Allahabad Court October 1940 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Bhikhi Ram Ramdeo Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, C.P. and U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-02-1940
Reported in: [1941]9ITR306(All)
ORDERThis is an application under Section 66(3) of the Income-tax Act (XI of 1922).The assessee is a firm, Bhikiram Ramdeo. The assessment year with which we are concerned is 1934-35 and the accounting year was from October 9, 1932 to September 27, 1933.Orginally an assessment was made on March 6, 1935 under Section 23 (3) of the Act; but when the assessee appealed in respect to certain expenses which had been disallowed, the Assistant Commissioner cancelled the assessment on the ground inter alia that 'the accounts produced are in fact no accounts in respect to the money-lending business' and that the assessee 'must be keeping separate accounts of money-lending business.'Thereupon the Income-tax Officer - not the same officer who had made the assessment of March 6, 1935 - issued notices to the assessee under Section 23(2) and Section 22(4) of the Act. The assessee produced the same books of account which he had produced before, and other notice was then issued for production of subsid...
Kunjamal and Sons, in Re.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-02-1940
Reported in: [1941]9ITR358(All)
At the instance of Messrs. Kunjamal and Sons of Agra, the assessee in the present case, the Commissioner of Income-tax, Central and United Provinces, drew up a statement of the case and referred it to us under Section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act after formulating three questions of law which might be mentioned at this very stage.'(1) Whether there was any material before the Income-tax Officer to justify his rejection of the accounts of the money-lending business ?(2) Whether in framing his estimate of Rs. 18,000 for money-lending, the Income-tax Officer was correct in law in holding that the interest on the loan of Rs. 15,000, advances to Babu Lal in February 1922 was received during the account year November 1935-November 1936 ?(3) Whether on the facts of the case, the interest of Rs. 546, paid to one of the partners of the firm to which the petitioner had succeeded under Section 26(2) of the Act has been correctly disallowed ?'The assessee is a Hindu undivided family and the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›