Gujarat Court March 1993 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. K.R. Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-31-1993
Reported in: [1994]205ITR405(Guj)
G.T. Nanavati, J. 1. The following question of law has been referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the claim of the assessee for standard deduction on the amount of pension was justified ?' 2. During the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1977-78, the assessee received Rs. 3,737 by way of salary and arrears of salary and Rs. 7,260 by way of pension. The assessee thus appears to have retired during that year and, therefore, for a part of that year he received salary and for the remaining part he received pension. The assessee claimed a deduction of Rs. 2,110 on the total amount of salary and pension received by him. 3. The Income-tax Officer granted proportionate standard deduction of Rs. 7,045 (sic) in respect of the salary income but refused to grant any standard deduction on the income received by the assessee by way of pension. 4. The assess...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Peas Industrial Engineers Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-31-1993
Reported in: [1994]205ITR447(Guj)
G.T. Nanavati, J. 1. The facts necessary for answering this reference are that the assessee entered into an agreement on June 3, 1969, with Meetler's Sons Ltd. of Switzerland to make their know-how available for manufacturing certain products in India. For obtaining this know-how and the drawings, the assessee, in all, paid Rs. 1,08,000 to the foreign company. The assessee had incurred travelling expenses amounting to Rs. 17,219 in connection with the acquisition of this technical know-how and the drawings. All these expenses were incurred between 1963 and 1966. The assessee started manufacturing activity some time in the year 1968-69. Till the year relevant to the assessment year 1971-72, the assessee had shown these expenses as miscellaneous expenses in its balance-sheet, but during the year 1970-71, which is relevant to the assessment year 1971-72, the said amounts were taken to the machinery account and were thus capitalised. It then claimed depreciation on the basis of the increas...
Tag this Judgment!New India Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-31-1993
Reported in: (1994)119CTR(Guj)306; [1994]207ITR1010(Guj)
G.T. Nanavati, J.1. Neither the assessee nor the Revenue was satisfied with the decision of the Tribunal and, therefore, both of them moved the Tribunal to refer the following questions to this Court : '(1) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the expenditure incurred on payment of listing fees as regards the assessee's shares had not been laid out wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the assessee's busines (2) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the rental income derived in respect of factory building No. 2 was chargeable under the head 'Income from house property' and that no depreciation was allowable in respect thereof under section 32(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (3) If the answer to question No. 2 is in the negative whether the Tribunal was correct in law in invoking the provisions of section 32(1) read with section 38(2) o...
Tag this Judgment!Nandlal Kanaiyalal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-30-1993
Reported in: [1994]205ITR360(Guj)
G.T. Nanavati, J. 1. For the year 1967-68, the assessee filed his return of income of December 23, 1968. The income disclosed was Rs. 10,951. For the subsequent two years, the assessee filed his returns on October 10, 1969, and September 30, 1970, respectively. On December 23, 1969, the Income-tax Department had carried out a raid at the place of the father of the assessee and seized certain documents. on May 18, 1971, a notice was given to the assessee under section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Thereafter, that is on July 21, 1971, the assessee filed a revised return of his income disclosing that his income was Rs. 26,611. The Income-tax Officer, on verification of the books of account of the assessee, found that the assessee had not given details of the amounts received as brokerage and in the absence of vouchers or receipts, the correctness of the amounts received was not verifiable. He, therefore, made a maximum addition of Rs. 2,000 and determined the income of the assessee...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Parmanandas Mohanlal
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-28-1993
Reported in: [1994]208ITR35(Guj)
Y.B. Bhatt, J.1. This reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, raises the following three questions for our consideration : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the correct status of the assessee for the assessment year 1974-75 was rightly taken by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner as a Hindu undivided family 2. Whether the conclusion of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in confirming the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in taking the status of the assessee for the assessment year 1974-75 as that of Hindu undivided family is correct in law and sustainable from the material on record 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal rightly came to the conclusion in law that the status of the assessee was not as individual but was that of Hindu undivided family and consequently the provisions of section 64(1)(ii...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hussainbhai M. Badri
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-28-1993
