Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1950Mad671; [1950]18ITR237(Mad)
..... this case the appellate tribunal was right in holding that the period the profits of which were entitled to exemption from payment of the tax under section 25 (4), income tax act, 1939, was the period commencing from 1st july 1938 and ending with 29th february 1940 ?' 14. the facts relevant to this reference ..... assistant commissioner were of opinion that the exemption claimed under section 25 (4) of the act applied only to the income of the period between 1st july ..... not liable to pay any tax on the income of the business of 'the hindu' during the period between 1st july 1938 to 29th february 1940, under section 25 (4), income-tax act, as the income of the raid business was charged to income-tax under the provisions of the indian income-tax act, 1918. the income-tax officer and the appellate .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : [1979]118ITR820(Mad)
..... . this view is clearly opposed to the provisions of the act and untenable. section 4 charges the total income of an assessee to income-tax. total income is defined in section 2(45) as meaning the total amount of income referred to in section 5 computed in a manner laid down in the act. section 5 defines total income in terms of residence. section 10 exempts certain categories ..... of income which are exempt from tax and provides that, in computing the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : [1969]72ITR107(Mad)
..... made under that provision, such an order could not be regarded as an order of assessment made under sections 3 and 4 of the income-tax act. we are of opinion that, on principle, m. m. parikh, income-tax officer v. navanagar transport and industries limited, without doubt, covers the second question and we must, therefore, answer it, against the assessee ..... . shah j. dissented, but the difference lay on a very narrow point. according to him, on the terms of section 3 of the income-tax act, 1922, there was only a liability to be taxed and that liability became effective not later than the year of account. the learned judge was of opinion that the liability did not give rise ..... [1966]59itr569(sc) the supreme court held that the amounts covered by notices of demand under section 18a of the income-tax act in respect of advance tax were debts owed within the meaning of section 2(m) of the wealth-tax act on the valuation date. that was, of course, where a demand has been made and there was no step .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : [1974]97ITR431(Mad)
..... 1967.'whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the levy of penalty of rs. 40,000 under section 271(1)(c) of the income-tax act, 1961, on the assessee-firm for the assessment year 1961-62 is valid in law '8. so far as the addition of a sum of rs. 52,070 to the assessee's ..... of the case, the addition of rs. 52,070 to the assessee's income for the assessment year 1961-62 was supported by material?'7. after making the addition as aforesaid, the income-tax officer initiated proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the income-tax act, 1961, and a penalty of rs. 40,000 was levied by the concerned inspecting assistant ..... commissioner, after holding that the assessee has deliberately concealed income, this penalty order was challenged by filing an appeal to the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : [1973]90ITR439(Mad)
..... two assessment years 1961-62 and 1962-63 was justified under the provisions of section 10(4a) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, and section 40(c)(i) of the 1961 act respectively? '8. it is contended on behalf of the assessee that though the introduction ..... of section 10(4a) vested some powers with the income-tax officer for judging the reasonableness of the expenditure, the paramount consideration ..... the bonus the assessee sought a reference to this court; and the following question has been referred to us under section 66(1) of the indian income-tax act, 1922:' whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the disallowance of the payment of bonus to the two managing directors in the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1980)15CTR(Mad)383; [1980]124ITR117(Mad)
..... east india housing and land development trust ltd. v. cit : [1961]42itr49(sc) , the supreme court again referred to the classification of income under distinct heads under section 6 of the 1922 act and pointed out as follows (headnote): ' income-tax is undoubtedly levied on the total taxable income of the taxpayer and the tax levied is a single tax on aggregate taxable receipts from all the sources ; it ..... a common reference, under section 256(1) of the i.t. act, 1961, of questions referred at the instance of the commissioner of income-tax as well as the assessee for the assessment years 1963-64 and 1964-65. we shall first deal with the question referred at the instance of the commissioner of income-tax, which runs as follows: 'whether, on the facts and in .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : [1979]119ITR123(Mad)
..... the tribunal was right in law in holding that the interest of rs. 8,416 cannot be included in the hands of assessee under section 64(1)(ii) of the income-tax act, 1961 ?'2. the assessee is an individual. the assessment under consideration is for 1972-73. he was a partner in a firm called messrs. misrimul bhawarilal,kancheepuram. this partnership ..... under this provision. if the legislature had intended otherwise, it would have used a different phraseology as it has done in section 86(iii). it is provided therein that income-tax shall not be payable by an assessee, if he is a partner of an unregistered firm, on any portion of his share in the profits and gains of the ..... having regard to the rate prevailing in the market.'3. for the assessment year 1966-67, interest paid to the minors on the loan deposits was included by the income-tax authorities in the hands of the assessee as arising to the minors on account of their admission to the benefits of partnership by invoking section 64 of the i. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : [1999]237ITR809(Mad)
..... 1984-85.3. against the orders of the inspecting assistant commissioner levying penalty, the petitioner filed a revision petition under section 264 of the income-tax act, 1961, before the commissioner of income-tax, coimbatore. following the earlier orders, the commissioner of income-tax confirmed the order passed by the inspecting assistant commissioner and confirmed the levy of penalty and dismissed the revision. against the order of the ..... mrs. kala ramesh, learned counsel for the respondent in all the writ petitions.5. learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that as per section 271(1)(a) of the income-tax act, 1961, there was a reasonable cause for not furnishing the return in time ; hence the inspecting assistant commissioner ought not to have levied penalty and furthermore the commissioner of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 1999(1)CTC166; [2000]245ITR281(Mad)
..... government pleader for respondents.5. mr.g. rajagopalan, learned counsel for the petitioner has raised the following contentions:(i) section 23 of the tamil nadu agricultural income-tax act, 1955 would not apply to court auction purchases. (ii) as per section 73 of the code of civil procedure, government gets priority than the other creditors ..... not the bonu fide purchasers for value and without notice. (ii) as per section 23 of the tamil nadu agricultural income-tax act, the respondents are entitled to proceed against the transferee with regard to tax arrears.7. i have carefully considered the rival submissions.8. there is no dispute that the firm by name v.r ..... according to mr. g. rajagopalan, learned counsel for the petitioner. section 23 of the tamil nadu agricultural income-tax act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') would not apply to court auction sales. section 23 of the act is as follows:-'23. assessment in case of transfer of right in land.: where a person in receipt .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1983)36CTR(Mad)5; [1983]144ITR573(Mad)
..... profits. this decision of their appellate jurisdiction. the supreme court, however, rejected that plea and sustained the tribunal's decision observing there is nothing in the income-tax act which restricts the tribunal to the determination of the questions raised before the departmental authorities. ' the supreme court added : 'all question whether of law or ..... merits notwithstanding the fact the the claim for deduction sought to be raised in the fresh grounds was not a point of dispute either before the income-tax officer or before the appellate assistant commisssioner at the time of the original appeal proceedings?'2. the controversy relates to the quantum of deduction claimed ..... of the supreme court in addl. cit v. gurjaragraures p. ltd. : [1978]111itr1(sc) , was cited by mr. jayaraman, learned standing counsel for the department, as striking a different note. we do not, however, think so. in that case, exemption under s. 84 of the i. t. act, 1961, was not claimed by the assessee before .....
Tag this Judgment!