Advanced Search Results

Commissioner of Income Tax (Additional), Lucknow Vs. Jeevan Lal Sah

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Direct Taxation

Acts : Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 28(1) and 271(1)

Reported in : [1994]205ITR244(SC); 1995Supp(4)SCC247

question before the High Court was whether the Explanation to Sub-section (1) of Section 271, added by the Finance Act, 1964, with effect from April 1, 1964, makes any difference to the position of law obtaining till then, … the principles enunciated in Anwar Ali's case : [1970]76ITR696(SC) (SC)4. Anwar Ali's case : [1970]76ITR696(SC) (SC) dealt with Section 28(1)(c) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. Section 28(1)(c), in so far as is relevant, read as follows :28. … 271 in 1964 ?2. The assessment years concerned herein are 1962-63, 1963-64, 1965-66, 1966-67 and 1967-68. The assessee is an individual running a tea-stall in

Mepco Industries Ltd., Madurai Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Direct Taxation

Acts : Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 28, 147, 148, 153, 154, 214 and 264; Finance Act, 1965

Reported in : (2009)227CTR(SC)313; [2009]319ITR208(SC); JT2009(14)SC339; 2010(I)OLR(SC)129; 2009(14)SCALE87; (2010)1SCC434; [2009]185TAXMAN409(SC)

derived profits from three industries, one of which qualified for special rebate under Part-I of Schedule-I to the Finance Act, 1965, for the Assessment Year 1966-1967. In granting this special rebate, the Income Tax Officer computed the profits attributable … Steel and Press Works Limited was a revenue receipt and, hence, it was liable to be taxed under Section 28 of the Act. This decision was based on a detailed examination of the Subsidy Scheme formulated by the

Prem Cables Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Collector (Principal Appraiser) Cu ...

Court : Rajasthan

Subject : ExciseCustoms

Acts : Indian Tariff Act, 1936 - Sections 2, 2A, 2A(1) and 2A(2); Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 2, 12(1), 25, 25(1), 27, 27(1), 128 and 131; Finance Act, 1965 - Sections 26(1), 76(1) and 77; Constitution of India (Fifteenth Amendment) Act, 1963 - Sections 8; Sea Customs Act - Sections 23; Finance Act, 1964 - Sections 57(1); Central Excise Act, 1944; Finance Act, 1960; Indian Tariff Act, 1934; Central Excise (Conversion to Metric Units) Act, 1968; Finance Act, 1969; Evidence Act - Sections 106; Limitation Act, 1963 - Sections 17(1); Limitation Act, 1908 - Schedule - Articles 24, 62 and 96; Constitution of India - Articles 19, 32, 136, 226 and 226(1A); Contract Act - Sections 72; Orissa Sales Tax Act - Sections 4, 14 and 19; Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Act; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Sectio

Reported in : 1981(8)ELT440(Raj); 1978(11)WLN481

goods were further chargeable to regulatory duty of 10% then in force levied under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1965. The duty @ Rs. 360 per M.T. was levied by the Central Government in exercise of the powers … Secretary to the Government, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi. By a consolidated order dated November 28, 1969 reproduced in Schedule A appended to the writ petition, the Government of India rejected the revision application.

Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat-v Vs. Abdul Razak and Co.

Court : Gujarat

Subject : Direct Taxation

Acts : Income Tax Act 1961 - Sections 28 and 36(2)

Reported in : [1982]136ITR825(Guj)

in law in holding that the impugned loss of Rs. 76,824 should be allowed as a deduction under section 28 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as loss incidental to the assessee's business ?' 4. The assessee also requested … In view of these well accepted legal principles, in our opinion, by necessary implication, either short-term or long-term financing is an integral part of the commission agency business. As a commission agent, one either buys the goods … at the end of the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1965-66, there was a debit balance of only Rs. 2,003 but in the