Reported in: [1994]208ITR719(Guj)
G.T. Nanavati, J.1. The following question is referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under section 256(1) of the Income tax Act, 1961 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the grant of relief under section 80L having exhausted the availability of deduction under section 86(v), the Income-tax Officer was not competent to rectify the mistake by passing an appropriate order ?' 2. The Income-tax Officer competed the assessment of the assessee for the assessment year 1971-72 on September 6, 1973, by passing an order. Thereafter, the assessee made an application for rectification of the said order on the ground that the Income-tax Officer had not allowed deduction worth Rs. 944 under section 80L of the Act, and that there was also a mistake in calculation in regard to rebate under section 86(v) amounting to Rs. 1,167. The Income-tax Officer accepted the contention of the assessee and granted relief by passing a rectification order under section 1...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Rajratna Naranbhai Mills Co. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-28-1993
Reported in: [1994]208ITR597(Guj)
G.T. Nanavati, J.1. In both these references, the point which arises for consideration is the same and the assessee is also the same. Though the question is the same, it pertains to five assessment years, viz., assessment years 1972-73, 1973-74, 1974-75, 1975-76 and 1976-77. The question which arises for consideration is, whether the assessee was entitled to claim a set off of unabsorbed depreciation allowance carried forward from the assessment year 1967-68 against income under the head 'Income from other sources', in the aforesaid assessment years even though the assessee had gone into liquidation and as it was not doing business or earning income. 2. The Income-tax Officer rejected the claim of the assessee on the ground that there was no business income against which carried forward unabsorbed depreciation allowance can be set off. 3. The assessee also lost in the appeals which it had filed before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. But the Tribunal allowed the appeals filed by t...
Tag this Judgment!Commission of Income-tax Vs. P.P. Contractor
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-28-1993
Reported in: [1994]208ITR771(Guj)
G.T. Nanavati, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following six questions to this court under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in coming to the conclusion that the Income-tax Officer could not have reopened the assessment under section 147(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (2) Whether the Appellate Tribunal is justified in law in entertaining the application of the assessee and reviewing its own decision on appeal on the basis of a subsequent decision of the Supreme Court (3) Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has any authority in law to review, rectify or reconsider any of its decisions on the basis of a subsequent pronouncement of law by the Supreme Court of India (4) Whether the Supreme Court decision in the case of Indian and Eastern Newspaper Society : [1979]119ITR996(SC) was rightly invoked by the Appellate Tribunal to hold that its ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Nathalal Dahyabhai
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-28-1993
Reported in: [1994]208ITR762(Guj)
Y.B. Bhatt, J.1. The present reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act raises the following questions for our opinion : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amount of Rs. 8,000 was taxable as business income 2. If the answer to question No. 1 is in the negative, whether the amount is taxable as capital gains 3. If the answer to both the questions are in the negative, whether the Tribunal was justified in taxing it under the head 'Other sources'?' 2. The relevant assessment year is 1973-74. The assessee being a registered-firm had entered into an agreement to purchase a plot of land. This agreement, inter alia, contained a provision that in case the vendor does not execute a sale deed, the purchase (assessee) would be entitled to refund of any amount paid towards the consideration, and also interest at the rate of 12% on such amount. There is no dispute that the assessee had paid Rs. 70,000 under the agreement in question and that since the ve...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Madhabhai H. Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-27-1993
Reported in: [1994]208ITR638(Guj)
G.T. Nanavati, J.1. Thought the Tribunal has made only one reference for the three assessment years, viz., assessment years 1967-68, 1968-69 and 1969-70, we have though it proper to separate this reference into three references as they pertain to three separate assessment orders and the question raised and referred arises out of three separate orders passed in three separate appeals by the Tribunal. The question, which is referred to this court under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is as under : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellant Tribunal was right in law in holding that the land in question was agricultural in character and the assessee was not liable to be taxed in respect of the surplus arising on the sale of the land in question as capital gains ?' 2. The assessee is the owner of land admeasuring acres 3.22 gunthas situated in village Paldi which is now within the limits of the Ahmedabad city. Till 1967, it bore S. No. ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »