Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 1972 1972 (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 61 to 80 of 85 Records

• 1972 (2) TMI 25 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
  

  Petitioner and his sons constituted a Hindu undivided family. There was a partition between the members of the family - Assessee sold buildings to his divided sons. The difference was offered as capital gains. ITO estimated fair market value at higher figure and the difference was treated as capital gains- whether assessee can also be assessed to gift-tax on the difference

  ---

• 1972 (2) TMI 24 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
  

  This is an application, under article 226 of the Constitution for a writ of certiorari for quashing the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax - Whether the Commissioner can reject the provision petition on the ground that it was belated - Commissioner will now consider the revision petition of the petitioner for the condonation of delay in the light of the observations made herein

  ---

• 1972 (2) TMI 23 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
  

  By this writ petition filed under articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner, Vidarbha Housing Board, Nagpur, is seeking to challenge the validity and/or, legality of the notice issued by the Income-tax Officer, City Circle and Refunds, Nagpur - impugned notice is sought to be attacked as being without jurisdiction and in excess of authority of the officer concerned, and the circumstances in which the challenge is made may be stated - Whether a housing board constituted under Madhya Pradesh Housing Board Act is a part of the State Government and is exempt from income-tax - Whether the income of board was held under trust wholly for charitable purpose and is exempt from tax

  ---

• 1972 (2) TMI 22 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
  

  Expenditure Tax Act, 1957 - assessee was at the material time a financial adviser to a limited company known - On April 10, 1956, that company passed a resolution that the assessee should be allowed free furnished residential accommodation in its house - The assessee was not to receive any other remuneration. While making the assessment under the Expenditure-tax Act, for the two years in question, the Expenditure-tax Officer included in the total expenditure of the assessee - the annual letting value of rent-free residence provided to the assessee and amount being taxes, insurance and other miscellaneous expenses in respect of the aforesaid residential accommodation- Whether an employee is liable for Expenditure-tax in respect of the annual letting value of the house given for employees occupation free of rent

  ---

• 1972 (2) TMI 21 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
  

  Whether Tribunal was justified in holding that the reassessment proceedings under section 147(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, were not validly initiated in the case – If the assessee has done all that he could or need do in the matter, the assessing authority cannot quite perfunctorily act as he did in the instant case with the hope of expectation that any error which he might commit, by not making a proper assessment, could subsequently be rectified by resorting to the machinery of section 147 of the Act. The Income-tax Officer cannot certainly fall back on the said section to make good his own deficiencies in the first completed assessment - Question answered in the affirmative

  ---

• 1972 (2) TMI 20 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
  

  Petitioner challenges in this petition under article 226 of the Constitution the summons dated 6th June, 1969, issued by the Income-tax Officer under section 131 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Whether an omnibus summons issued by the Income-tax Officer without the knowledge of the contents of the documents would be valid

  ---

• 1972 (2) TMI 19 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
  

  Whether, the provisions of section 2(m) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, are applicable for determination of the assessee's interest in the wealth of the firm styled as M/s. J. K. Bankers - Whether arrears of income-tax of the firm should be deducted from the value of other assets to determine the partner's share in the firm's assets

  ---

• 1972 (2) TMI 18 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
  

  Petitioner obtained a degree of Bachelor in Commerce from the Commercial University, Delhi - His qualification was not recognised by the respondents for representing the assessee before them. The sales tax authorities also refused permission to the petitioner to represent the assessee before them - present writ petition claiming that he is duly qualified to represent the assessee under section 288 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with rule 51 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 – Held that Commercial University Limited, Delhi is not a University incorporated by any law as required by rule 51 of IT Rules, 1962 - therefore, a person holding a degree of that university cannot appear before the income-tax authorities as an authorised representative

  ---

• 1972 (2) TMI 17 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
  

  Winding-up of the company - advance tax - When business is carried on under section 457(1)(b) of the Companies Act for the beneficial winding-up of the company the payment of tax would be part of the costs and expenses of winding-up as per section 530(6) of the Companies Act - it is not necessary to anticipate the total income of the company for the assessment year in question on any hypothetical basis and that the Income-tax Officer should really wait until the close of the year and the filing of the return of income-tax by the company. I do not, however, think this argument can be upheld when the applicant only wants leave to proceed in the matter according to the law

  ---

• 1972 (2) TMI 16 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
  

  Whether Tribunal was right in law in holding that the Income-tax Officer had no power to cancel the registration and renewal of registration of the assessee under section 186(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of the AY 1958-59, 1959-60 and 1960-61, when the same had been granted with regard to the aforesaid assessment years under the provisions of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 - hold that the Income-tax Officer had no power under section 186(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, to cancel the registration for the assessment year 1958-59 and the renewal of registration for the assessment years 1959-60 and 1960-61 granted under the provisions of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 - question is answered in the affirmative

