Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1964Kant204; AIR1964Mys204
..... reported in : [1963]49itr165(sc) ).36. what is true of the income-tax act is also true of the agricultural income-tax act. hence it follows that on or before 31-3-1959 the assessee had incurred the liability to pay agricultural income-tax for the accounting year relevant to the assessment year 1959-60. the question for ..... decision is whether that liability can be considered as 'debt owed' within the meaning of sec. 2(m) of the 'act ..... sharply divided on the question whether the provision for payment of income-tax or agricultural income-tax constitutes a 'debt owed' and therefore, a liabilityto be deducted in ascertaining the taxable wealth.11. under the wealth tax act (to be hereinafter referred to as the 'act'), while determining the 'net wealth', the revenue has to .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [1973]87ITR636(KAR); [1973]87ITR636(Karn)
ordergovinda bhat, j.1. this matter arises under the mysore agricultural income-tax act, 1957, hereinafter called 'the act'. the petitioner is an assessee under the act. for the assessment year 1966-67 he did not file his return of income despite notice by the agricultural income-tax officer, dharwar (respondent no. 1). thereafter, the first respondent proposed to ..... , and that application was pending till july 21, 1969. under section 42 of the act, the agricultural income-tax officer has the discretion to impose penalty where an assessee is in default in paying the agricultural income-tax. when the act provides for cancellation of the assessment made under section 19(4) and where such an ..... computed on the basis of the average yield notified by the assistant commissioner under the mysore land reforms act. the petitioner has not shown nor alleged that the yield as computed by the agricultural income-tax officer is in excess of the notified yield. so also, he has not shown that the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [1963]50ITR449(KAR); [1963]50ITR449(Karn)
..... assessing authority was wrong in thinking that the mother and wife of the petitioner are not members of his family. under part i of the schedule annexed to the mysore agricultural income-tax act, 1957, it is provided that the limit referred to shall be seven thousand rupees in the case of every hindu undivided family or an aliyasanthana family or branch or a ..... the petitioner's family; quite clearly in the family of the petitioner there are more than five members. therefore, the petitioner is not liable to pay any tax. hence the levy made on him is an illegal levy.2. for the reasons mentioned above, the tax levied on the petitioner on his agricultural income above mentioned being illegal, the same is quashed. no costs.
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [1973]91ITR479(KAR); [1973]91ITR479(Karn); (1973)1MysLJ10
..... for the assessment years 1966-67 and 1967-68 to rectify the mistakes that are apparent in the assessment orders cited above under section 37 of the mysore agricultural income-tax act, 1957, i issue this notice and request you to appear before me in my office at hassan on february 10, 1971 to 11-30 a.m ..... the case of the department, how can assessee meet the case the notice dated january 18, 1971, reads thus : 'notice under section 37 of the mysore agricultural income-tax act, 1957, or rectification of certain mistakes apparent in the assessment orders for the assessment year 1966-77 and 1967-68. it has come to the notice of ..... govinda bhat, j.1. the petitioner is an assessee under the mysore agricultural income-tax act, 1957, hereinafter called 'that act'. for the assessment year 1967-68, the respondent made an order of assessment on the petitioner on march 11, 1968. while determining the taxable income for the assessment year, certain depreciation allowances on the assets of the petitioner .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [1973]87ITR150(KAR); [1973]87ITR150(Karn)
..... govinda bhat, j.1. the petitioner is an assessee under the mysore agricultural income-tax act, 1957, hereinafter called 'the act'. the respondent issued a notice to the petitioner under section 18(4) requiring him to submit his return of income for the assessment years 1965-66, 1966-67 and 1967-68; but the petitioner did not file any return. thereafter, ..... cane overruling the objections of the petitioner to the proposed assessment the respondent made an order of assessment determining the total income at rs, 14,018 on which a sum of rs. 766.62 was levied as tax. aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has preferred the above writ petition. 2. it was urged by k ..... the respondent issued a proposition notice under section 19(4) of the act proposing to assess the petitioner on an income of rs. 18,825 for the assessment year 1967-68. in the said notice the basis of computation of income is stated. once of the commercial crops raised by the petitioner is groundnuts. according .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [1973]91ITR529(KAR); [1973]91ITR529(Karn); (1973)2MysLJ425
