Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1974]94ITR187(All)
..... refunded to the hindu undivided family on july 9, 1968. thereupon, the petitioner by an application dated january 30, 1970, requested the income-tax officer to pay interest under section 244 of the income-tax act, 1961.3. in the meantime there was a complete partition of the hindu undivided family on december 29, 1958. for the assessment year 1960 ..... assessment order is passed and a notice of demand under section 29 of the indian income-tax act, 1922, and section 156 of the income-tax act, 1961, is served upon the assessee. if there is no assessment order, the assessee is not liable to pay any tax. if follows, therefore, that if an assessment order is set aside, the notice ..... is that interest became due to the petitioners only after the expiry of six months from the date of the orders passed by the income-tax officer on remand.5. chapter xix of the income-tax act, 1961, deals with refunds. section 240 provides :' where, as a result of any order passed in appeal or other proceeding under this .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1992]197ITR671(All)
..... accordance with the rules of the court.6. learned counsel for the petitioner has first urged that as the income-tax department has given no notice under section 226(4) of the income-tax act, 1961 (hereinafter described as the 'act'), the entire proceedings are invalid and are liable to be quashed. reliance has been placed in support of this ..... petition has been filed praying for a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated october 16, 1990, passed under section 226(4) of the income-tax act by the assistant commissioner of income-tax, meerut, addressed to the ivth additional district judge, meerut.4. learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that the amount which has been ..... 1990, addressed to the ivth additional district judge, meerut, had requested the additional district judge for payment under section 226(4) of the income-tax act in respect of the outstanding income-tax demand to the tune of rs. 11,32,531 in respect of the assessment years 1980-81 and 1987-88. it is against this .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1977]110ITR77(All)
..... the matter was referred to the inspecting assistant commissioner under section 274(2) of the act. the amount of rs. 29,588 was computed by the income-tax officer by adding an amount of rs. 5,000 to the trading results, and by a further addition of rs. 8,000 on account of ..... ?' 2. the penalty related to the assessment year 1968-69. return of rs. 16,338 was filed by the assessee but was finalised at rs. 29,588 by the income-tax officer. as the minimum penalty imposable was more than rs. 1,000 ..... .s.p. singh, j. 1. the income-tax appellate tribunal, delhi bench, has referred the following question for our opinion :'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in cancelling the penalty levied upon the assessee in terms of the explanation to section 271(1)(c) of the act relating to the assessment year 1968-69 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (1991)95CTR(All)258; [1991]188ITR787(All)
..... case, the appellate tribunal was correct in law in holding that the interest of rs. 15,360 paid by the assessee company to the income-tax department for late payment of income-tax was not an allowable deduction under the income-tax act, 1961, in respect of the assessment year 1971-72 ?' 2. we shall proceed to deal with them in their proper order. 3. question no. 1 ..... pertains to the deductibility of interest paid by the assessee on the arrears of cane purchase tax. it has now been held by the supreme court .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1976]104ITR723(All)
..... and amend or withdraw it. after the certificate is received the matter is governed by schedule 2 of the income-tax act, 1961. under rule 2 of the second schedule, on a certificate being received by the tax recovery officer, the tax recovery officer has to serve on the defaulter a notice requiring the defaulter to pay the amount specified in ..... purposes of the present controversy are sections 222(1) and 224 as also schedule 2 of the income-tax act, 1961. we will extract the relevant part of section 222(1) and then refer to the other provisions :'222. certificate to tax recovery officer.--(1) when an assesses is in default or is deemed to be in default in ..... . v.k. kannan.10. mr. deokinandan appearing on behalf of the department, however, contended that these decisions are not applicable as the tax is being recovered in accordance with the provisions of the second schedule of the income-tax act, 1961. we have given careful thought to this contention, but are of the view that even under the new .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1991]190ITR372(All)
