Gujarat Court January 1976 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat Vs. Laxmi Cement Distributors Pvt. ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-15-1976
Reported in: [1976]104ITR711(Guj)
P.D. Desai, J.1. The assessee is a private limited company. At the relevant time, it was working as the selling agent of the State Trading. Corporation for cement and asbestos products manufactured by Messrs. Digvijay Cement Co., Ltd., Sikka. One of its employees, M. C. Maloo, who was at the material time the secretary of the asses see-company, was sent to the U.S.A. in the month of -June, 1963, for training in sales technology, of asbestos and cement products. In July, 1963, Maloo suddenly expired in the U.S.A. while undergoing training. On January 4, 1964, the board of directors of the assessee-company passed a resolution to pay compensation in the sum of Rs. 12,500 to the daughter of Maloo in recognition of his past services. On June 13, 1964, a resolu tion was passed in the general meeting of the company approving the aforesaid proposal. The amount was accordingly paid to the daughter of the deceased employee. In the course of its assess ment proceeding for the assessment year 1965...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Gujarat Automobiles
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-12-1976
Reported in: [1976]105ITR588(Guj)
Divan, C.J.1. In this case the Tribunal has referred the following question for our opinion at the instance of the revenue :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the assessee-firm must be allowed the benefit of deduction of annuity deposit payable from the total income and the tax should be computed on the balance of the total income for the purpose of computing the penalty under Section 271(1)(a) of the Act ?'2. The facts leading to this reference are as follows. We are concerned with assessment year 1965-66. The assessee is a registered firm and itsprevious year for the purpose of assessment year 1965-66 was calendar year 1964. Under section 139(1) the return of income was due on June 30, 1965. However, a notice under Section 139(2) was served by the Income-tax Officer on the assessee-firm and the notice was received on May 4, 1965, requiring the firm to submit its return of income by June 2, 1965. No return of in...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›