Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (2004)188CTR(All)361; [2004]266ITR453(All)
..... affidavit.14. the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the recovery was barred by rule 68b of the second schedule to the income-tax act, 1961. rule 68b which was inserted by the finance act, 1992, with effect from june 1, 1992, states :'time-limit for sale of attached immovable property.--(1) no sale of immovable property shall ..... the settlement commission under section 245-i or by any order of the appellate authority or revising authority under section 246 254(1) or 263/264 of the income-tax act giving rise to the demands for which the recovery proceedings were initiated in the year 1972 itself when one of the writ petitions was filed. however, it ..... 21, 1979, is annexure 11a to the writ petition. it is alleged that the sale of the properties is barred by rule 68b of the second schedule to the income-tax act.8. by the impugned notice dated march 26, 1997, published in the newspaper rashtriya sahara dated march 28, 1997, the properties 170 and 360 sahebganj, padrauna, have .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (2004)189CTR(All)79; [2004]266ITR597(All)
..... the petitioners.3. the petitioners have challenged the validity of the warrant of authorisation under section 132(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, and the initiation of block assessment proceedings, by issue of notice under section 158bc of the act by respondent no. 5, and continuation thereof by respondent no. 6 by issue of notice dated october 26, 2002, ..... 2002, at about 8.00 a.m. the respondents authorities their officers, servants and agents in purported exercise of the powers under section 132(1) of the income-tax act started search at the aforesaid premises of the petitioners as stated in paragraph 7 of the petition. it is alleged in paragraph 7 of the petition that the aforesaid ..... . similarly in ito v. lakhmani mewal das : [1976]103itr437(sc) , the supreme court held that the words used in section 147/148 of the income-tax act are reason to believe and not reason to suspect.31. we are of the opinion that the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is correct. the respondents .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (1988)68CTR(All)87; [1988]172ITR292(All); [1988]37TAXMAN1(All)
..... that they were liable to be included in the hands of the assessee in view of section 64(ii) of the income-tax act, 1961. when this came to the knowledge of the income-tax officer assessing the assessee, the income-tax officer reopened the assessment of the assessee under section 147(a), on the charge that there was failure or omission on ..... 16(1)(a), we may note that these provisions are similar in nature to those contained in section 147(a) of the income-tax act, 1961, and the corresponding provisions contained in section 34(1)(a) of the indian income-tax act, 1922. the law on the subject, if we may say so, has by now been well-settled by the supreme court ..... court was concerned with a case arising under section 271(1)(c) of the income-tax act, 1961. there the assessee had omitted to include in her return, items of income arising to her spouse and minor daughter, in spite of there being a note in the income-tax return to that effect, although there was no specific column in the return. in .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1972]83ITR895(All)
..... that the heading shows that the surcharge was being levied on income-tax and that it was not a tax on total income, i.e., income-tax. additional surcharge levied under the finance act of 1963, not being income-tax as contemplated by section 81 of the income-tax act, 1961, the petitioner is not exempt from paying it.12. in order ..... the consolidated fund of india, to be utilised only by the union. according to section 4 of the income-tax act, 1961, the central legislature has to pass a separate act providing for charge of income-tax for any assessment year at the rate or rates mentioned therein. it is in pursuance of this provision that ..... .10. learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the additional surcharge payable under the finance act, 1963, is nothing but income-tax. according to section 81 of the income-tax act, 1961, the petitioner-society is exempt from payment of income-tax and as such the respondents have no jurisdiction to demand any additional surcharge from the petitioner .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [2000]241ITR131(All); [2001]117TAXMAN702(All)
..... and, therefore, it was allowable as deduction under the income-tax act, 1961 ?'2. the said question is stated to arise from the tribunal's order dated january 9, 1981, in ..... the case before us, the interest is not paid on the amount of any tax but is paid for delay in the payment of purchase price of raw material, i.e., sugarcane and is clearly an expenditure allowable under section 37 of the income-tax act, 1961. we, therefore, answer the aforesaid question in the affirmative, i.e., against the ..... for opinion of this court under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961 :'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, was the tribunal legally correct in holding that the interest paid under section 17(3) of the sugarcane (regulation of supply and purchase) act, 1958, was not penal in nature for infringement of law .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1963All488
