Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (1997)143CTR(All)428; [1997]226ITR411(All); [1997]92TAXMAN524(All)
..... 226 of the constitution of india, the petitioner challenges an order dated august 30, 1994, passed by the appropriate authority, lucknow, under section 269ud of the income-tax act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'), ordering the purchase of plot no. b-70, sector 14, noida, for a consideration of rs. 14,57,149.2. we have heard sri ravi ..... exhaustive and when we interpret this term in the light of special law as contained in chapter xx-c of the income-tax act, 1961, it would be unwise to follow the general law under the transfer of property act that an agreement to sell does not create an interest in the property in favour of the buyer. we are dealing ..... 269ud by the finance act, 1993 (sic), and proceeded on the special terms of the agreement between the parties which were to the effect that in case the government decided to purchase the property, the buyer would get a refund of his advance and for that purpose the vendor was to authorise the income-tax department to refund the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : [2002]120TAXMAN655(Delhi)
..... them are common somewhere) have been referred for opinion of this court under section 18 of the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as 'the surtax act') read with section 256(1) of the income tax act, 1961. by common order dated 9-1-1985 various appeals were disposed of by the tribunal, delhi bench 'a'. accepting ..... on completion of regular assessment under section 6(2) thereof, was entitled to interest under section 18 of the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964, read with section 244(1a) of the income tax act, 1961?6. whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appellate tribunal was justified in law in holding that ..... the circumstances of the case, the appellate tribunal was justified in law in holding that section 18 of the companies (profits) surtax act, 1964, read with section 244(1 a) of the income tax act, 1961 was applicable to the refund due to the assessed on regular assessment made under section 6(2) of the companies (profits) surtax .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : (2008)214CTR(Del)130; 2007(99)DRJ207; [2009]313ITR347(Delhi)
..... present case.20. as already noted above, the present case is one under article 226 of the constitution and not as a result of statutory and adjudicatory proceedings under the income tax act, 1961. moreover, as mentioned above, the respondents have disputed their liability and learned counsel has even gone to the extent of suggesting that the proceedings under section 132 of the ..... assessment order dated 31st may, 1979.5. under these circumstances, the silver bars which were seized (and perhaps retained due to the tax liability) being the subject matter of an order under section 132(5) of the income tax act, 1961 (for short the act) were required to be released to the partnership firm. over a period of time, from 10th september, 1974 onwards till 25th .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : (2003)185CTR(Raj)464
..... ao that on the amount refunded, interest should be paid as required under section 214 of the it act.3. ito has rejected the claim of the assessee. in appeal before the cit(a), cit(a) also dismissed the appeal of the assessee. in appeal before the tribunal, tribunal has allowed ..... of interest on that excess amount, which has been refunded after assessment.6. following the view taken by this court in the case of cit v. hindustan engineering co. (supra), we feel that tribunal has committed the error in directing to allow the interest under section 214 on ..... three times.5. heard learned counsel for the revenue, mr. mathur. he brought to our notice the decision of this court in case of cit v. hindustan engineering co. (1995) 215 itr 527, wherein this court has taken the view that there is no provision for payment of ..... s.k. keshote, j. 1. on an application filed under section 256(1) of the it act, 1961, the tribunal has referred the following question for the opinion of this court:'whether, on the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : [2002]254ITR641(Mad)
..... tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee is entitled to interest under section 18 of the surtax act read with section 244(1a) of the income-tax act, 1961, on the over payment of the self-assessment tax paid by the assessee ?'for the assessment year 1976-77, the surtax liability was determined at rs. 56,00,940. ..... . in the case reported in modi industries ltd. v. cit : [1995]216itr759(sc) , the supreme court has held that section 214 provides for payment ..... after giving credit to the pre-assessment tax paid by the assessee, the assessment resulted in a refund of rs. 3,40,366. the assessing officer did not allow the assessee interest under section 18 of the surtax act read with section 244(1a) of the income-tax act, 1961. hence, an appeal has been filed by the assessee.2 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : (2008)217CTR(Kar)572; [2008]301ITR143(KAR); [2008]301ITR143(Karn)
