Court : Kolkata
..... to remain with the assessee. moreover in the case of muthoot leasing & finance only the provisions of section 51 of the motor vehicles act were considered without any attempt to distinguish a hire purchase transaction from a loan transaction simplicitor. section 51 of the motor vehicles act provides as follows:- s pecial hire-purchase provisions agreement, regarding etc. (1 ..... , the hire charges received by the assessee are in the nature of interest chargeable to the interest tax under section 2(7) of the interest tax act. the installment financed as amount receivable per recoverable and agreement which as from is shown the secured under hirer against the head shown as vehicles c urrent ..... received under such hire purchase transaction in this case cannot be treated as interest in terms of section 2(7) of the interest tax act. on analysis of a similar agreement in the case of harita finance limited versus acit (interest-tax appeal no.29/mds/1997) the itat a bench, madras held the same view .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
..... from today. in default, the appeal stands rejected for failure of pre-deposit, under the provisions of section 35f of central excise act, 1944 as applicable to the provisions of finance act, 1994, qua the provisions of section 83 of the act. it is the aforesaid order which was challenged in the writ jurisdiction. during the pendency of the writ ..... tax for having provided the taxable service during the relevant period, declined to accept claim of the petitioner for the benefit of the provisions of section 73(3) of the act (i.e.non-pursuit of further proceedings, on deposit of the liability before issuance of show cause notice).on the ground that in view of ..... the provisions of section 74(4) of the act, the adjudication order, the adjudicating authority has clearly recorded that the petitioner was fully aware of its liability towards discharge of tax, that it .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
..... can confer on the corporation only those powers which are within its legislative power and relevant to the topic. the petitioners have further argued that the impugned sections of the act have also the potential of depriving a citizen of his right to enjoy the property. a person may be deprived of his right to property under article ..... postulates the sanction of some authority before a certain thing is done. it is also very difficult to accept the submission of the petitioners that the impugned sections of the act violate the right to property under article 300a of the constitution of india. right to use any property is always subject to some restrictions. absolute right to ..... 629 in the act is the prior legislation by the central government in the concerned field and the exclusive prerogative of parliament to make any law in respect of entries 1 to 4 of list-i to the seventh schedule of the constitution. in the case of reserve bank of india vs.- peerless general finance and investment company .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
..... india [2001].249 itr612 it has been held that interest-tax is a special tax. the borrower. it operates as an indirect levy on this is indicated by section 26c of the act which lays down that a lender can modify the existing agreement so as to pass on the burden of interest-tax to the borrower. in the present case, ..... provided for inclusion of interest earned from bonds and debentures within the purview of the interest tax act. if we look at the object sought to be achieved by the act as discussed by the bombay high court in the case of discount and finance house of india ltd.(supra).the object cannot be achieved by roping in interest earned from ..... according to the revenue interest earned from bonds and debentures should be open to taxation under the interest tax act. the learned tribunal, in deciding the matter, relied upon a judgment of the bobmay high court in the case of discount and finance house of india ltd., reported in (2003) 259 itr295 delivered by his lordship kapadia, j. (as his .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
..... was withdrawn. in other words, with regard to the terms of the award there is no dispute. during the pendency of the challenge to the award under section 34 the act, the present suit was filed. the entire controvers.hinges on the interpretation of clause 17 of the award which reads as under;- 17. the party of the ..... plaintiffs/respondents creating encumbrances so that ultimately the claim of the appellants is defeated. in the above factual situation, unless there is a clear indication that the inventory financing facility was also included in the amounts shown in clause 17 of the award, we cannot direct the bank to withhold the documents. if any amount inter se ..... decided taking into account the terms of the award and also other materials touching the interpretation of clause 17 or other terms of the award including the terms of financing facility inventory and how many cars were released, how many were sold and how many are left with the appellants company. if this amount advanced by the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
