Whether the carried forward business loss of a partner can be set-off against share income from a firm - Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee's share income from property in the registered firm of 'S.Rm.M. Ct.M.' was income from property or profits and gains of business - In any view of the matter, we are not inclined to hold that the share income derived by the assessee in this case is not a business income. The result is that the assessee's share income has to be assessed under the head " profits and gains of business " and the question is answered accordingly.

  ---

• 1973 (2) TMI 42 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  

  Penalty proceedings - Whether materials produced at assessment stage can be acted upon in penalty proceedings - Whether the reasons recorded in assessment order can form basis of penalty order

  ---

• 1973 (2) TMI 41 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
  

  Shares are transferred at less than fair market value to persons connected with the assessee - (1) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the transaction was properly subjected to gift-tax under section 4(1)(a) of the Gift-tax Act ? (2) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the transaction was liable to be taxed under section 52(1) of the Income-tax Act ? (3) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the transaction was liable to simultaneous taxation to gift-tax as well as to tax on capital gains? "

  ---

• 1973 (2) TMI 40 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  

  These writ petitions challenge the validity of attachment orders made by the Tax Recovery Officers with respect to the attachment of the properties which stand registered in the names of the petitioners for the recovery of income-tax arrears due from the respective husbands of the petitioners in Writ Petitions Nos. 484 of 1969 and 1144 of 1970, and the father of the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 801 of 1970 - Whether property held benami by third party for the defaulter could be proceeded against for recovery of tax - writ petitions are dismissed

  ---

• 1973 (2) TMI 39 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
  

  Tribunal arrived at a finding ignoring the material evidence - whether the Findings Of Fact is vitiated in law giving rise to a question of law - this mandamus application is allowed - Tribunal is directed to draw up the case and refer the questions to this court for decision along with the questions referred

  ---

• 1973 (2) TMI 38 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  

  Rejection of account books vis-a-vis rejection of method of accounting - right of the officer to reject account books - method of accounting can be rejected under s. 13 but the account books can be rejected under section 23(3). This is because the power to reject the accounts is inherent in the power to call for evidence in support of the return and investigate the same

  ---

• 1973 (2) TMI 37 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  

  Penalty - whether the findings given by the authorities in the assessment proceedings are conclusive in the matter of levy of penalty - Tribunal is right in holding that on the facts and in the circumstances of this case where the assessee is found to have paid for the cotton purchased at the inflated rates, it is not possible to say that the assessee has deliberately concealed its income - findings in assessment proceedings were not sufficient to levy penalty

  ---

• 1973 (2) TMI 36 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
  

  Tribunal holding that the date given in the partnership deed was an error and that the firm was genuine - It cannot be said that the Tribunal's finding were without any material or they were perverse - It is not possible to say that the Tribunal relied upon irrelevant considerations - so, this finding of fact could not be challenged in a reference – no reference lies to High Court against such a decision

  ---

• 1973 (2) TMI 35 - KERALA HIGH COURT
  

  Debts due by the firm to various creditors was barred by limitation were credited to the partners' account - " 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that the amounts of ₹ 16,513 is not assessable under section 41(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there is any material for the Tribunal to hold that there was no remission or cessation of liability in respect of the sum of ₹ 6,725 ? " - we answer both the questions referred to us in the affirmative, that is, in favour of the assessee and against the department

  ---

• 1973 (2) TMI 34 - KERALA HIGH COURT
  

  Assessee then claimed that a sum of Rs. 33,747.09 was payable towards interest on a loan of Rs. 4 lakhs taken by them from M/s. Associated Planters Ltd. - Whether this sum of Rs. 33,747.09 credited towards interest in the relevant previous year could be assessed in the year 1964-65 - Whether the interest given up by the creditor which was already allowed as deduction can be treated as assessee's income and whether it depends on the method of accounting followed by the assessee - Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the amount of Rs. 33,747.09 is not agricultural income for the assessment year 1964-65

  ---

• 1973 (2) TMI 33 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
  

  Proceedings under section 34(1)(a) of the Act were initiated with a view to levying tax on the income of the assessees derived by way of their share in the firm, Jagdish Prasad Satya Prakash. That income had already been assessed under section 23B(2). From the assessment order it is clear that the assessees had no other source of income nor is it the case of the department that the income provisionally assessed is less than the income actually earned by the assessees. In these circumstances, it cannot be said that any part of the assessees' income had escaped assessment. The mere fact the assessees had not filed their returns did not bring into play section 34(1)(a) of the Act. It must be shown that some income of the assessee had escaped assessment. That clearly is not the case of the department - reassessment proceedings cannot be initiated against a person who has been assessed provisionally under s. 23B(2) even though he did not file his returns provided he has no other source of income

  ---

• 1973 (2) TMI 32 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  

  Satisfaction of escapement of income - Recording of Reasons for Notice of Reassessment - A condition precedent of reopening assessment is the reasonable belief of the Income-tax Officer that the income had escaped assessment.

  ---

• 1973 (2) TMI 31 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  

  Estimated Income - Rejection Of Accounts - discrepancy between the books' stock and the statement given to bank - assessee explained that the inflated figures shown to the bank was for obtaining higher loan facilities - Whether estimation would be justified, if the books were not adversely commented upon

  ---

• 1973 (2) TMI 30 - KERALA HIGH COURT
  

  Land Acquisition - state appeals against the compensation for land acquired determined by subordinate judge - whether the Income-tax authorities should wait for disposal of appeal before assessing the capital gains - "Whether assessment of the sum as capital gains chargeable to tax under section 45 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is valid in law? - in cases where section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, applied, the assessee can seek a rectification of the order of the Tribunal if the income determined by the subordinate judge or the Land Acquisition Officer as the case may be and taken by the taxing authority to be the true income is varied after the order of the Tribunal by an appellate authority. In this case, the appeal to the High Court did not succeed and the quantum fixed by the subordinate judge has been upheld and no such difficulty as envisaged by the assessee actually arose - We see no error in the order of the Tribunal

  ---

12345