..... remedy. shah, j. laid down in c. a. abraham v. income-tax officer kottayam : [1961]41itr425(sc) 'the income-tax act provides a complete machinery for assessment of tax and imposition of penalty and for obtaining a relief in respect of any improper orders passed by the income-tax authorities, and the appellant could not be permitted to abandon resort to ..... [1960]40itr200(ap) , chandra reddy, c. j and narasimham, j. observed at pags 205 that an order passed by the commissioner of income-tax on revision under section 33a of the income-tax act is of administrative character and outside the purview of article 226 of the constitution. they said at page 207 : 'this section created only an ..... 66a of the income-tax act. 3. in the instant petition the assessment order under section 16 was passed on 16-2-1959, an appeal against it was decided by an appellate assistant commissioner under section 23 on 17-9-1959 and a revision application by the commissioner under section 25 on 16-2-1961. in writ .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1975]98ITR153(All)
..... , j. 1. a short but interesting question of law arises in this reference under section 66(1) of the indian income-tax act, 1922.2. the assessee is a company. the assessment years involved are 1960-61 and 1961-62 of which the relevant previous years are the calendar years ending on 31st december, 1959, and 31st december, 1960, ..... the assessee of the new machinery acquired by it for the purpose of allowance of development rebate in terms of section 10(2)(vib) of the indian income-tax act, 1922. 29. in commissioner of income-tax v. challapalli sugars ltd. : [1970]77itr392(ap) , the andhra pradesh high court has taken a different view. while it has agreed that the ..... 24,25,000.' 5. before we proceed to answer the questions, it is necessary to notice the relevant provisions of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'). section 10 of the act provides the mode of computation of profits and gains of a business. sub-section (2) of section 10 enumerates the allowances to .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1975]98ITR557(All)
..... under deeds of trust dated august 27, 1970. each of the petitioners was granted a certificate under section 80g of the income-tax act, 1961, by the commissioner of income-tax, kanpur, stating that the donations made to them will be exempt from tax in the hands of the donors.3. in december, 1970, and august, 1971, the j.k. charitable trust, ..... the act. he required the petitioners to show cause why they should not be ..... of donations from the j. k. charitable trust and that the income of those shares by way of dividend was exempt under section 11 of the income-tax act, 1961.5. the income-tax officer felt that the donations as such were covered by section 12(2) of the income-tax act, 1961, and so were liable to be dealt with under section 11 of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1954All661; [1954]25ITR287(All)
..... other questions of law arise and should be brought for decision by the court.'these decisions clearly indicate that the principle governing the application under section 66(4), income-tax act, is that the high court can ask for further statement of facts on questions of law already framed by the tribunal and, further, the court can reframe ..... for the assessee has contended that the question has not been properly framed by the tribunal and has presented an application under section 66(4) of the indian income-tax act requesting that the question be re-framed as follows:'q. whether the sum of rs. 5,986-9-9 earned by the applicant as commission from the ..... the learned counsel wants to urge after having the question re-framed, arise out of the appellate order of the income-tax appellate tribunal. the scope of the jurisdiction of the high court in references under section 66, income-tax act, is restricted to deciding questions of law raised by the case referred to the court by the tribunal. their .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1952All928
..... in opening these new branches expenses were incurred and, while the assessee claims that the amount spent was a revenue expenditure deductible under section 10 (2) (xv), income-tax act, on behalf of the department it is claimed that the expenses incurred were in the nature of capital expenditure. 3. the tribunal held that a part of the ..... on their own property) to enable vessels constructed by them to put out to sea was in the nature of capital expenditure and was not deductable under the income-tax acts. it is urged that the opening of new branches was an advantage for the enduring benefit of the business and was in the nature of capital expenditure. ..... the business,must be deemed to be a capital expenditure andnot allowable as a permissible deduction under section 10 (2) (xv), income-tax act. the tribunal hasquoted a decision in watney v. musgrave, (1881-88) 1 tax. cas. 272. we have carefully consideredthat case and are of the opinion that that casedoes not support the proposition laid down. .....
Tag this Judgment!