Kolkata Court October 1990 Judgments
Buxa Dooars Tea Co. (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-31-1990
Reported in: [1999]188ITR218(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J.1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1976-77, the following questions of law have been referred to this court:'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the liability to tax raised in 1958 under the Assam Taxation (on Goods Carried by Road or Inland Waterways) Act, 1954, continued to be an ascertained liability for the year in which it was ascertained notwithstanding the fact that the said Act of 1954 wasstruck down as void and unconstitutional by the hon'ble Supreme Court on the 26th September, 1960 ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee was not entitled to claim deduction of its liability under the Assam Taxation (on Goods Carried by Road or Inland Waterways) Act, 1954, in computing its business income for the assessment year 1976-77 ?' 2. Shortly stated, the fact...
Tag this Judgment!Oriental Cotton Corporation and Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income- ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-30-1990
Reported in: [1993]202ITR370(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J.1. This reference relates to the assessment year 1975-76. The question is whether there was any mistake apparent from the record which could be rectified under Section 154 of the Income-tax Act.2. Shortly stated the facts are that the Income-tax Officer framed the assessment for the assessment year 1975-76, in the case of the assessee company on January 2, 1976. The assessee had leased out its land and also calender machines and sizing machines along with the building. It showed receipt of rent of Rs. 6,000 from the land and of Rs. 60,069 from the calender machines and sizing machines and the building in which they were fitted. The said income of Rs. 66,069 (Rs. 6,000 plus Rs. 60,069) was assessed by the Income-tax Officer under the head 'House property'. The assessee thereafter filed an application dated April 16, 1977, before the Income-tax Officer for rectification of a mistake in the assessment order. The contention of the assessee in the said application was th...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. S.M. Oil Extraction Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-30-1990
Reported in: [1991]190ITR404(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J.1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following question of law has been referred to this court for the assessment year 1979-80 ;'Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the material which was not in existence at the time when the assessment was made and came into existence afterwards could not form part of the records of the proceedings of the Income-tax Officer at the time he passed the order and cannot be taken into consideration by the Commissioner for the purpose of invoking his jurisdiction under Section 263(1) and, in that view, was correct in cancelling the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 263(1) ?'2. Shortly stated, the facts are that the Income-tax Officer, while making the assessment under Section 143(3), accepted the value of plant and machinery and electrical installation as reflected in the balance-sheet in toto. The matter of valuation of the aforesaid assets referred to the V...
Tag this Judgment!Arvind Kumar Lohia Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-26-1990
Reported in: [1994]205ITR593(Cal)
Ajit Kumar Sengupta, J.1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), for the assessment year 1981-82, at the instance of the assessee, the following question of law has been referred to this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee is not entitled to deduction on account of interest paid by him on the capital borrowed for the purpose of investment in the firm in which he is a partner either under Section 67(3) or Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The facts are that the assessee, an individual, is a partner in the firm, East India Transport Agency. The said firm changed its accounting year from Ram Navami to June 30, as a result of which there was no assessment of the firm for the assessment year 1981-82. The assessee, accordingly, had no share income from the said firm and for the assessment year under consideration the assessee has not, therefore, s...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Vidyut Metallics Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-25-1990
Reported in: [1993]203ITR779(Cal)
Ajit Kumar Sengupta, J.1. This reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, relates to the assessment year 1980-81, on the interpretation of Rule 6D(2)(b) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962.2. The Income-tax Officer disallowed Rs. 21,693 as against Rs. 15,978 offered by the assessee on the ground that, under Rule 6D(2)(b), incidental conveyance expenses incurred (after reaching the destination) would be taken into consideration while making this disallowance. On appeal, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) deleted both the disallowances. On further appeal, the Tribunal held the deletion of the disallowance of Rs. 5,985 on account of travelling expenses on the ground that Rule 6D read with Section 37(3) seeks to limit the expenditure incurred on travelling to the extent of stay in hotels confining it to daily allowance referred to in Rule 6D and do not extend to any other expenditure incurred provided that expenditure was for the purpose of business.3. On these facts, the ...
Tag this Judgment!G. S. Atwal and Co. (Gua) Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-24-1990
Reported in: (1993)109CTR(Cal)328
AJIT K. SENGUPTA, J. :In this reference under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, for the asst. yr. 1965-66 the following questions of law have been referred to this Court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the reopening of assessment under s. 147(a) of the IT Act, 1961, was justified 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal misdirected itself in law in holding that conditions precedent to initiate proceedings under s. 147(a) of the IT Act, 1961, was satisfied 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the query made by the ITO by his letter dt. 7th October, 1967 to M/s. Hewitt-Robins Inc. regarding the nature of the advance before the original assessment was general in nature ?4. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that there was a nexus between the materials available b...
Tag this Judgment!Statesman Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-11-1990
Reported in: (1991)36ITD80(Kol.)
1. The assessee is a limited company and is in appeal against the sustenance of penalty of Rs. 37,672 imposed by the Assessing Officer.2. The assessee derives income from publication of a daily known as 'The States-man. A notice under Section 210 was issued to the assessee to pay the advance tax of Rs. 20,88,190. The said demand was based upon the total income of Rs. 33,14,590.The assessee did not pay the tax according to the demand of the Assessing Officer under Section 210 and filed an estimate on 15-6-79 showing the tax payable at Rs. 38,70,000 on the income of Rs. 60,00,000 and accordingly paid the instalment of Rs. 12,90,000 each on 14-6-79 and 15-9-79. The Palekar Tribunal constituted by the Govt. of India was considering the salaries and wages payable to journalists and non-journalists newspaper employees. After considering the sittings and discussions with the Palekar Tribunal the assessee was of the opinion that on the award of the Palekar Tribunal a huge liability for salari...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Aruna Paul Vs. Inspecting Assistant
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-01-1990
Reported in: (1990)35ITD520(Kol.)
1. These three appeals by the assessee, Smt. Aruna Paul, for the assessment years 1975-76 to 1977-78 are directed against the orders Of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) upholding the valuation of jewellery fixed by the Assessing Officer.2. The assessee had returned the value of jewellery at Rs. 59,268 in the assessment year 1975-76 and at Rs. 68,927 in the two later years.The Assessing Officer took it at Rs. 1,94,000 in the assessment year 1975-76 and at Rs. 2,13,400 and Rs. 2,33,000 in the assessment years 1976-77 and 1977-78 respectively. The basis of valuation for the year 1975-76 is recorded as follows : The assessee filed a disclosure petition under the Voluntary Disclosure of Income and Wealth Ordinance, 1975 accompanied by returns of net wealth relating to the assessment years 1965-66 to 1974-75. In the said disclosure the assessee, amongst other movable assets, showed the value of jewellery owned by her at Rs. 1,83,000 as on 31-3-1974. The authorised submits that on ob...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›