Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: finance act 2005 section 92 amendment of section 13 Court: privy council Page 2 of about 573 results (0.027 seconds)

Mishrimal Gulabchand of Beawar, in Re.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : [1950]18ITR75(All)

..... appellant or his daughters, nor assessment of such income, until the passing of the indian finance act of 1939, which imposed the tax for 1939-40 on the 1938-39 income and authorised the present assessment. by sub-section (1) of section 6 of the indian finance act, 1939, income-tax for the year beginning on the 1st april, 1939, is directed ..... can only refer to the indian income-tax act, 1922, as it stood amended at the date of the indian finance act, 1939, and necessarily includes the alterations made by the amending act, which had already come into force on the 1st of april, 1939.'similar provisions are contained in section 6 of the finance act of 1944, and on a parity of ..... to be charge at the rates specified in part i of schedule ii, and rates of super-tax are also provided for, and by sub-section (3) it is provided that .....

Maharaja of Pithapuram Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1946)48BOMLR13

..... of the appellant or his daughters,, nor assessment of such income, until the passing of the indian finance act of 1939, which imposed the tax for 1939-1940 on the 1938-1939 income and authorised the present assessment. by sub-section (7) of section 6 of. the indian finance act, 1939, income-tax for the year beginning on april 1, 1930, is directed to be charged ..... at the rates specified in part i of sch. ii, and rates of super-tax are also provided for, and by sub-section (3) it is provided that ' for the purpose .....

Maharajah of Pithapuram Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras

Court : Privy Council

..... time, forms a code, which has no operative effect except so far as it is rendered applicable for the recovery of tax imposed for a particular fiscal year by a finance act. this may be illustrated by pointing out that there was no charge on the 1938-1939 income either of the appellant or his daughters, nor assessment of such income, until ..... 1939, which imposed the tax for 1939-1940 on the 1938-1939 income and authorised the present assessment. by sub-s. (1) of s. 6, finance act, 1939, income-tax for the year beginning on 1st april 1939, is directed to be charged at the rates specified in part i of sch. 2, and rates of super- ..... purpose of this section and of sch. 2, the expression 'total income' means total income as determined for the purposes of income-tax or super-tax, as the case may be, in accordance with the provisions of the income-tax act, 1922." this can only refer to the income-tax act, 1922, as it stood amended at the date of the finance act, 1939, and .....

Sir Byramjee Jeejeebhoy, Kt. Vs. the Province of Bombay

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1940Bom65; (1940)42BOMLR10

..... against defendants nos. 2 and 3 only, and i shall deal with it later on.4. the principal question is whether the finance act is ultra vires the provincial legislature. the relevant section s of the material acts are set out in the judgment of the learned chief justice. it will be useful first to summarise the recognised rules of ..... by the advocate general.3. the material provisions of part vi of the bombay finance act, 1932, which were added by the bombay finance act, 1939, are as follows :-section 20 directs that part vi of the act extends to the city of bombay, and the other places therein mentioned.section 21 defines ' annual letting value ' in the city of bombay as meaning ..... is clear that it can have no application when the question is whether there is any valid revenue. if the finance act iv of 1939 of the province of bombay is ultra vires, the section cannot be a bar to this suit. this position is not seriously disputed by the learned advocate general.3. if the levying of the .....

Trinidad Petroleum Development Co. Vs. Inland Revenue Commissioners.

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : [1938]6ITR667(Cal)

..... i understand, that whatever has been said in the metropolitan water board case, which was dealing with a liability for the year of assessment, cannot apply to section 33, of the finance act, 1926, assumes an assessment which, in this case, would show an assessment on the profit of pounds 69,908, and that it is only after that assessment ..... so expressed, is applied to the present case and, as i have said, i think it must be applied, we must have regard to its effect on section 33 of the finance act, 1926, which has brought the present problem before the court. the fact is that though the profits of the company during the year 1932 amounted to pounds ..... trinidad petroleum development co., appeal against an assessment which has been made upon them under rule 21 of the general rules, all schedules, income-tax act, 1918, as amended by sec. 26 of the finance act, 1927, in the sum of pounds 46,032 odd in respect of interest paid under deduction of tax to another company, the british controlled oil .....

