Allahabad Court February 1942 Judgments
Pandit Gaya Prasad Tewari Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax C. P and U. P ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-24-1942
Reported in: [1942]10ITR308(All)
.COLLITER AND BAJPAI, JJ.-This is a reference under Section 66 (2) of the Indian Income-tax Act.The assessee is Gaya Prasad Tewari. The accounting year was from Asarh Sudi 3rd, S. 1992 to asarh Sudi 11th, S. 1993 and the assessment year was 1937-38. One of the items included by the Income-tax Officer in the income of the assessee was a sum of Rs. 600 consent and it was provided that the lady was to appropriate Rs. 50 a month from the income of the trust property by virtue of her office as Mukh Dharam Karta. Having regard to all the facts, we are of opinion that in the circumstances of this case the allowance of Rs. 50 a month was income which arose indirectly 'from assets transferred directly or indirectly to the wife by the husband otherwise than for adequate consideration or in connectio wirh an agreement to live apart.' It is, therefore, computable as part of the total income of the husband under Section 16 (3) (iii) of the Act; it is not salary arising out of employment, as claimed...
Tag this Judgment!Lala Ganesh Prasad, in Re.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-24-1942
Reported in: [1942]10ITR286(All)
This is an application under Section 66 (3A) of the Indian Income-tax act. The applicant prays that the we should require the Commissioner to state a case and refer two questions of law for our decision. The learned Commissioner had refused to state a case under Section 66 (2) of the Act because he thought that the application was barred by time.The facts are that the Assistant Commissioners order was passed on the 3rd of January 1939 of January 1939, and it is common-ground that the application under Section 66 (2) of the Act would have been in time up to the 13th March 1939. An application asking for a reference under Section 66 (2) was filed on the 16th of February1939 (that is with in time), but it was not accompanied by a fee of Rs. 100 as required. The petitioner was also informed by the Commissioner of Income-tax that Rs. 100 ought to be remitted immediately. Nothing seems to have been done by or on behalf of the petitioner till the 13th of March 1939, the very last date of limi...
Tag this Judgment!income-tax Commissioner Vs. Rev J C Manry.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-24-1942
Reported in: [1942]10ITR205(All)
This is a reference under Section 66 (2) of the Indian Income-tax Act. The assessee is the Rev, J. C. Manry, and the year of assessment is 1936-37. The assessee belongs to the Board of Foreign Missions of the Presbyterian Church of the United States of American; and so too does his wife. They had at the material time four children, two boys and two girls. The assessee and his wife each receive a separate salary and the house allowance from the Board, and the Board also pays an allowance in respect to each of the four children. Up to and including the year 1935-36 the salaries of the assessee and his wife and the allowances on account of the children were lumped together by income-tax authorities and were assessed jointly to tax. This was done, as stated by the Commissioner of Income-tax in the statement of the case, on the assumption that the wifes salary and the allowances for the children were 'additional emoluments paid to the assessee to meet the additional cost of married life and...
Tag this Judgment!Bisheshwar Nath and Co in Re.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-18-1942
Reported in: [1942]10ITR103(All)
This is a reference under Section 66 (2) of the Indian Income-tax Act.Mr. Gopi Nath Kunzru informs us that he has no instructions from his client. We have, however, heard the learned Advocate-General and have carefully examined the statement of the case which has been presented to us by the Commissioner of Income-tax. Although we have not had the benefit of any arguments on behalf of the assessee, we are clearly of opinion that the view taken by the Commissioner in respect to all the three questions which he has referred to this Court is correct. We are in agreement with his reasoning and we accordingly answer those questions in the affirmative.The assessee will pay the costs of this reference and we fix the Advocate-Generals fee at Rs. 150. A copy of our judgment under the signature of the Registrar and the seal of the Court will be sent to the Commissioner of Income-tax.Reference answered in affiramative...
Tag this Judgment!Mohanlal Vs. Shyamlal.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-18-1942
Reported in: [1942]10ITR219(All)
.This is a reference under Section 66 (2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and was made at the instance of Messrs. Mohan Lal Shyam Lal of Benaras. The assessment year is 1938-39. It has been conceded in the course of argument that the Income-tax Act of 1922 before the amendment by the Act of 1939 will govern the present reference.There was a man by the name of Lala Shyam Lal whose fathers name was Mohan Lal. Shyam Lal had two wives. One was Mst. Muni and from this union there were two sons, Kanhiaya Lal and Kishen Das. The second wife was Mst. Shyam Kumari and from this union there were two sons, Basant Lal and Gobind Prasad. His business, consisted of Benares cloth, gold and silver thread and money-lending. The assessee Messrs. Mohan Lal and Shyam Lal were always assessed as an 'association of individuals'. An attempt was made in the year 1934-35 for the assessment being made as an unregistered firm, but the application was withdrawn and in that assessment year also Messrs. Mohan L...
