Court : Mumbai
Reported in : [1995]216ITR584(Bom)
..... 000. therefore, the excess dividend so declared amounted to rs. 3,90,000. such excess dividend entailed an additional income-tax under the provisions of the finance act, 1968. the income-tax officer, however, failed to take note of this fact at the time of the assessment proceedings. he thereupon initiated rectification proceedings under section ..... contention also does not appeal to us. the income-tax officer had clearly made a mistake in overlooking the provision relating to additional income-tax under the finance act, 1968, while making his assessment. this is a mistake which is apparent on the record. he has, therefore, rightly resorted to the proceedings under section 154 ..... order to decide whether additional income-tax is attracted or not. the income-tax officer had clearly made a mistake in overlooking the provisions of the finance act, 1968, a mistake which is apparent from the record itself. 11. in the above case before the supreme court also, the company had declared excess dividend .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : [1975]99ITR243(Mad)
..... even this argument is not available to the learned counsel now in view of the deletion of the words 'received by it' by the finance act, 1968, with retrospective effect. while deleting the provisions of section 99, finance act, 1968, by section 31(3) omitted the words 'received by it' with effect from 1st april, 1962.14. we, therefore, hold that the ..... assessee is entitled to rebate under section 99(1)(iv) as amended by the finance act, 1964, on the entire gross amount of rs. 4,91,470 ..... basis that this reference in t. c. no. 120 of 1968 also includes the question in respect of surtax.5. the answer to the reference made in respect of the assessment year 1963-64 depends on the construction of paragraph d of part ii in the finance act, 1963. the relevant portion reads as follows :'in the case .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : [1973]91ITR289(Ker)
..... the appellate tribunal that the assessee is an ' industrial company ' within the meaning of the definition contained in section 2(6)(d) of the finance act, 1968. we do not think that the activity carried on by the assessee in preparing articles of food from raw materials constitutes manufactureor processing of goods'. therefore ..... company engaged in the process of manufacturing being included in the definition of an industrial company by the definition in section 2(6)(d) of the finance act, 1968, the assessee claimed that it should be taxed at the rate applicable to an industrial company. the appellate assistant commissioner found that though manufacturing operations ..... the assessee in preparing articles of food from raw materials, constitutes ' manufacture or processing of goods ' within the meaning of section2(6)(d) of the finance act, 1968, and that the assessee is an ' industrial company ' within the meaning of the definition contained in that section '2. the assessee is a private limited .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : [1977]109ITR596(Ker)
..... concealment and he had to impose penalty for these two years. section 271(1)(c)(iii) of the income-taxact, 1961, before it was substituted by the finance act, 1968, with effect from april 1, 1968, provided that the penalty imposable shall be a sum which shall not be less than 20% but which shall not exceed 1 1/2 times the amount of ..... the law at the time of the commission of the offence is the law as it stood after the amendment by the finance act, 1968, and, therefore, the minimum penalty had to be computed according to that law. reliance was placed on behalf of the department on the decision in commissioner of income-tax v. ..... tax which would have been avoided if the income as returned by the assessee had been accepted as the correct income. but with effect from april 1, 1968, the finance act of 1968 enacted that the penalty shall be a sum less than, but not exceeding twice the amount of, income in respect of which the particulars had been furnished. the inspecting .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1986)52CTR(Bom)32; [1986]161ITR684(Bom); [1986]25TAXMAN29(Bom)
..... ,000 should not be taken into account for the purpose of levying tax at the rate of 7.5 per cent. under the finance act, 1968, and consequently holding that dividend declared was only rs. 8,00,000 as against rs. 15,50,000 adopted by the income-tax ..... applied the provisions contained in sub-clause (b) of part i of paragraph f of the first schedule to the finance act, 1968, and calculated the total dividend declared during the relevant previous year to be rs. 15,50,000 and charged additional ..... the aforestated provisions.7. the relevant portion of paragraph f of the first schedule to the finance act, 1968, reads thus :'paragraph fin the case of a company, other than the life insurance corporation of india established under the life insurance ..... company as computed in accordance with explanation 1 to item i of paragraph f of part i of the first schedule to the finance (no.2) act, 1967 (20 of 1967), exceeds its total income (reduced by the amount of capital gains, if any, relating to capital .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : [1979]119ITR688(MP)
