Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1984)43CTR(Bom)329; [1986]159ITR756(Bom); [1984]18TAXMAN119(Bom)
..... operation of the income-tax act, 1961, and are carried forward and set off under section 24(2b) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, or (after the coming into force of the income-tax act, 1961) are carried forward and set off under section 24(2b) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, read with section 74 of the income-tax act, 1961. if section ..... indian income-tax act, 1922, which is similar to section 80 of the income-tax act, 1961. the only provision under the indian income-tax act, 1922, which can be considered in this connection is section 22(2a). section 22 of the indian income-tax act, 1922, deals with the return of income. it is comparable to section 139 of the income-tax act, 1961. under ..... being carried forward and set off in the assessment year 1964-65.31. to conclude, there is no provision under the indian income-tax act, 1922, or under the income-tax act, 1961, which requires the assessee-company which has suffered a loss under the head 'capital gains' in a previous year relevant to .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : [1963]48ITR376(Bom)
..... is contended on behalf of the appellant company that no portion of the appellant's profit from the dyeing, printing and bleaching department can be assessed to tax under the indian income-tax act. it is conceded that most of the purchases were made in the taxable territories. but mr. mulla argues that the profit on the purchases is negligible ..... is contended on behalf of the appellant company that no portion of the appellant's profit from the dyeing, printing and bleaching department can be assessed to tax under the indian income-tax act. it is conceded that most of the purchases were made in the taxable territories. but mr. mulla argues that the profit on the purchases is negligible ..... 2) dated 29th august 1961, in i.t.r. no. 11 of 1959, in the case of bhor industries ltd. v. commissioner of income-tax (central), bombay, we hereby draw up an agreed statement of the case and refer it to the high court of judicature at bombay under section 66(2) of the indian income-tax act, 1922. the question .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1984)38CTR(Bom)210; [1985]151ITR461(Bom); [1983]15TAXMAN491(Bom)
..... .1. the question to be answered in this reference under s. 256(1) of the i.t. act, 1961, reads thus :'whether the assessee-firm was entitled to relief under s. 84 of the income-tax act, 1961, in its assessment, though similar relief was allowed by the income-tax officer in the assessments of the partners ?'2. the assessee is a partnership firm consisting of three partners ..... . it set up a new industrial undertaking in the accounting year relevant to the assessment year 1967-68. the ito allowed partial exemption from tax under s. 84, relating .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : [1979]119ITR266(Bom); [1979]2TAXMAN68(Bom)
..... express language of the statute. in so deciding the point, i am aware of the decision of the supreme court in the case of c. a. abraham v. income-tax officer, kottayam : [1961]41itr425(sc) , wherein it has been held that, in interpreting a fiscal statute, the court cannot proceed to make good deficiencies, if there be any; the ..... as the case may be...... (2) in the case of any person who, in the income-tax officer's opinion is assessable under this act, whether on his own total income or on the total income of any other person during the previous year, the income-tax officer may, before the end of the relevant assessment year, serve a notice upon him requiring ..... ultimately confirmed by the tribunal. the high court was moved in its writ jurisdiction, inter alia, because it was contended that s. 271(1) of the i. t. act, 1961, infringed art. 14 of the constitution. we are not concerned with this aspect in the present reference save to note that the challenge was rejected. however, one other .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1959)61BOMLR1339
..... profit of rs.96,796/- made by the assessee in this transaction. but the commissioner of income-tax took action under s.88b of the income-tax act and brought the amount as tax. income-tax act and brought the amount as tax. the matter was then taken to the income-tax appellate tribunal & the tribunal was of the view that in acquiring the right of bhudarbhai the ..... a trading venture and that the profit of rs.96,796/- made by the assessee in this transaction. but the commissioner of income-tax act and brought the amount to tax. the matter was then taken to the income-tax appellate tribunal & the tribunal was of the view that in acquiring the right of bhudarbhai the assessee was indulging in a trading ..... received by the assessee on 5-5-1946 was part of the sale price under agreement dated 5-5-1946. in the reference under s.66(2) of the income-tax act, the question which falls to be determined is whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the amount of rs.96,000/- odd, which is .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : [1958]34ITR92(Bom)