M/s. Bharti Airtel Ltd. Vs. The Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Service Tax

amount of Rs.2,04,39,093/- under provisions of Rule 14 of the Credit Rules read with Section 73 of the Finance Act,1994. In respect of towers and parts thereof, prefabricated building, printers and office chairs, the Commissioner observed that the … (e) M/s. J.K. Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Sales Tax Officer, Kanpur and Anr., (AIR 1965 SC 1310); (f) CCE Vs. Jay Engineering Works Ltd., (1989(39) ELT 169 (S.C.) (g) Indus Towers Ltd. Vs. … case was engaged in manufacturing of excisable goods which fell under Chapters 28, 29 and 31 of the Central Excise Tariff Act,1985. The appellant had

Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat I Vs. Ahmedabad Manufacturing and ...

Court : Gujarat

Subject : Direct Taxation

Acts : Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 30, 34, 37, 40, 147 and 148; Finance Act, 1965

Reported in : [1977]106ITR159(Guj)

purpose of taxation. He further held that rebate under clause 1(b)(ii) of Paragraph F of Schedule I of Finance Act, 1965, had been wrongly allowed at the rate of 35 per cent. in the original assessment order but on … under section 147 was issued by the Income-tax Officer concerned on March 28, 1964. On April 24, 1964, the Supreme Court decided the question regarding … the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in upholding the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's order cancelling reassessment under section 147(b) read with section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. We are concerned in this case

T. Saraswathi Achi Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Chennai

Subject : Direct Taxation

Acts : Wealth Tax Act, 1957 - Sections 4(1); Gift Tax Act

Reported in : [1976]104ITR185(Mad)

also notice that at or about the same time in Section 33(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, Finance Act, 1965, introduced Section 33(1)(o) which reads as follows :' 33. (1) To the extent specified against each of the … Constitution. The argument placed before the Supreme Court was that in respect of an offence falling under Section 28(1)(c) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, if the return had been filed prior to the Income-tax Act, 1961,

Smith (inspector of Taxes) Vs. Schofield.

Court : Kolkata

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : [1994]209ITR572(Cal)

the judge in reaching his decision.The Finance Act 1965Capital gains tax was introduced by Part III of the Finance Act 1965. Section 19(1) provided :'Tax shall be charged in accordance with this Act in respect of capital gains, that is … and Schedule 5 to the Act of 1979 as amended Chapter II is headed 'Computation', and begins with section 28 which provides :'(1) The amount of the gains accruing on the disposal of assets shall be computed in

indo Asian Switchgears (P.) Ltd. Vs. Inspecting Assistant

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (1985)12ITD65(Delhi)

as the profit of the export business of the assessee for the purposes of a rebate under the Finance Act, 1965. The observations of the Gujarat High Court were to the effect that the sale of such entitlements was … Court in Agra Chain Mfg. Co. v. CIT [1978] 114 ITR 840 had referred to the provisions of Section 28(iv) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), and was of the view that such rights could be brought

State Bank of Travancore Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kerala

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Direct Taxation

Acts : Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 5, 10, 10(2), 28, 29, 36, 36(1), 36(2), 56, 57, 145, 145(1), 147 and 263

Reported in : AIR1986SC757; (1986)2CompLJ126(SC); (1986)50CTR(SC)290; [1986]158ITR102(SC); 1986(1)SCALE34; (1986)2SCC11; [1986]1SCR25; 1986(2)LC208(SC)

Ltd. 143 I.T.R. 386 and one decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in C.I.T. v. Ferozepur Finance (P) Ltd. 124 I.T.R. 619 where a view has been taken that it will be totally unrealistic to … is chargeable to tax under the Act and not any hypothetical income of an assessee and that under section 28 in respect of a business the chargeability must attach to real profits and gains arising from the transactions … 57,889, representing interest on !sticky! advances, as income for the assessment years 1965-66, 1966-67 and 1967-68 respectively was justified in law? (2) Whether on the