  ---

• 1972 (2) TMI 15 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
  

  Whether, Appellate Tribunal, was justified in holding that there was no evidence on record at the time the assessments were completed to show that the assessee-firm had concealed its income or had furnished inaccurate particulars thereof - If the answer to the above question is in the negative, whether the Income-tax Officer could, at the time of levying the penalty under section 28(1)(c) of the Act, take into account also the additional evidence brought on record after the assessments were completed

  ---

• 1972 (2) TMI 14 - DELHI HIGH COURT
  

  Assessee in this case is the Hamdard Dawakhana (wakf) represented by its mutawalli, Hakim Abdul Hamind - A seven-eighths portion of the annual income of the wakf which is transferred to the reserve fund is exempt from assessment under section 4(3)(i) of the Act and the remaining one-eighth portion of the income transferred to the reserve fund is not exempt from assessment under section 4(3)(i) - The one-eighth portion of the income transferred to the reserve fund is not chargeable to tax at the maximum rate under the first proviso to section 41(1) of the Act. Since seven-eighths of the amount of the share of charity is exempt, the one-eighth share of the private beneficiary is taxable in his hands at the ordinary rates

  ---

• 1972 (2) TMI 13 - DELHI HIGH COURT
  

  Petitioner, an advocate on the rolls of the State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh, has instituted this writ petition to challenge a disqualification imposed on him under section 288(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 – held that disqualification in section 288(4) cannot be imposed for a default committed prior to the coming into force of 1961 Act - Petition allowed

  ---

• 1972 (2) TMI 12 - DELHI HIGH COURT
  

  Scope and extent of the power of the Income-tax Officer under section 3(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Income-tax Act, 1961 does not require recording of reasons while exercising his discretion under section 3(4) in refusing to approve the proposed change in previous year. Also, the reasons for refusal need not be communicated to the assessee - the court cannot substitute its own opinion or discretion for that of the Income-tax Officer

  ---

• 1972 (2) TMI 11 - DELHI HIGH COURT
  

  Whether the Tribunal could hold that a sum of Rs. 30,000 being the face value of three hundred fully paid up shares of firm, was not capital but revenue receipt in the hands of the petitioner liable to tax - Assessee obtained dealership of petrol. He transferred the dealership rights to a company for a consideration of fully paid up shares - Tribunal, therefore, ought to have determined the market value of the shares at the time and it erred in arriving at the conclusion that the face value of the shares would constitute the revenue receipt

  ---

• 1972 (2) TMI 10 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
  

  Quantum of penalty – Act of 1922 and Act of 1961 - penalty in respect of defaults committed with regard to any assessment year before 1st April, 1962 in respect of which the assessment is completed after that date is to be imposed under Income-tax Act, 1961 and not under Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 - Under the 1922 Act the Income-tax Officer had the jurisdiction to impose penalty up to 1 1/2 times the tax levied. The penalty to the extent of 40 per cent. of the tax levied in the present case was within that limit and that penalty was reduced by the Tribunal on a wrong interpretation of the provisions of the 1961 Act. The violation of article 20 of the Constitution does not take place when a wrong order is rectified

  ---

• 1972 (2) TMI 9 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  

  Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the shares held by the assessee in the Madras Motor and General Insurance Co. Ltd. has been valued in accordance with the Wealth-tax Act – Whether the amounts shown in balance sheet under the head "balance of funds and accounts" and "reserves and surplus" are to be considered for finding out intrinsic value of shares of an insurance company - result will be that the Tribunal has to work out the intrinsic value of the shares after excluding the amounts standing to the credit of " balance of funds and accounts " in each of the years

  ---

• 1972 (2) TMI 8 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  

  Assessee in this case is a dealer in paper. During the assessment year 1960-61 he paid a bonus of Rs. 39,541 to his employees and claimed it as allowance under section 10(2)(x) of the Income-tax Act, 1922. The Income-tax Officer took the view that the bonus paid by the assessee which is equivalent to 13 months' salary was excessive and not justified by the profits derived by him in the assessment year, and disallowed a sum of Rs. 19,000 from and out of the total claim of the assessee on the ground that the bonus equivalent to six months' salary can alone be justified - Held that disallowance of bonus to the extent of three months' salary was not valid

  ---

• 1972 (2) TMI 7 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  

  Adventure in the nature of trade - transaction of cutting and selling the trees - assessee in this case is a registered firm carrying on business in cement and money-lending - assessee did not intend to trade in the sandalwood trees, therefore transaction of cutting and selling the trees will not amount to an adventure in the nature of trade

  ---

• 1972 (2) TMI 6 - KERALA HIGH COURT
  

  Claim for exemption u/s 11 – general public utility - amount/fee received for issuance of certificates for survey and weighment by the assessee - issue of certificates was to obviate delays and help those engaged in trade and commerce – exemption granted

  ---

12345