Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: finance act 1965 section 13 amendment of section 40 Sorted by: old Court: guwahati Page 1 of about 54 results (0.071 seconds)

T.K. Roy, Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax

Court : Guwahati

..... 1975]101itr457(sc) , the supreme court observed as follows (page 463) : ' furthermore, it is the finance act which fixes the rate of interest payable under sub-section (2) of section 220 and it is common knowledge that every year the finance act makes important amendments in the rates payable under the various provisions of the i.t ..... same reason he submits that the assessee is liable to pay penalty under section 18 as amended by the amending act of 1964 up to march 31,1969, for the periods 1965-66, 1966-67, 1967-68 and 1968-69, and thereafter, under section 18 as amended by the 1969 amendment ..... that the penalty leviable for the period from april 1, 1965, to march 31, 1969, was under section 18(1)(a)(i) of the act as amended by the 1964 amendment and for the period after april 1, 1969, under section 18(1)(a)(i) as amended by the 1969 amendment.8. ..... section 18 of the act was amended by the 1964 amendment and the section as amended was given effect from april 1, 1965 ..... further held that the amount leviable for the period from april 1/1965, to march 31, 1969, was under section 18(1)(a)(i) of the acs as amended by the 1964 amendment and for the period after april 1, 1969, under section 18(1)(a)(ii) as amended by the 1969 amendment.66 ..... same reasons, he submits, the assessee is liable to pay penalty under section 18 as amended by the amending act of 1964 up to march 31, 1969, for the periods 1965-66, 1966-67, 1967-68 and 1968-69, and under section 18 as amended by the 1969 amendment thereafter. .....

T. K. Roy Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax. S. Karam Singh V. Commission ...

Court : Guwahati

..... it held that the penalty leviable for the period from april 1, 1965 to march 31, 1969, was under section 18(1)(a)(i) of the act as amended by the 1964 amendment and for the period after april 1, 1969, under section 18(1)(a)(i) as amended by the 1969 amendment.an application having been made by the assessee for a reference, the tribunal has made this reference under section 27(1) of the act and has referred the following question to us for opinion :"whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ..... thereafter, penalty was levied under section 18(1)(a)(i) of the act as amended by section 24 of the finance act of 1969 (hereinafter called the "1969 amendment").the assessee appealed to the aac of the wealth- ..... was again amended in 1969 by section 24 of the finance act, 1969 act 14 of 1969), and the amendment was given effect from april 1, 1969.by this amendment cls. ..... act, 1957, as amended by the finance act, 1969, is not retrospective in its operation.under section 18 the wrongful act on the part of an assessee becomes complete as soon as he does not file the return of his wealth on the stipulated ..... (2) of section 220 and it is common knowledge that every year the finance act makes important amendments in the rates payable under the various provisions of the ..... thereafter, penalty was levied under section 18(1)(a)(i) of the act a amended by section 24 of the finance act of 1969 (hereinafter called "the 1969 amendment act").the assessee appealed to the aac of wealth-tax .....

T.K. Roy, Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax

Court : Guwahati

..... [1975]101itr457(sc) , the supreme court observed as follows (page 463) :' furthermore, it is the finance act which fixes the rate of interest payable under sub-section (2) of section 220 and it is common knowledge that every year the finance act makes important amendments in the rates payable under the various provisions of the i.t ..... same reason he submits that the assessee is liable to pay penalty under section 18 as amended by the amending act of 1964 up to march 31,1969, for the periods 1965-66, 1966-67, 1967-68 and 1968-69, and thereafter, under section 18 as amended by the 1969 amendment ..... that the penalty leviable for the period from april 1, 1965, to march 31, 1969, was under section 18(1)(a)(i) of the act as amended by the 1964 amendment and for the period after april 1, 1969, under section 18(1)(a)(i) as amended by the 1969 amendment.8. ..... section 18 of the act was amended by the 1964 amendment and the section as amended was given effect from april 1, 1965 ..... further held that the amount leviable for the period from april 1/1965, to march 31, 1969, was under section 18(1)(a)(i) of the acs as amended by the 1964 amendment and for the period after april 1, 1969, under section 18(1)(a)(ii) as amended by the 1969 amendment.66 ..... same reasons, he submits, the assessee is liable to pay penalty under section 18 as amended by the amending act of 1964 up to march 31, 1969, for the periods 1965-66, 1966-67, 1967-68 and 1968-69, and under section 18 as amended by the 1969 amendment thereafter. .....