..... is filed against the order of the commissioner dated august 28, 1987, under section 264 of the income-tax act.2. the petitioner is a public limited company. for the assessment year 1984-1985, it did not file an estimate of advance tax which ought to have been filed on or before june 15, 1983. the petitioner filed the return ..... . yet another circumstance relied upon by the petitioner is that his application for waiver of penalty levied for the same default has been allowed by the commissioner of income-tax holding that there were sufficient grounds for waiving the said penalty. the petitioner says that the grounds urged by him for waiving the penalty and for waiving the ..... was not entitled to carry forward losses and his return for the assessment year 1984-85 could also be not a return of losses but a return of substantial income. it is on this score that, while making the assessment for the assessment year 1984-85, the assessing authority levied interest under section 217 for non-filing of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1950All648; [1953]24ITR395(All)
..... :' (1) whether in view of the fact that the partial partition had been accepted by the income-tax officer and the business was treated as having been discontinued for the purpose of assessment under the income-tax act, the same business could legally be treated as having continued unbroken in respect of the same chargeable accounting ..... [1950]18itr988(all) , that the excess profits tax officer is not bound by the findings arrived at by the income-tax officer. the income-tax officer had accepted the plea of partial partition by his order dated 24th july 1946, and the claim for relief under section 25 (3), income-tax act on the ground of creation of distinct and separate ..... accepted that the joint family had discontinued business for purposes of assessment under the income-tax act, the same business could not legally be treated as having been continued during the same period for purposes of payment of excess profits tax.6. per the reasons given by us in our decision quoted above our answer .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (1983)32CTR(All)174; [1983]143ITR55(All)
..... substance in this contention. we may first discuss the legal aspect canvassed before us. section 14 of the act classifies income under six heads; none the less, income-tax is only one tax and is levied on the sum total of the income classified and chargeable under the various heads. it follows that a loss sustained in any year under one head ..... the assessee was carrying on the business of smuggling and that he was liable to income-tax on income from the business and such income was assessed to tax. the question was whether the assessee was entitled to deduction, under section 10 of the indian i.t. act, 1922, of the loss of rs. 65,000 arising by the confiscation of the ..... rastogi, j. 1. this is a reference under section 256(2) of the i.t. act, 196j, (hereinafter 'the act'). in compliance with the direction given by this court, the income-tax appellate tribunal, delhi bench 'c', delhi, has stated the case and referred the following question of law for the opinion of this court:'whether, on the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (1982)29CTR(All)301; [1983]142ITR185(All)
..... directors of the company, were not laid out wholly and exclusively for business purposes and were not permissible business expenditure under section 37 of the income, tax act, 1961? (4) whether the income-tax appellate tribunal was right in holding that the sum of rs. 7,000 paid as donation to the congress party was not a business ..... widows of the ex-directors of the company, were not laid out wholly and exclusively for business purposes and were not permissible business expenditure under section 37 of the income-tax act, 1961 ?' department's questions (consolidated) ' '(1) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was legally correct in holding that ..... the ex-directors of the company, were not laid out wholly and exclusively for business purposes and were not permissible business expenditure under section 37 of the income-tax act, 1961 (4) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in holding that the sum of rs. 12,000 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 131Ind.Cas.875
..... title of indian 'income tax act.' but the correct title of the act is 'an act to consolidate and amend the law relating to income-tax and supertax. the very title of the act, therefore, observes the distinction to be drawn between income-tax and super-tax. further in section 2 of the act there is no definition of income-tax as including super-tax. and the ..... the crown the argument as to the jurisdiction of the income tax officer to impose this penalty for super-tax is stated as follows. chapter ix of the indian income tax act deals with super-tax and it states that super-tax is 'an additional duty of income-tax (in this act referred, to as super-tax).' section 58 (1) of that chapter is as ..... in regard to procedure. we may observe at once that this point was not referred to us under section 66 of the income tax act. the point was that on 15th march, 1929, the income tax officer issued a notice to the aseessee for re-assessment under section 34 on 16th december, 1929, having examined the books .....
Tag this Judgment!