Court : Delhi
Reported in : [1985]156ITR676(Delhi)
..... 84,16,116 being the credit balance in an account styled as 'contingency reserve'should be treated as a reserve as on the first day of the previous year in computing the capital of the company for the purposes of the companies (profit) surtax act, 1964 ?' 2. ..... 78,00,000 transferred to an account styled as 'contingency reserve' represented a reserve and was deductible from chargeable profits under the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964 2. ..... they have to be treated as such for the purpose of the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964. ..... for the assessment year 1963-64, a reference made in respect of the super profits tax assessment of this assessed, the punjab national bank ltd. ..... at the instance of the commissioner of income-tax the following question have been referred to us under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, for the assessment year 1970-71 : '1. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : (1984)41CTR(Del)97; [1985]154ITR561(Delhi)
..... 9 of the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964, penalty can be imposed only for failure to file the return and not for filing ..... 9(a) of the companies profits (surtax) act, for the delayed filing of the return for this year ..... such a loss, it would be reasonable for the assessed to think that no return had to be filed under the surtax act. ..... are of the view, this case is concluded by a finding of fact and even otherwise, the question of law could only be academic in view of the fact that there is no provision in the act for imposing a penalty in the case of a late return as found by the calcutta high court in the aforementioned judgment. ..... this point, the tribunal observed in its substantive order as under :"incidentally it may be added that the assessed had already admittedly filed the income-tax return on september 30, 1969, and the calculation of the chargeable profits was to be only consequential to the figures shown in the income-tax return. ..... ito rejected the assessed's plea that the delay was on account of the impression that there were no chargeable profits and, hence, there was a delay and accordingly imposed a penalty of rs. ..... from this angle, the explanation of the assessed that there was some confusion regarding the calculation of chargeable profits can be said to have some weight".7. ..... [1971] 80 itr 627, where it was held that held that there could be no penalty for the late filing of the return under the super profits tax act. ..... under the act, the return had to be filing by september .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : (2001)170CTR(Del)293; [2002]254ITR125(Delhi); [2001]119TAXMAN750(Delhi)
..... whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the surtax liability under the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964, is an allowable deduction in the computation of total income under the income-tax act, 1961 ?'2. ..... 88,950 should be treated as profits and gains attributable to priority industry carried on by the company, for the purpose of section 80i of the income-tax act, 1961 ? ..... the following questions have been referred for the opinion of this court under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961 (in short 'the act'), by the income-tax appellate tribunal, delhi bench 'd', delhi (in short 'the tribunal'):'(1) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the provisions of section 144b are applicable and, if so, whether assessment was made ..... the factual position in a nutshell is as follows :the assessed a public limited company was, at the relevant point of time, engaged in the manufacture of process control instruments ..... assessed's stand was not accepted and it was held that the surtax liability was not an allowable deduction while computing the total income. ..... here again the tribunal held that the commission was not to be treated as profits and gains attributable to priority industry, and thereforee, was not to be taken into account for the purpose of working out benefit under section 80i of the act. ..... 88,950 were to be treated as profits and gains attributable to priority industry ..... the assessed claimed surtax liability as deduction while computing the total .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : [2001]250ITR171(Delhi); [2001]117TAXMAN732(Delhi)
..... the income-tax officer (in short 'the ito') completed the assessment on the assessed in its capacity as successor of bharat general re-insurance limited under the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964 ('the surtax act' in short), on the basis of income-tax assessments for the two assessment years 1972-73 and 1973-74. ..... in view of these orders, the action of the appellate assistant commissioner in cancelling the assessments under the surtax act was upheld. ..... on being moved by the revenue, the income-tax appellate tribunal, delhi bench-c (in short 'the tribunal'), has referred under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961 (in short 'the act'), the following question for the opinion of this court :'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was justified in holding that the surtax assessments made on the oriental fire and general insurance co. ..... the central government framed a scheme for merger of certain indian insurance companies in the assessee-company for more efficient carrying on of the general insurance business. ..... by paragraph 9 of the said scheme it was provided that the merged company shall, on the specified date, stand dissolved without winding up. ..... the assessed preferred an appeal before the appellate assistant commissioner (in short 'the aac') who, following the order in the income-tax assessment, cancelled the surtax assessments. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : [2000]246ITR602(Delhi)
..... 3,62,910 in the assessment year 1972-73 under section 80-i of the income-tax act, 1961, is deductible in the computation of the capital of the company under rule 4 of the second schedule to the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964, for the said three assessment years ?'3. ..... on the basis of the applications filed by the revenue under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961 (for short 'the act'), the income-tax appellate tribunal, delhi bench-b ('the tribunal' in short), has referred the following question, pertaining to the assessment years 1970-71, 1971-72 and 1972-73, for the opinion of this court :'whether, on the ..... , [1977] 10 itr 399 it was held by the tribunal that the provisions contained in rule 4 of the second schedule cannot be interpreted and invoked relating to deductions in respect of the reliefs granted under sections 80-i and 80j of the act. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : [1997]227ITR635(Delhi)
..... whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the surtax assessed on the assessee-company for each of the assessment years 1976-77 and 1977-78 under the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964, is an allowable deduction in computing the total income of the assessed for each ..... 87,142 determined for the assessment year 1974-75 under the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964, is not an allowable deduction in the computation of the assessor's ..... , has held that surtax levied under the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964, squarely falls within the mischief of sub-clause (ii) of clause (a) of section 40 of the income-tax act, 1961, and cannot be allowed as a deduction while computing the business income of the assessed under the provisions of the income-tax act. ..... once the provisions of section 144b can be invoked in relation to an assessment the period of limitation has to be computed applying explanationn 1(iv) to section 153 of the income-tax act, 1961, and the period of 180 days commences from the date on which the assessing officer forwards the draft assessment order to the inspecting assistant commissioner. 5. ..... whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessed is entitled to weighted deduction under section 35b of the income-tax act, 1961, on outward carriage representing freight charges from indian ports to foreign ports, clearing agent's charges and other incidental charges as also on insurance charges covering voyage of exported goods borne by .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : (2002)172CTR(Del)351
arijit pasayat, c.j.heard. the following question has been referred by the tribunal, delhi bench, for opinion of this court under section 256(1) of the income tax act, 1961, read with section 9 of the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') :'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was correct in law in holding that the gratuity reserve of rs. 2 lakhs and reserve for bad and doubtful debts of rs. 7,19,863 are includible in the capital base for determining the statutory deduction under section 2(6) of the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964 ?'2. we find that gratuity reserve and reserve for bad and doubtful debts have not been worked out on actuarial basis. it is to be noted that so far as the gratuity reserve is concerned, it is to be worked out on actuarial basis. for the purpose of bad and doubtful debts actual quantification would be necessary. that question does not appear to have been considered by the tribunal. that being the position, we remit the question back for fresh hearing in view of what has been stated by the apex court in cit v. jyoti ltd. : [1996]219itr388(sc) .
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : [2001]119TAXMAN710(Delhi)
heard. the following question has been referred by the tribunal, delhi bench, for opinion of this court under section 256(1) of the income tax act, 1961, read with section 9 of the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as the act) :'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was correct in law in holding that the gratuity reserve of rs. 2 lakhs and reserve for bad and doubtful debts of rs. 7,19,863 are includible in the capital base for determining the statutory deduction under section 2(6) of the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964 ?'2. we find that gratuity reserve and reserve for bad and doubtful debts have not been worked out on actuarial basis. it is to be noted that so far as the gratuity reserve is concerned, it is to be worked out on actuarial basis. for the purpose of bad and doubtful debts actual quantification would be necessary. that question does not appear to have been considered by the tribunal. that being the position, we remit the question back for fresh hearing in view of what has been stated by the apex court in cit v. jyoti ltd. : [1996]219itr388(sc) .
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : [1997]227ITR843(Delhi)
..... cit [1996] 219 itr 581 holding that surtax levied under the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964, clearly falls within the mischief of sub-clause (ii) of clause (a) of section 40 of the income-tax act, 1961, and cannot be allowed as a deduction while computing the business income of the assessed under the provisions of the income-tax act. ..... after the completion of the assessments, the assessed filed applications under section 154 of the income-tax act, 1961, claiming deduction of surtax paid by the assessed on the ground that it should have been allowed against the business income of the assessed for all the years under consideration and relied upon the decision of a bench of the tribunal in ..... in the instant case, the question was whether deduction on account of payment of surtax by a company while computing its business income could be allowed. ..... the income-tax officer, however, rejected the applications filed under section 154 of the act. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Reported in : (1989)29ITD514(Delhi)
..... he referred to the second schedule to the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964 and the rules thereunder made for computing the capital of a company for the purpose of surtax.in the impugned order, he reproduced rule 1 of this schedule ..... that the order passed by the iac (assessment), new delhi under section 6(2) of the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964 was erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. ..... that issuance of the notice under section 16 of the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964 and the subsequent completion of the proceedings terminating in the passing of the impugned order under section 16 of the act is without jurisdiction, because the id. ..... directed against the order of the commissioner of income-tax, delhi made under section 16 of the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964 for the assessment year 1983-84 on 27-3-1987. ..... section 16 of the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964 invests the commissioner of income-tax with the powers of ..... for some of the earlier assessment years, the assessee had been taxed under the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964. ..... commissioner has not appreciated the relevant provisions of law and has erroneously interferred with the assessment made by way of invoking the powers under section 16 of the surtax act because the order made by the surtax officer was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interests of revenue as that order had been made in a bona fide manner by the sartax officer considering all the relevant material .....
Tag this Judgment!