Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act 1961 section 168 executors Sorted by: old Page 4 of about 164,455 results (0.439 seconds)

The Commissioner of Income Tax Madurai Vs. Smt. P. Manonmani, Karur

Court : Chennai

Reported in : 2000(2)CTC1; [2000]245ITR48(Mad)

..... lite, was different from the administrator contemplated by section 168 of the income-tax act and that section 68 would not apply to such administrator pendente lite. the court observed:'we have noted s. 168 and sub-section. (3) and (4) of the i.t. act, 1961. section 168, in our opinion, contemplates the distribution of the ..... assets in the case of the administration of an estate by the executor. if the executor or the administrator cannot distribute the assets then sub-s.(3) and sub-section (4) would be, inappropriate.'23. in the case of commissioner of income-tax, gujarat ..... net wealth as on the valuation date. that, however, does not make any significant difference to the interpretation of section 19a of the wealth-tax act and section 168 of the income-tax act, in so far as explanations attached to those provisions which are couched in identical language are concerned.28. we hold that extended definition of .....

income Tax Officer Vs. Estate of Late K. S. Engineer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

..... is to be noted that this decision was rendered under the 1922 act, where there was no express provision corresponding to s. 168 of the 1961 act. however, the income of the estate of a deceased person was held liable to income-tax under the general charging provisions of that act, in the hands of the executors or administrators in whom the estate ..... vested. under s. 168 of the new act, the subject-matter of assessment is the "income" of the estate of ..... change in the position obtaining prior to 1961, when the it act was introduced and under the said section, any sum received after the discontinuance of the profession due to the death of the person to earn the income could be brought to tax. he also held that under s. 168, the income of the estate of the deceased person .....

income Tax Officer Vs. Estate of Late K.S. Engineer

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (2001)70TTJ(Mumbai)161

..... the assessing officer, but they were all negatived and the amount of fees were brought to tax. the appellate assistant commissioner held that section 176(4) brought about a change in the position obtaining prior to 1961, when the income tax act was introduced and under the said section, any sum received after the discontinuance of the ..... profession due to the death of the person to earn the income could be brought to tax. he also held that under section 168, the income of the estate of the deceased ..... to be noted that this division was rendered under the 1922 act, where there was no express provision corresponding to section 168 of the 1961 act. however, the income of the estate of a deceased person was held liable to income-tax under the general charging provisions of that act, in the hands of the executors or administrators in whom .....

The Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Smt. A.S. Rukmani Ammal

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (2003)181CTR(Mad)109

..... assess the share income in her hand. the assessee filed returns and in the returns filed, she did not include the share ..... the view that the share income of the minors from the firm in which the minors had been admitted to the benefits of partnership has to be clubbed in the hands of the assessee under section 64(1)(iii) of the income-tax act, 1961 and therefore issued a notice under section 147(a) of the income-tax act to the assessee to ..... the revenue submitted that it was not a case falling within the scope of section 64 of the income-tax act, but it was a case falling under section 168(1) of the income-tax act, and therefore the provisions of section 64 of the income-tax act are not applicable. we are unable to accept the submission of the learned counsel for the assessee .....

Cit Vs. Smt. A.S. Rukmani Ammal

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : [2003]127TAXMAN149(Bom)

..... assess the share income in her hand. the assessee filed returns and in the returns filed, she did not include the share ..... the view that the share income of the minors from the firm in which the minors had been admitted to the benefits of partnership has to be clubbed in the hands of the assessee under section 64(1)(iii) of the income tax act, 1961 and therefore issued a notice under section 147(a) of the income tax act to the assessee to ..... the revenue submitted that it was not a case falling within the scope of section 64 of the income tax act, but it was a case falling under section 168(1) of the income tax act, and therefore, the provisions of section 64 of the income tax act are not applicable. we are unable to accept the submission of the learned counsel for the assessee .....

