Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act 1961 section 248 appeal by person denying liability to deduct tax Page 10 of about 414 results (0.193 seconds)

Aug 14 1968 (SC)

Kapurchand Shrimal Vs. Tax Recovery Officer, Hyderabad and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1969SC682; [1969]72ITR623(SC); [1969]1SCR681

..... in enforcement of the certificate issued under section 222 of the income-tax act, 1961, must be upheld.4. by virtue of section 297(2)(j), notwithstanding the repeal of the indian income-tax act, 1922, any sum payable by way of income-tax, super-tax, interest, penalty or otherwise under the income-tax act, 1922, may be recovered under the act of 1961, but without prejudice to any action already taken for the recovery ..... certificate for recovery is issued against the family.7. counsel for the revenue invited our attention to section 140(b) and section 282(2) of the income-tax act, 1961, in support of his contention that when tax is assessed against the hindu undivided family there is no distinction between the representative status of the manager of the family and his personal status. section 140 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 18 2009 (SC)

Commr. of Income Tax, Dibrugarh Vs. Doom Dooma India Ltd.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : (2009)222CTR(SC)105; [2009]310ITR392(SC); 2009(3)SCALE663; (2009)4SCC427; [2009]178TAXMAN261(SC)

..... of civil appeals is directed against judgments dated 22.11.06 and 8.1.07 of the high court of guwahati, assam,in appeals under section 260a of the income-tax act, 1961 in respect of assessment years 1988-89, 1989-90, 1990-91 and 1991- 92.4. what is the meaning of the expression 'depreciation actually allowed' in ..... the old section corresponding to section 43(6)(b) of the 1961 act. this contention of the assessee was accepted by the majority judgment which held that in fixing the depreciation allowances for the years in which the assessee was assessed as a non-resident under the income-tax act, 1922, the ito had 'actually allowed' only a portion of ..... following the decision of the calcutta high court in the case of commissioner of income-tax v. suman tea and plywood indusries (p) ltd. : [1993]204itr719(cal) , held that since 40 per cent of the assessee's composite income is chargeable under section 28 of the 1961 act, for the purposes of computing the 'written down value' of depreciable assets .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 17 1948 (PC)

Ahmedbhai Umarbhai and Co. Vs. Excess Profits Tax Officer, Iii Circle

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1948)50BOMLR349

..... of goods manufactured in raichur and sold in british india. the assessee is a firm resident in british india and it is registered with the income-tax authorities under section 26a of the indian income-tax act. the assessee has three mills in bombay and one in raichur in hyderabad (dn.) state. they purchased groundnuts and then converted them into oil ..... estates in an indian state; but the tea was brought into british india and sold in british india. the calcutta high court, in a reference under the income-tax act, held that the income accrued or arose in calcutta and not in the indian state. in coming to this conclusion panckridge j. who delivered the judgment states (p. 125):in ..... the moment subsequent to that export.26. now, so far as the actual case was concerned, since the case fell within section 4(1) of the indian income tax act, undoubtedly all these profits were taxable in india and, therefore, i do not read this case as any authority for the proposition that no portion of the profits .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 29 1964 (SC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Bombay Vs. Chugandas and Co., Bombay

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1965SC568; [1965]55ITR17(SC); [1964]8SCR332

..... with the said provisions and theyare not treated as the profits from the business. the profits and gains ofbusiness and capital gains are two distinct concepts in the income-tax act :the former arises from the activity which is called business and the latteraccrues because capital assets are disposed of at a value higher than what theycost to the ..... . 13. there is no force in the contention raised by counsel for thecommissioner that for the year 1921-22 interest on securities could not becharged to tax twice over. under the income-tax act, 7 of 1918, by s. 14(2) taxwas levied in respect of the year beginning from april 1, 1918 in respect ofeach subsequent year, ..... s. 24(2) against thatincome. this view was approved by the high court of calcutta. the high courtheld that the several heads under s. 6 of the income-tax act are mutuallyexclusive, and an item falling under an exclusive head cannot be charged underanother head. this view was affirmed by this court, and it was held that'interest .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 24 1987 (HC)

Mrs. Grace Collis and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax

Court : Kerala

Reported in : (1988)68CTR(Ker)165; [1988]172ITR597(Ker)