Smt. Indu Barua Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax, North Eastern Region

Court : Guwahati

..... that in the case of the assessee, the calculation of the penalty should be in accordance with section 18(1)(i) of the wealth-tax act, 1957, as it stood up to march 31, 1965, and then as substituted with effect from april 1, 1965, by section 18 of the wealth-tax (amendment) act, 1964, and with effect from april 1, 1969, by section 24 of the finance act, 1969, in the view that the default was a continuing one (2) whether, on the facts ..... and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in law in upholding the order of penalty under section 18(1)(a) passed by the wealth-tax officer (3) ..... justified in law in holding that there was valid and legal service of the notice on the assessee in accordance with the provisions of section 41 of the wealth-tax act, 1957, read with order 5, rule 15 of the code of civil procedure, as amended for the state of assam (4) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was correct in law ..... for the assessment year 1964-65, in the absence of any previous approval of the inspecting assistant commissioner of wealth-tax, as required under section 18(4) of the wealth-tax act, 1957, as it stood prior to its amendment by act 46 of 1964, with effect from april 1, 1965?' 2. .....

Badshah Khan Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax

Court : Guwahati

..... act, 1957: 'whether, on the, facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in holding that the calculation of penalty up to march 31,1969, was to be made under section 18(1)(i) of the wealth-tax act, 1957, as it originally stood from april 1, 1965, to march 31, 1969, as substituted with effect from april 1, 1965, by section 18 of the wealth-tax (amendment) act, 1964, and thereafter under section 18(1)(i) as substituted by section 24 of the finance act, 1969 ' sections 14, 15 and 18 of the w.t. ..... the aac held that the petitioner would be governed by the then existing law prevalent on june 30, 1969, and the provision of the amendment brought by the finance act from april 1, 1965, could not be applied. ..... however, the aac held that the amended provisions of the act brought in by the finance act, 1969, would not apply and the penalty should be on the basis of the law that existed in the assessment year and accordingly directed that the penalty should be calculated at the rate of 2% of the net assessed ..... ) act, 1964, and again amended by the finance act, 1969, which came into force from april 1, 1969. ..... act, 1957, as it originally stood but it went wrong in holding that the calculation of penalty from april 1, 1969, should be under section 18(1)(i) as substituted by the finance act, 1969. .....

T.K. Baruah Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax

Court : Guwahati

..... the following question is referred : 'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in holding that the calculation of penalty up to march 31, 1969 was to be made under section 18(1)(i) of the wealth-tax act, 1957, as it originally stood from april 1, 1965, to march 31, 1969, as substituted with effect from april 1, 1965, by section 18 of the wealth-tax (amendment) act, 1964, and thereafter under section 18(1)(i) as substituted by section 24 of the finance act, 1969 ?'2. ..... section 18(1)(i) of the wealth tax act, 1957, was amended by the wealth-tux (amendment) act, 1964, and thereafter is substituted by section 24 of the finance act, 1909.8. ..... whatever the stage at which the satisfaction is reached, the scheme of sections 274(1) and 275 of the act of 1961 is that the order imposing penalty must be made after the completion of the assessment. ..... the appellate tribunal held that the assessee failed to submit returns under section 14(1) of the wealth-tax act, 1957, and that proceeding under section 18(1)(a) was properly initiated. ..... the question now is referred under section 27(1) of the wealth-tax act, 1957, for our opinion.7. ..... the reference in this case is made under sub-section (1) of section 27 of the wealth-tax act, 1957. ..... this case relates to five orders of penalty in relation to the assessment years 1964-65, 1965-66, 1966-67, 1967-68 and 1968-69. .....

S. Charan Singh Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax

Court : Guwahati

..... , the tribunal was justified in upholding the order of penalty for the assessment years 1966-67, 1967-68 and 1968-69, on the finding that the calculation of penalty for the default up to march 31, 1969, was to be made under section 18(l)(i) of the wealth-tax act, 1957, as substituted with effect from april 1, 1965, by section 18 of the wealth-tax (amendment) act, 1964, and thereafter under section 18(l)(i) as substituted by section 24 of the finance act, 1969 ?' 2. ..... in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was justified in holding that although the show-cause notices under section 18(2) of the wealth-tax act, 1957, were issued for non-compliance with the provisions of the notices under section 14(2) of the wealth-tax act, penalty orders imposing penalties for the default under section 14(1) of the wealth-tax act, 1957, for the assessment years 1966-67 and 1968 - 69 were valid and were not void ab initio ..... charan singh is the assessee in this reference under section 27(1) of the wealth-tax act, 1957. ..... the appellate tribunal, on further appeal, held : 'as a matter of fact, the appellate assistant commissioner had allowed relief to the assessee even beyond the date of the submission of the return of net wealth as required under section 14(2) of the act. .....