Sir Byramji Jeejeebhoy Vs. the Province of Bombay, Municipal Corporati ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : [1939]7ITR670(Bom)

..... the plaintiffs case against the second and third defendants only, and i shall deal which it later on.the principal is whether the finance act is ultra vires the provincial legislature. the relevant sections of the material acts are set out in the judgment of the learned chief justice. it will be useful first to summarise the recognised rules of ..... by the advocate general.the material provision of part vi of the bombay finance act, 1932, which were added by the bombay finance act, 1939, are as follows :section 20 directs that part vi of the act extends to the city of bombay and the other places therein mentioned.section 21 defines 'annual letting value' in the city of bombay as meaning ..... is clear that it can have no application when the question is whether there is any valid revenue. if the finance act iv of 1939 of the province of bombay is ultra vires, the section cannot be a bar to this suit. this position is not seriously disputed by the learned advocate-general. if the levying of the .....

Khan Bahadur C.K. Mamad Keyi Vs. the Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1943)2MLJ364

..... ) in computing the income from property under section 9 of the income-tax act?2. (sub-section (1) of section 9 says that the tax shall be payable by an assessee under the head ' ..... was suggested that the municipal taxes represent an annual charge upon the property within the meaning of section 9(1)(iv), but this contention was rejected. see commissioner of income-tax bombay v. mahamedbhoy rowji (1943) 320 i.t.r. 24 b of the bombay finance act, 1932, does not create ' an annual charge ' upon the property. it operates to ..... to state a case to this court under section 66(1). the tribunal acceded to this request and the question referred is in these words:whether the sum of rs. 10,880 (or any portion of it) being urban immovable property tax ,paid under the bombay finance act is not an admissible deduction under section 9(1)(iv) or 9(1)(v .....

C K Mamad Keyi Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1944Mad10; [1943]11ITR484(Mad)

..... v) in computing the income from property under section 9 of the income-tax act ?'sub-section (1) of section 9 says that the tax shall be payable by an assessee under the head ' ..... it was suggested that the municipal taxes represent an annual charge upon the property within the meaning of section 9(1)(iv), but this contention was rejected. see commissioner of income-tax, bombay v. mahomedbhoy rowji. section 24-b of the bombay finance act, 1932, does not create 'an annual charge' upon the property. it operates to create a charge ..... state a case to this court under section 66(1). the tribunal acceded to this request and the question referred is in these words :-'whether the sum of rs. 10,880 (or any portion if it) being urban immovable property tax paid under the bombay finance act is not an admissible deduction under section 9(1)(iv) or 9(1)( .....

Sir Byramji Jeejeebhoy Vs. the Province of Bombay (No. 2)

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1942Bom312; (1942)44BOMLR687

..... the bombay finance act 1932 is illegal and void, for a declaration that the demand made for payment of the tax is illegal and invalid, for ..... for a declaration that part vi of the bombay finance act, 1932, incorporated therein by the bombay finance (amendment) act, 1989, is ultra vires of the bombay provincial legislature and is invalid, inoperative and void, for a declaration that the urban immoveable property tax purporting to be levied by section 22 forming part of the said part vi of ..... allowed on a question of law only.8. applying the principle established by the cases i have to determine whether the case was such that the 1st defendants acting with ordinary prudence would not have ventured to come into court without three counsel. there was no dispute as to the facts, and the brief consisted of .....

Sir Byramji Jeejeebhoy Vs. the Province of Bombay (No. 1)

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1942Bom310; (1942)44BOMLR682

..... suit a declaration that part vi of the bombay finance act of 1932, incorporated therein by the bombay finance (amendment) act, 1939, is ultra vires of the bombay provincial legislature, and a declaration that the urban immoveable property tax purporting to be levied by section 22 which forms part of the said part vi of the bombay finance act, 1932, is illegal and invalid. he also sought ..... further declarations that certain notices served on him by the bombay municipality under section 202 of the city of bombay municipal act under powers purporting to be conferred by the impugned act were invalid so far as they related to the urban immoveable property .....