Gujarat Court September 1964 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.
Shashibala Navnitlal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-12-1964
Reported in: [1964]54ITR478(Guj)
P.N. Bhagwati, J.1. The short question that arises on this reference is whether a sum of Rs. 38,000 received by the assessee in redemption of 380 redeemable preference shares held by her in a company called Sakarlal Ballabhai and Company Ltd., ought to be included in the assessment made upon the assessee for the assessment year 1957-58, the accounting year being Samvat Year 2012. the determination of the question rests upon the proper construction of section 2(6A)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1922. A highly ingenious argument has been advanced by Mr. Kaji on behalf of the assessee in an attempt to persuade us to answer the question in favour of the assessee and though the argument has been presented with skill and ability, we find there is no merit in it and it must be rejected. 2. The material facts giving rise to the reference may be summarized as follows : Sakarlal Ballabhai and Company (hereinafter referred to as the company), at all material times carried on business as managing agen...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay North Vs. Tejaji Farasram Kharawala ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-09-1964
Reported in: (1964)10GLR1041; [1965]55ITR46(Guj)
ORDER : 1. That the judgment and order, dated the 15th February, 1955, of the Bombay High Court dismissing the Notice of Motion in Income-tax Reference No. 28 of 1954 be and is hereby set aside and that the said High Court Do restore to its file the aforesaid Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay Bench 'B', to state a case for the opinion of the High Court on the question raised in the notice of motion and indicated hereinabove, viz., 'Whether, on the facts of the case, a portion, viz., 5%, of the selling agency commission of 12 1/2% received by the assessee-company from Messrs. Ciba (India) Ltd., or the portion thereof which was not expanded in the course of the carrying on of the selling agency business is exempt from tax under section 4(3) (vi) of the Act' and that the said High Court on receipt of the said statement of the case Do hear and dispose of the reference in accordance with law. 2. THAT the cost of this appeal SHALL be costs in the reference.' 7. By the time the order was...
Laxmandas Sejram Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-04-1964
Reported in: [1964]54ITR763(Guj)
Bhagwati, J.1. The question which arises in this reference is whether a certain commission paid by the assessee to an employee is an allowable expenditure in computing the profits of the assessee from business. The assessee is a registered firm carrying on business in cloth at Mahavir Market, Ahmedabad. There were at the material time seven partners in the assessee-firm, two of them being Badarmal and Mithalal. These two were also partners in another firm called Messrs. Badarmal Ishverlal which carried on business in Maskati Market, Ahmedabad. The firm, Messrs. Badarmal Ishverlal, closed down some time towards the end of Samvat year 2014, but at or about this time a new firm called Messrs. Badarmal Mithalal was started in which both Badarmal and Mithalal joined as partners. This firm of Messrs. Badarmal Mithalal, it appears, was in existence during Samvat year 2015, being the accounting year corresponding to the assessment year 1960-61 with which we are concerned in the present referen...
Sakarlal Naranlal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-01-1964
Reported in: (1965)GLR114; [1965]56ITR503(Guj)
Bhagwati, J.1. Ordinarily we find cases where the assessee relies on section 4(3)(viii) and the revenue contests the claim of the assessee, but here in this reference the position is reversed and we find the revenue relying on section 4(3)(iii) and the assessee disputing that position. The reference relates to assessment year 1954-55, 1955-56 and 1956-57 the corresponding previous years being Samvat Years 2009, 2010 and 2011. The assessee is an individual and he holds certain agricultural lands. In or about 1952, a friend of the assessee suggested to him the idea of growing a vegetable product commonly called galka, the botanical name being luffa pentendra and the assessee accordingly obtained galka seeds from abroad and, after preparing the lands for cultivation, raised galka on the lands in 1952. Now the kind of galka prown by the assessee was not an indigenous kind but was a kind grown fairly widely in Formosa, Japan and other places. After the gulkas were fully grown, they were rem...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›