..... the full value of the assets shown in the balance-sheet of the relevant company, as reduced by the rate of depreciation applicable to such assets under the income-tax act, 1961, and the rules made thereunder. according to the assessees, what the officer did was to take the full value, as shown in the balance-sheet, and ..... is a matter of arithmetic. 5. the depreciation deductible from the value of the assets has to be computed strictly in accordance with the rates applicable under the income-tax act and the rules. this is necessarily so, even when the assessee has, for whatever reason, shown in the balance-sheet depreciation which is not correctly computed in ..... be computed with reference to the full value of the assets shown in the balance-sheet, as reduced by depreciation at the rates, allowable in terms of the income-tax act and the rules made thereunder ?' 8. having thus reframed the question, we answer it in principle in the affirmative. but the actual net wealth determinable under rule .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 19 2001 (HC)

Unit Trust of India and anr. Vs. P.K. Unny and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (2001)168CTR(Bom)99; [2001]249ITR612(Bom)

..... the extent required.'32. income-tax and other taxes.--(1) notwithstanding anything contained in the wealth-tax act, 1957 (27 of 1957), the income-tax act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the super profits-tax act, 1963 (14 of 1963), the companies (profit) surtax act, 1964 (7 of 1964) or in any other enactment for the time being in force relating to income-tax, super-tax, super profits-tax, surtax or any other tax on income, profits or gains.'15 ..... . section 32 gives exemption to the uti from payment of tax, inter alia, under the income-tax act on its income, profits .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 19 2001 (HC)

Unit Trust of India, Mumbai and anr. Vs. P.K. Unny and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2001(3)BomCR673; 2002(1)MhLj301

..... the purposes of this judgment, we hereby quote section 32(1) to the extent required. '32, income-tax and other taxes. -- (1) notwithstanding anything contained in the [wealth tax act, 1957 (27 of 1957)], the income-tax act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the super profit-tax act, 1963 (14 of 1963), [the companies (profit) surtax act, 1964 (7 of 1964) or in any other enactment for the time being in force relating to ..... income-tax, super-tax [super profits-tax, surtax] or any other tax on income, profits or gains --'section 32 gives exemption to uti from payment of tax, inter alia, under the income tax act on its income, profits or .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 01 1991 (HC)

Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. G.E. Narayana and Others

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : [1992]193ITR41(KAR); [1992]193ITR41(Karn)

..... the charge is related to the net wealth of the person concerned. 10. under the income-tax act also, the hindu undivided family is a person assessable to tax. there were almost similar situations which arose under the provisions of the indian income-tax act, 1922, as well as under the present income-tax act, 1961, in connection with the assessment of the hindu undivided family. one such situation resulted in ..... the enactment of section 25a in the earlier income-tax act, 1922. the said provision was enacted to get over the difficulty caused when a hindu undivided family had .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 06 2000 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax and ors. Vs. T.K. Shahal Hassan Musaliar

Court : Kerala

Reported in : [2001]247ITR395(Ker)

..... certificates were issued only after the death of thangal kunju musaliar, mentioning him as the assessee and, therefore, they were invalid under section 66(3) of the travancore income-tax act and section 221 of the income-tax act, 1961. (3) by the gift deeds executed by thangal kunju musaliar in favour of his wives and children, the title to the properties comprised in them passed to ..... considered these questions and gave the following findings. the additional personal assistant to the collector, being a tax recovery officer within the meaning of section 2(44) of the income-tax act, 1961, is an authority constituted under section 221 of the income-tax act, 1961, to recover arrears of income-tax due under that act and, therefore, he is the corresponding authority referred to in the proviso to section 13(1 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 22 1985 (HC)

Arvind Singh (Legal Heir of Maharana Bhagwat Singh Who Was Legal Heir ...

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : (1986)52CTR(Raj)286; [1986]160ITR908(Raj); 1985(2)WLN789

..... udaipur to the tribunal. the same was dismissed. the tribunal considered the question of exemption under sections 10(19) and 10(2) of the income-tax act, 1961 (xliii of 1961) (for short 'the act'), and recorded the following findings:(1) that the deceased-assessee has all along in the past been receiving the said allowance by way of ..... of the ruler as privy purse or as a result of any financial agreement with the government and, therefore, exemption under section 10(19) of the income-tax act, 1961, is not available in the hands of the assessee. the covenant is between the ruler and the government whereas hath kharch allowance is between the ruler and ..... of privy purse were not entitled to exemption under section 10(19) of the income-tax act, 1961, in spite of clauses (2) and (4) of the covenant, but constituted income of by virtue of the definition of ' income' contained in section 2(24) of the income-tax act, 1961 ' 6. the tribunal, has however, thought it fit to refer the following .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //