Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act 1961 section 280z tax credit certificates to certain equity shareholders omitted Sorted by: old Page 1 of about 104 results (2.288 seconds)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. P.V. John

Court : Kerala

Reported in : [1990]181ITR1(Ker)

..... assessee.3. on appeal, the commissioner of income-tax (appeals) found that the payments were not made either to the assessee or on his behalf or for his individual ..... were minors during the relevant previous year. the income-tax officer, while completing the assessment of the assessee, treated these amounts as payments made on behalf of, or for the benefit of, the assesses and, therefore, considered them, under section 2(22)(e) of the income-tax act, 1961, as deemed dividend in the hands of the ..... dividend as understood in general law orunder section 205 of the companies act. in the decision in kantilal manilal v. cit : [1961]41itr275(sc) , the supreme court observed that (atp. 278) : ''dividend' in its ordinary meaning is a distributive share of the profits or income of a company given to its shareholders. when the legislature, by .....

Hylton Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

..... 171 (1796) hylton v. united states 3 u.s. (3 dall.) 171 error to the circuit court for the district of virginia syllabus the act of congress of 6 june 1794, laying "a tax on carriages for the conveyance of persons, kept for the use of the owner," is a constitutional law, and is within the authority granted to ..... , and is at once easy, certain, and efficacious. all taxes on expenses or consumption are indirect taxes. a tax on carriages is of this kind, and of course is not a direct tax. indirect taxes are circuitous modes of reaching the revenue of individuals, who generally live according to their income. in many cases of this nature the individual may be said ..... to tax himself. i shall close the discourse with reading a passage or two from smith's wealth .....

Merchants' Loan and Trust Co. Vs. Smietanka

Court : US Supreme Court

..... . cf. goodrich v. edwards, post, 255 u. s. 527 ; walsh v. brewster, post, 255 u. s. 536 . 3. income, within the meaning of the sixteenth amendment, the income tax act of 1913, 1916, 1917, and the corporation tax act of 1909, is a gain derived from capital, from labor, or from both combined, including profit gained through sale or conversion of capital ..... is obvious that these decisions in principle rule the page 255 u. s. 519 case at bar if the word "income" has the same meaning in the income tax act of 1913 that it had in the corporation excise tax act of 1909, and that it has the same scope of meaning was in effect decided in southern pacific co. v. ..... coal & mining co. v. harry w. mager, collector, etc., submitted with it, and in other cases since argued that the word "income," as used in the sixteenth amendment and in the income tax act we are considering, does not include the gain from capital realized by a single isolated sale of property, but that only the profits realized from .....

Weston Vs. City Council of Charleston

Court : US Supreme Court

..... this state of the question. it is true the act of the city council of charleston which imposes this tax is most clumsily worded. but i think it clear that, taken together, the object is to impose an income tax. this, i think, is necessarily inferred from the fact that the tax is not imposed upon money at interest generally, but ..... it is said "this ordinance does not affect to regard the tax as an income tax. it is a tax upon the united states stock eo nomine. as it is not a tax on income, it is unnecessary to inquire if the city council or a state has the power to tax income and include therein the interest received on united states stock. the ..... from exempting from taxation certain species of property according to their own views of policy or expediency. what, then, is the ordinance in substance? it is a tax upon the net income of interest, upon money secured by bonds, notes, insurance stock, six and seven percent stock of the united states, or other obligations, upon which interest has .....

Venable Vs. Mcdonald

Court : US Supreme Court

..... children were maintained during this whole period by venable and his wife, and in the most favorable view, if adams' estate had been completely settled, the interest and income from the children's shares of his whole estate could not be presumed to amount to more than, if to so much as, the reasonable expenses for their support ..... all due certainty. the court cannot presume it. the statement already alluded to as a statement of the administration or guardianship account contains no deductions whatever, either for charges, taxes, page 27 u. s. 117 repairs, or even for debts due from the intestate, or for expenses incurred for the children. it assumes only one side of the ..... execution of the deeds, ought not to be permitted to prejudice the title of mcdonald, and are not evidence to bind him. it is true that neither the acts nor confessions of a grantor under such circumstances are admissible to defeat the title of the grantee. but they are certainly admissible to disprove the answer of the .....

Peter Vs. Beverly

Court : US Supreme Court

..... except one farm, which, being stocked, was reserved for the management and support of the family, and so remains to this day. the income arising from the estate annually, after paying taxes, was insufficient to defray the expenses of the establishment in georgetown in the manner they had been accustomed to live and to educate the three ..... be considered when the claims generally shall be presented for final settlement." "the death of the executrix, the subsequent death of leonard h. johns, who was the acting executor, and the surviving executor not residing in the district, and knowing little about the manner in which the estate has been managed, the want of papers and ..... the banks, and he exhibits numerous letters from beverly showing his knowledge of and acquiescence in it, and shows that said beverly was, for a considerable time, acting as agent for the estate, under the authority of the executors, and paying discounts on these substituted notes to the banks out of the rents of the estate, .....

Charles River Bridge Vs. Warren Bridge

Court : US Supreme Court

..... unaltered. in short, all the franchises and rights of property enumerated in the charter and there mentioned to have been granted to it remain unimpaired. but its income is destroyed by the warren bridge, which, being free, draws off the passengers and property which would have gone over it and renders their franchise of no value ..... was to be the property of the commonwealth, "saving, as the law expresses it, to the said college or university, a reasonable annual compensation for the annual income of the ferry, which they might have received, had not the said bridge been erected." the bridge was accordingly built, and was opened for passengers on the 17th ..... regards the question of jurisdiction, this case, in principle, is similar to the one under consideration. osborn acted as the agent or officer of the state of ohio in collecting from the bank, under an act of the state, a tax or penalty unconstitutionally imposed, and if, in such a case, jurisdiction could be sustained against the agent .....

Dobbins Vs. Commissioners of Erie County

Court : US Supreme Court

..... the emoluments of the office, then, are taxable, and not the office. but whether it be one or the other, we cannot perceive how a tax upon either conduces to comprehend within the terms of the act the office or the compensation of an officer of the united states. it will not do to say, as it was said in argument, that ..... taxes is mistaken and the sense in which a tax is a personal charge is misunderstood. the foundation of the obligation to pay ..... received from government, and then that the liability to pay the tax was a personal charge because the person upon whom it was assessed was a taxable person. the first answer to be given to these suggestions is that the tax is to be levied upon a valuation of the income of the office. but besides, the obligation upon persons to pay .....

Armstrong Vs. Treasurer of Athens County,

Court : US Supreme Court

..... page 41 u. s. 289 and are sanctioned by a different statute; the complainants actually claim, and could only claim, by force of the act of 1826. this act secured the payments of no taxes to the university as the substitute of the state. it simply authorized the corporation to sell, as an individual might sell, and the respective purchasers ..... university added to the rent of its tenants. the lands not leased continued exempt from taxation on the fair supposition that they brought no income, and could bear no burdens. the policy of the act of 1804 is too plain to admit of comment, and its wisdom so manifest as to meet with instant sanction. but what was the ..... , the united states. it was a matter of course, in the then state of the college fund, to exempt it from taxes, in the hands of the trustees. the lands brought no income, and could bear no tax, in their uncultivated condition, until they passed into the hands of private individuals. the tenants of the university for twenty years made .....

Passenger Cases

Court : US Supreme Court

..... and not conflicting, as to the powers exercised both by the states and the general government, but for different purposes. thus, hides may be imported under the acts of congress taxing imports and regulating commerce, but this does not deprive a state of the right, in guarding the public health, to have them destroyed if putrefied, whether before ..... to the view taken in the above case of smith v. turner, was a regulation of commerce, and not being within the power of the state, the act imposing the tax is void. the fund thus raised was no doubt faithfully applied for the support of foreign paupers, but the question is one of power, and not of policy ..... to ascertain the rights of the individuals, and the obligations of the public, under any contingency which might occur. it opposed no obstruction to commerce, imposed no tax nor delay, but acted upon the master, owner, or consignee of the vessel, after the termination of the voyage, and when he was within the territory of the state, mingling .....