..... holding that penalty was leviable at 20% of the tax sought to be avoided, on a misconception of fact that section 271(1)(c), substituted by the finance act, 1968, w.e.f. april 1, 1968, was not attracted. it proceeded on the assumption that the quantum of penalty was governed by clause (iii) as it originally stood. the returns, in ..... it, however, reduced the quantum of penalty to 20 per cent. of the tax sought to be avoided on the hypothesis that the amendment by the finance act, 1968, which came into effect from april 1, 1968, was not retrospective in operation.10. in reaching the conclusion it did, the tribunal rejected the contention of the assessee that (i) the books of ..... logical or rational principle.8. inasmuch as the returns for both the years were filed on april 9, 1968, i.e., after the substitution of new clause (iii) in section 271(1)(c), by the finance act, 1968, w.e.f. april 1, 1968, the iac held that penalty had to be computed by reference to the amount of income concealed. he, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1987SC566; (1986)55CTR(SC)183; [1986]161ITR749(SC); 1986(2)SCALE160; (1986)3SCC689; [1986]3SCR478
..... on by an indian company and the hotel is for the time being approved in this behalf by the central government.the word 'sixth' was substituted for 'fifth' by the finance act 1968 with effect from april 1, 1969.5. with effect from april 1, 1964 the fifth schedule set forth a list of articles and things and items 7, 17 and 24 ..... to which the provisions of section 80e and subsequently of section 80i will apply. section 80i, it may be noted, was deleted by the finance act, 1972 with effect from april 1, 1973. with effect from april 1, 1968 the expression 'priority industry' was defined in section 80b(7) as meaning:the business of generation or distribution of electricity or any other form ..... and things specified in items 7, 17 and 24 of the fifth schedule for the assessment years 1966-67, 1967-68 and 1968-69 and items 7, 17 and 24 of the sixth schedule of the income tax act for the assessment years 1969-70 to 1971-72. it produced expert evidence in support of its claim. the income tax officer .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1986)54CTR(Guj)241; (1986)2GLR1342; [1986]162ITR240(Guj)
..... point out that at the time when the provisions of section 19 of the act were inserted in the statute book by the finance act, 1968, with effect from april 1, 1968, it was explained, inter alia, in the memorandum explaining the provisions of the finance bill, 1968, as under [1968] 67 itr 80 : 'in order to avoid hardship due to delay in ..... . under the mercantile method of accounting, as stated earlier, the moment the liability is incurred, it would be an admissible deduction. what section 43b of the act states is that irrespective of the fact that the liability is already incurred, that would be an admissible deduction only when the actual amount in that regard is paid ..... issue of refund in cases where the completion of the regular assessment is likely to be delayed, it is proposed to make a new provision of the income-tax act enabling tax-payers to claim a .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : [2002]253ITR53(Ker)
..... in that case the question that came up for consideration was whether the assessee was entitled to a concessional rate of tax provided to an industrial company by the finance act, 1968. 'industrial company' means a company which is mainly engaged in the business of generation or distribution of electricity or any other form of power or in the ..... sc) , where the supreme court held that the appellant-company running a cold storage was not an industrial company for the purpose of section 2(7)(c) of the finance act, 1973. it was held that in a cold storage there was no processing of goods. in a bench decision of this court in cwt v. mrs. daisy paul ..... in the production of commercially a new commodity different from the old and worn out castings. therefore, the assessee is entitled to deduction under section 80-i of the act.3. we heard learned counsel for the revenue, sri p. k. ravindranatha menon. learned counsel for the revenue contended that retreading is only replacing the tread. it .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (1982)29CTR(All)301; [1983]142ITR185(All)
..... , or that the assessee-company was an ' industrial company ' within the meaning of section 2(7)(d) of the finance act, 1966, and the finance (no. 2) act, 1967, or section 2(6)(d) of the finance act, 1968, or section 2(6) of the finance act, 1969, so as to be entitled to the concessional rates of tax in the assessment years 1064-65, 1965-66, 1966-67 ..... to the concessional rate of income-tax as provided in clause 1(a)(1)(ii) of the proviso to paragraph f of part i of the first schedule to the finance act, 1968 (3) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the income-tax appellate tribunal was right in holding that the amounts paid to mr. martin and mrs ..... to the concessional rate of income-tax as provided in clause 1 (a)( 1 )(ii) of the proviso to paragraph f of part i of the first schedule to the finance act, 1968 (2) whether the income-tax appellate tribunal was light in holding that the assessee is not a company as is mentioned in section 108(b) on the ground that the .....
Tag this Judgment!