Asstt. Commissioner of Wealth Tax Vs. Smt. Mrunalinidevi Puar of Dhar

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Indore

Reported in : (2007)106ITD541Indore

..... not apply to such administrator, pendente lite. the court observed (page 762) : "we have noted section 168 and sub sections (3) and (4) of the income-tax act, 1961. section 168, in our opinion contemplates the distribution of the assets in the case of the administration of an estate by the executor.if the executor or the administrator cannot ..... discussion various aspects of these provisions and different case law, hon'ble high court has opined as under: the assessable person under section 168 of the income tax act, 1961, is the executor. an administrator is also an executor for purposes of this section by virtue of the explanation. neither term has been defined in the ..... . james anderson 51 itr 345 (sc). to overcome this lacuna, certain sections in chapter xv were introduced in the income tax act 1961. particular reference in respect of taxation of the income of the deceased can be made to sections 159 to 168. in the present case, section 168 which is a complete code in itself will apply. .....

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. A.M.L. Price

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : (2007)211CTR(All)15

..... referred the following questions of law under section 256(1) of the it act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') for opinion to this court:1. whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was legally correct to hold that the share of income from the estate of the deceased was not includible in the hands ..... be obtained from the court of competent jurisdiction as necessary steps were not taken. the application for probate was rejected on technical grounds and not on merits. before the tax authorities, the assessee's case was that since probate was not granted for technical reasons, the will continued to hold the field and, therefore, in terms of the ..... -ao, the assessee who was the sole surviving brother of sri j.a.w. price, was the legal heir and the entire income from the property in question was assessable in his hands. the dy. cit(a) upheld the orders of the ao. in appeal, the tribunal opined that since the probate application had been rejected on technical .....

Cit Vs. Mrunalinidevi Puar of Dhar

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : [2008]305ITR263(Guj)

..... d.a. mehta, j.1. the tribunal, ahmedabad bench 'b' has referred the following three questions under section 256(1) of the income tax act, 1961 (the act) at the instance of the commissioner of income tax (cit), bhopal (mp).(1) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee being the wife and sole surviving successor and legal heir has ..... , indore on the assessee as an executor of the estate of the deceased person in accordance with the provisions of section 168 of the income tax act, 1961 ?2. the assessment years involved are 1982-83 and 1981-82. the relevant accounting period being years ended on 31-3-1982 and 31-2-1981 respectively. ..... to be assessed in respect of the income arising to her from the properties of her late husband shri anandrao puar as per .....

The Collector Vs. Day

Court : US Supreme Court

..... rendered for the plaintiff. the defendant brought the case here for review, the question being, of course, whether the united states can lawfully impose a tax upon the income of an individual derived from a salary paid him by a state as a judicial officer of that state. page 78 u. s. 122 mr. ..... given, or given by necessary implication. the general government and the states, although both exist within the same territorial limits, are separate and distinct sovereignties, acting separately and independently of each other within their respective spheres. the former in its appropriate sphere is supreme, but the states within the limits of their powers ..... by necessary implication; otherwise, the states might impose taxation to an extent that would impair, if not wholly defeat, the operations of the federal authorities when acting in their appropriate sphere. these views, we think, abundantly establish the soundness of the decision of the case of dobbins v. commissioners of erie, which determined .....

Legal Tender Cases

Court : US Supreme Court

..... been compelled to suspend specie payments. taxation was inadequate to pay even the interest on the debt already incurred, and it was impossible to await the income of additional taxes. the necessity was immediate and pressing. the army was unpaid. there was then due to the soldiers in the field nearly a score of millions of ..... action, indirectly impair the obligation of contracts, if by the expression be meant rendering contracts fruitless, or partially fruitless. directly it may, confessedly, by passing a bankrupt act, embracing past as well as future transactions. page 79 u. s. 550 this is obliterating contracts entirely. so it may relieve parties from their apparent obligations indirectly ..... suppress insurrection, to raise and support armies, and to provide and maintain a navy, all of which were called into exercise and severely taxed at the time the legal tender act was passed. but it is evident that the notes have no relation to these powers or to any other powers of congress except as .....