..... was rs. 17,591. the contention of the assessee was that these amounts were not subject to tax. the tribunal held that these amounts constituted an income and were liable to tax under section 10 or 12 of the indian income-tax act. 2. now, every receipt that a man receives is either a revenue receipt or a capital receipt ..... with a fair regularity. but even if a receipt is a revenue receipt, it may not be subject to tax if the assessee establishes that the receipt is exempted from tax under one of the provisions of the income-tax act, and mr. thakkar, on behalf of the assessee, has strongly pressed upon us that these particular receipts ..... is an untenable proposition that the amounts received by the assessee were income which was exempted under the provisions of the indian income-tax act. 7. now, mr. thakkar wanted to argue that even if these receipts constituted 'income', he was entitled to deductions permissible under the income-tax law. no question has been raised on this reference and we .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1990(3)BomCR100; (1990)85CTR(Bom)95; [1990]185ITR513(Bom)
..... aforesaid interim order was passed by this court, on the same day orders under section 197(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, dated april 16, 1987, were received by the petitioner requiring it to deduct tax under section 192 out of payments/remittance to be made to the four foreign technicians. however, no action thereupon was ..... petitioner placed before the court an order dated february 9, 1990, issued by the income-tax officer, ward 23(9), bombay, treating the petitioner as an agent in relation to the four foreign technicians under section 163(1)(c) of the income-tax act, 1961.4. shri dalvi, learned counsel for the petitioner, argued at length that the ..... payments made to the four foreign technicians were not income in their hands chargeable under the head 'salary' and, consequently, the petitioner was not obliged .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2003(3)BomCR193; [2002]258ITR601(Bom)
..... allowed deduction for the broken period interest paid.conclusion :we now propose to answer the questions referred to us under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961.questions in income-tax reference no. 346 of 1987 :(1) whether,on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was rightin law in ..... in the circumstances of the case, the tribunalwas right in holding that for the purposes of computing the disallowanceunder section 40a(5) of the income-tax act, 1961,rule 3of the income-tax rules, 1962, cannot beinvoked in the case of the applicant for determining the value ofrent-free accommodation and the conveyance provided to their employees ..... and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was rightin holding that for the purpose of computing the disallowance undersection 40a(5) ofthe income-tax act, 1961,rule 3 of the income-tax rules, 1962, cannot be invoked in the case of the applicant for determining thevalue of rent-free accommodation in the affirmative, i.e., .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1996(5)BomCR564
..... . the learned advocate general referred to the case of c.a. abraham v. income tax officer, reported in : [1961]41itr425(sc) wherein the supreme court has held that the income tax act provides a complete machinery for assessment of tax and imposition of penalty. he submitted that this shows that the concept of tax and penalty are two different concepts.54. he also relied upon the authority of ..... view of the dishonest and contumacious conduct of the assessee. the supreme court, in cit v. bhikaji dadabhai & co. : [1961]42itr123(sc) in the context of hyderabad income tax act which ceased to have effect from 1st april, 1950, reiterated the position and held that the levy, assessment and collection of income tax would comprehend the levy of penalty also. again, in jain brothers v. union of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1994(2)BomCR164; [1994]208ITR623(Bom)
..... filed under article 226 of the constitution of india, the petitioners are seeking a declaration that the amendment made to section 37 of the income-tax act, 1961, by section 17(b) of the finance act, 1983, by inserting sub-sections (3a) to (3d) is bad in law, illegal, invalid and violative of the petitioners' fundamental ..... 16. the real question which requires determination is whether the impugned amendments in section 37 of the income-tax act restrains or curtails commercial speech. in the decisions in express newspapers (p.) ltd. v. union of india : (1961)illj339sc , the question arose as to whether the wage board specifying the wages and conditions of service ..... commercial speech. it is also difficult to accede to the submission that the enactment of sub-sections (3a) and (3b) of section 37 of the income-tax act has the direct inevitable consequence of infringing upon the protection guaranteed under article 19(1)(a) of the constitution of india. as mentioned hereinabove, sub-section .....
Tag this Judgment!