..... year 1966-67 and 1967-68. the petitioner was served with a proposition notice under section 19 (4) read with section 36 of the mysore agricultural income-tax act, 1957 (hereinafter called 'the act'). that proposition notice is dated april 17, 1971, and required the petitioner to prefer his objections, if any, by april 22, 1971. but, ..... notices were served on april 24, 1971. therefore, the respondent, agricultural income-tax officer, issued a second notice dated may 12, 1971, calling upon the assessee to file his ..... hearing with regard to the objections raised by the assessee, but straightaway passed two orders on august 17, 1971, determining the total income of the assessee on which he leaved the tax. 2. the short question raised in these writ petitions is that the petitioner was not afforded an opportunity of being heard as .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [1971]81ITR509(KAR); [1971]81ITR509(Karn); (1971)1MysLJ36
govinda bhat, j.1. the petitioner, who is an assessee under the mysore agricultural income-tax act, 1957 (hereinafter called 'the act'), has challenged the provisional assessment made for the assessment year 1969-70 and the proceedings taken for recovery of the tax so assessed. for the assessment year 1969-70, the petitioner filed a return on 30th may, 1969, showing a net profit of rs. 2 ..... of the act is illegal as the assessing authority has to jurisdiction to make a provisional assessment order on an income not admitted by the assessee. the contention of the learned counsel, in our opinion, is well-founded. sub-section (1) of section 20, which empowers the assessing authority to make a provisional assessment order, reads thus : '20. (1) the agricultural income-tax officer may .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [1974]95ITR453(KAR); [1974]95ITR453(Karn); (1973)2MysLJ366
..... govinda bhat, c.j.1. these are two writ petitions by a common assessee under the mysore agricultural income-tax act, 1957 (hereinafter called 'the act'). 2. the petitioner is a coffee planter. for the assessment year 1967-68, he was allowed initial and ordinary depreciation allowance on a sprinkler ..... plant, etc., which are the property of the assessee and which are required for the purpose of deriving the agricultural income. the said sub-section is in pari materia with section 10(2) (vi) of the indian income-tax act, 1922. sri k. srinivasan, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the view taken by the respondent that ..... the assessment year 1967-68. for the assessment year 1968-69, he has given ordinary depreciation allowance of rs. 3,771. the income-tax officer purporting to act under section 37 of the act rectified his earlier assessment orders and disallowed the depreciation allowance granted on the sprinkler equipment during the relevant accounting years. the reason stated .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : (1966)1MysLJ141; [1966]18STC197(Kar)
..... . vijay anand maharaj : [1962]45itr414(sc) in support of his contention. in that case, the assessee had been assessed on the basis of the utter pradesh. agricultural income-tax act, 1948. aggrieved by that assessment, the assessee approached the high court of allahabad under article 226 of the constitution. the assessment in question was quashed by that high ..... authority approached the high court to review its earlier order. the high court refused to do so. it held that section 11 of the u.p. agricultural income-tax act did not entitled the assessing authority to file an application for review of an order made under article 226 of the constitution. section 11 applied only to orders ..... made in proceedings under the u.p. agricultural income-tax act, 1948; the order in that case was not made under any such proceedings; it was made in exercise of the power of the high court under .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : (1967)1MysLJ502; [1967]20STC67(Kar)
..... however that the order of the deputy commissioner is prejudicial to the interests of revenue. apparently these ideas are relatable not to the sales tax act but to the agricultural income-tax act. 3. even so, we find ourselves unable to accept as correct the opinion entertained by the commissioner as sufficient justification to interfere with ..... the order of the deputy commissioner. 4. we do not think it can be stated correctly that there has been any prejudice to the revenue unless it can be shown at least prima facie that tax ..... has suffered during the relevant years, and also some time prior thereto, heavy losses in business on account of some litigation and that even the income-tax authorities had fixed his total turnover only at rs. 25,000 for each of the years. he stated his case upon affidavit before the deputy .....
Tag this Judgment!