..... cannot be held that a pro interesse suo application cannot be maintained in respect of a proceeding under section 9 of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 and for the aforesaid reasons, the judgment referred to by the petitioner (srei equipment finance ltd.) has no manner of application in the facts of the instant case. at this stage, ..... court cases 155. referring to paragraph 13 of the said judgment, he submits that the qualification which a person invoking jurisdiction of the court under section 9 of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996, must possess is of being a party to an arbitration agreement. he further submits that a person not being a party to an ..... to intervene in ap66of 2014 since it is not a party to the arbitration agreement which form the basis of an arbitration petition filed under section 9 of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996. in this context, he refers and relies on the judgment of the supreme court rendered in the case of firm ashok traders .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
..... can be filed at any time before completion of the assessment by the a.o.we do not agree with the ld. d.r.that after the amendment by the finance act, 2003, non filing of instrument of partnership deed along with the return will make the claim of the assessee illegal so as to deny the claim of the assessee though ..... defective return. once he refused to treat the return as 12 a defective one he could not have also held that the return was in derogation of sub-section 4 of section 184 of the act nor could he in that case have refused to allow the deductions. if, on the contrary, he had held that the return was defective, then under sub ..... 'ble calcutta high court in the case of cit-versus magnum export (pvt.) ltd.[262 itr10. in the above case, it has been held by their lordships that sub-section (4) of section 80hhc consists of two parts. the firs.part requires filing of the special audit report for claiming deduction without which the deduction is not admissible. this part is mandatory .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
..... pointed out that the transactions in question are a series and not a single one. according to the defendant no.1, the ingredients of undue influence under section 16 of the contract act, 1872 have not been established. the plaintiffs have relied upon hearsay evidence. there is no evidence to establish that the defendant no.1 was in a position ..... 1 recorded physical inability to continue in the management of the defendant nos. 6 and 7. the original plaintiff no.1 requested the defendant nos. 2 and 3 to release finance in favour of the defendant nos. 6 and 7. according to the plaintiffs, on receipt of exhibit b , the defendant nos. 2 and 3 promised disbursement of sanction ..... supply of ration. this made the original plaintiff no.1 and the plaintiff no.2 to look forward to the defendant nos. 2 and 3 for immediate release of finance. instead of releasing the sanctioned amount, the defendant no.2 called upon the defendant nos. 6 and 7 to bring down the outstanding dues to the defendant 2. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
..... the case of cit, punjab v. kulu valley transport co.p.ltd.was rendered without having to deal with two provisions namely sub-section 3 of section 139 and section 80 of the income tax act. sub-section 3 of section 139 provides as follows : (3)if any person who has sustained a loss in any previous year under the head profits and gains ..... further time as may be allowed by the income- tax officer, shall be carried forward and set off under sub- section (1) of section 72 or sub-section (2) of section 73 or sub-section (1) of section 74 or sub-section (3) of section 74a. in support of his submission, he drew our attention to a judgment of the karnataka high court in the case ..... order sheet in the high court at calcutta special jurisdiction (income tax) original side ita no.162 of 2003 with ita no.163 of 2003 the peeless general finance & investment co ltd versus the commissioner of income tax kolkata i before: the hon'ble ble justice girish chandra gupta the hon'ble ble justice arindam sinha date : .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
..... said head of income. the doctrine of merger, therefore, would not apply in a case of this nature. furthermore, explanation (c) appended to sub-section (1) of section 263 of the act is clear and unambiguous as in terms thereof the doctrine of merger applies only in respect of such items which were the subject-matter of appeal and ..... to have been reopened. the aforesaid discussion in the judgment cited by the learned advocate is with regard to interpretation of explanation (c) appended to sub-section (1) of section 263 which merely means that the power of the commissioner to revise an order does not extend to such matters which have been considered and decided in an ..... limitation. the learned advocate appearing for the appellant drew our attention to a paragraph from a judgment of the apex court in the case of cit versus alagendran finance ltd., reported in [2007].293 itr1(sc).which reads as follows: a bare perusal of the order passed by the commissioner of income-tax would clearly demonstrate .....
Tag this Judgment!