..... 30, as the case may be. the said royalty payable by the assessee to the collaborator was subject to the provisions of tax deduction at source, as per the various provisions of the income-tax act, 1961.the assessee credited the royalty as per the agreed terms to the collaborator from april 1, 1994, to january 31, 2000. ..... tribunal is correct in rejecting the claim for set off and refund merely because section 201(1) and 201(1a) of the income-tax act, 1961, have been amended to cover short deduction of tax?3. the facts of the case, in a nutshell, are as under:the assesses had initially entered into a technical collaboration agreement with ..... 333, dated april 2, 1982 (see : [1982]137itr1(bom) ), dealing with the conflict between the provisions of the income-tax act, 1961, and the provisions of the double taxation avoidance agreement, its clarification, the judgment of this court reported in cit v. r.m. muthaiah : [1993]202itr508(kar) and the board's circular no. 769, dated august 6, 1998 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : [1973]92ITR312(Delhi)
..... said this :'the matter has been carefully examined. however, in view of the provisions of sections 240 and 244(1) read with section 297(2)(i) of the income-tax act, 1961, it is not possible to agree to your request for the grant of interest on the amount of refund for the period from march, 1957, to december, 1966, ..... and 7:7. first of all it has to be determined whether the indian income-tax act of 1922 (referred to hereinafter as the old act) or the income-tax act, 1961 (referred to hereinafter as the present act), applied to the facts of this case.8. under the old act it was provided in section 66 that a reference may be made to the ..... plaintiffs entitled to have any interest on the sum refunded to them on account of income-tax and/or excess profits tax ? (6) whether the claim of the plaintiffs in the suit is governed by the provisions of the income-tax act, 1961, or under the provisions of the indian income-tax act, 1922 ? (7) whether the plaintiffs are entitled to recover any amount from .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : [1975]100ITR33(Mad)
..... provisions of the new act relating to the interest payable on refunds that have to be applied and not section 66(7) of the old ..... comprehend appeal, revision or reference. it has been pointed out by the supreme court in a, n. lakshman shenoy v. income-tax officer, : [1958]34itr275(sc) : ' this brief resume of the relevant provisions of the income-tax act, clearly establishes that the word 'assessment' has to be understood in each section with reference to the context in which it ..... 66(7) of the old act, and the commissioner also proceeded on that basis. but in answer to the rule nisi the revenue has filed a counter-affidavit asserting that in view of the transitory provisions contained in section 297(2)(i) of the income-tax act of 1961, hereinafter referred to as the 'new act', it is only the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [2005]144TAXMAN682(All)
..... tribunal, allahabad has referred the following two questions of law under section 256(1) of the income tax act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the act, for opinion to this court.'1. whether, on the facts and in circumstances of the case, the incon-lctax appellate tribunal was correct in law in holding ..... assessment to the date of making refund, on the amount refundable as a result of excess amount paid only as a result of proceedings under section 155 of the income tax act, subsequent to the regular assessment?'2. briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows:the reference relates to the assessment year 1974-75. ..... the excess amount paid during the financial year on the date subsequent to the date fixed under section 211 of the income tax act for payment of such instalment.2. whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the income tax appellate tribunal was correct in law in holding that the interest under section 214(2) is payable to the assessee, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [2007]292ITR143(All)
..... order dated may 21, 1979, that could be rectified under section 154 of the income-tax act, 1961 ?2. the reference relates to the assessment years 1962-63, 1970-71 and 1971-72.3. briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows:4 ..... tribunal, allahabad has referred the following question of law under section 256(2) of the income-tax act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') for the opinion of this court.whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in holding that there was no mistake in the ..... starts running after the expiry of three months from the end of the month in which the order under section 241 of the act is passed by the commissioner of income-tax and as in the present case the commissioner of income-tax had passed three orders one on september 30, 1977, the second on may 15, 1978, and the third on july 31, 1978 .....
Tag this Judgment!