Ashutosh Banik Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, N.E. Region

Court : Guwahati

..... act, 1922, as amended from time to time, formed a code, which had no operative effect except in so far as it was rendered applicable for recovery of tax imposed for a particular fiscal year by a finance act ..... of the finance act, 1939, section 16(1)(c) of ..... up the above statement of the case, reframed the question and referred the same to this court as follows : 'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a true interpretation of section 27 of the income-tax act, 1961, the assessee could be deemed to be the owner of the house property which was transferred to his spouse prior to the commencement of the ..... the income derived from the assets comprised in four trust deeds transferred on april 5, 1933, were deemed to be the income of the assessee under section 16(1)(c) of the act as amended by the amendment act of 1939. 18. in r. ..... the assessee's case from the assessment year 1962-63 conies within the provisions of section 64(iii) read with section 27 of the act, and as such the view taken by the appellate assistant commissioner in excluding income ..... of refusing to answer the question as referred, we reframe the question as under: ' whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and on a true interpretation of section 64(iii) read with section 27 of the income-tax act, 1961, the income from the house property in holding no. ..... cit : [1965]58itr411(mad) , it was observed that in section 16(3) the law did not say that the income of the wife was to be deemed to be .....

Neepco Tribal Employees' Welfare Association, Vs. Union of India (UOi ...

Court : Guwahati

..... its amendment and regularisation by section 3 of the finance act, 1958, assumed the form of section 4(3)(xxi) which is extracted herein below:section 4. ..... for the petitioners has argued that as the employees whose case is espoused in the instant proceedings are admittedly members of the schedule tribes, residing in the areas as envisaged in section 10(26) of the act, they are apparently entitled to the exemption thereunder and therefore, the impugned decision to the contrary as manifested in the related communications/notifications is per se, illegal, unconstitutional, null ..... the unequivocal judicial dicta that is decipherable from the above authorities supports the view that the underlying objective of the exemption visualised by section 10(26) of the act is not only to benefit the members of the scheduled tribe of the area(s) specified therein, but also to advance thereby the economic growth thereof to ..... petitioners are not members of the scheduled tribes comprehended in article 366(25) of the constitution of india for the area, having either their domicile or permanent residence there as specified in section 10(26) of the act, they are not entitled to the exemption granted thereby and therefore, the impugned decision of the revenue authorities is perfectly legal and valid. ..... the state of nagaland was added to the areas specified in section 10(26) by the state of nagaland (adaptation of laws of union subjects) order, 1965, so that the tribal people of the said state could also be .....

Neepco Tribal Employees' Welfare Association, Vs. Union of India (UOi) ...

Court : Guwahati

Reported in : (2007)211CTR(Gau)133,[2007]290ITR481(Gauhati)

..... its amendment and regularisation by section 3 of the finance act, 1958, assumed the form of section 4(3)(xxi) which is extracted herein below:section 4. ..... for the petitioners has argued that as the employees whose case is espoused in the instant proceedings are admittedly members of the schedule tribes, residing in the areas as envisaged in section 10(26) of the act, they are apparently entitled to the exemption thereunder and therefore, the impugned decision to the contrary as manifested in the related communications/notifications is per se, illegal, unconstitutional, null ..... the unequivocal judicial dicta that is decipherable from the above authorities supports the view that the underlying objective of the exemption visualised by section 10(26) of the act is not only to benefit the members of the scheduled tribe of the area(s) specified therein, but also to advance thereby the economic growth thereof to ..... petitioners are not members of the scheduled tribes comprehended in article 366(25) of the constitution of india for the area, having either their domicile or permanent residence there as specified in section 10(26) of the act, they are not entitled to the exemption granted thereby and therefore, the impugned decision of the revenue authorities is perfectly legal and valid. ..... the state of nagaland was added to the areas specified in section 10(26) by the state of nagaland (adaptation of laws of union subjects) order, 1965, so that the tribal people of the said state could also be .....