Tag this Judgment!Pearey Lal Shukla of Cawnpore in Re.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-17-1942
Reported in: [1942]10ITR239(All)
This is a reference under Section 66 (3) of the Indian Income-tax Act. In 1935 notice was issued to the assessee by the Income-tax Officer directing him to furnish a return of his income for the year from Dewali 1933 to Dewali 19334 for assessment in the year 1935-36. The assessee accordingly furnished a return, which showed a total income of Rs. 22,975 under three heads, namely (1) poverty, (2) business, and (3) money. lending On the 11th February 1936 the Income of Rs. 31,760. In respect to income from business he calculated profits at a flat rate of 16 per cent. on sales under the proviso to Section 13 of the Act.The assessee appealed against the assessment order, but only in respect of the income from property which had been assessed by the Income-tax Officer. Thereupon the Assistant Commissioner issued notice to the assessee requiring him to show cause why his assessment under the head of business should not be enhanced under Section 31 (3) of the Act. The assessee appeared and sh...
Tag this Judgment!Syed Mohammad Isa and Another Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-17-1942
Reported in: [1942]10ITR267(All)
.COLLISTER, J.-This is a reference under Section 66 (2) of the Indian Income-tax Act.On the 31st January, 1935, K. B. Mohammed Isa was assessed to income-tax on an income of Rs. 5,405. The original source of part of this income was agricultural property while the original source of the other part was non-agricultural property. On appeal the Assistant commissioner held that the income from non-agricultural property only was assessable, and this he found to be Rs. 1,848, Which is below the assessable minimum. I do not understand how precisely this figure was arrived at; but it is immaterial. Subsequently that Officers successor referred the matter to the Commissioner of Income-tax who, in the exercise of his revisionary powers under Section 33 of the Act, restored the Commissioner to refer five so-called question of law to this Court, but the Commissioner found that only one question of law arose. He accordingly referred the following question to this Court :'Whether in the circumstances...
Tag this Judgment!Pandit Pyare Lal Shukla Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U.P. [No. 2].
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-17-1942
Reported in: [1942]10ITR416(All)
This is an application by Pandit Pyare Lal Shukla, an assessee of Cawnpore, under Section 66(3) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, by which it is prayed that we should require the Commissioner of Income-tax to state a case and to refer four questions of law for our decision. After having heard Mr. Malik for the assessee and the Advocate-General for the Department we have come to the conclusion that the findings arrived at by the Income-tax authorities in their various assessment or appellate orders are findings of fact and no question of law really arises.The facts are that for the assessment year 1936-37 the Income-tax Officer assessed Pandit Pyare Lal Shukla on a total income of Rs. 62,889. The assessee has income from property, business and interest. We are not concerned with property and interest but we are concerned with business only. The assessee has an extensive tobacco and oil business and in the past years it had not been possible for the Department to find out the profits m...
Tag this Judgment!L Pitamber Prasad in Re.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-16-1942
Reported in: [1942]10ITR370(All)
.The facts giving rise to this reference under Section 66 (3) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, may be briefly stated :-The assessee, Lala Pitamber Prasad, was assessed for the assessment year 1934-35 on the 28th May 1935 on a total income of Rs. 4,534. When the assessment proceedings for the year 1935-36 were going on the Income-tax Officer discovered that the assessees income from speculation business had partially escaped assessment during the year 1934-35. A notice under Section 34 read with Section 22 (2) of the Act was accordingly sent to the assessee and was served on him on the 15th of August 1935. The notice runs as follows :-'Whereas I have reason to believe that your income from business which has been assessed in the financial year ending the 31st March 1935. (a) has partially escaped assessment, and I, therefore, propose (b) to assess the said income that has escaped assessment. I hereby require you to deliver to me....... a return in the attached form of you income from...
Tag this Judgment!L Bishambhar Nath in Re.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-16-1942
Reported in: [1942]10ITR379(All)
.The facts of this case are very similar to the facts in Miscellaneous Case No. 490 of 1937 in which we have just delivered our judgment. The assessee in this case was Bishambhar Nath, but the assessment year was the same, namely 1934-35. In this case also, according to the Income-tax Officers opinion, some income had escaped assessment and a notice under Section 34 read with Section 22 (2) of the Indian Income-tax Act was served on the assessee and a second return was submitted by the assessee blank with the observation that on income escaped assessment. The return in this case well was duly signed and duly verified. In this case too notice under Section 22 (4) was served on the assessee for the production of account books, but the assessees account books were produced and there was no default committed in complying with the notice under Section 22 (4) of the Act. In this respect this case is distinguishable from the facts of the case that we have just disposed of.For the reasons give...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »