Court : Gujarat
Reported in : [1977]107ITR489(Guj)
B.J. Divan, C.J.1. This reference has been made under section 19 of the Super Profits Tax Act, 1963, at the instance of the revenue. The two questions which have been referred to us for our opinion are : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 3,31,069 standing in the provision for taxation account on December 31, 1961, was includible in computing the capital of the company for the purposes of the Super Profits Tax Act, 1963 (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 2,13,600 standing in the proposed dividend account of December 31, 1961, was includible in computing the capital of the company for the purposes of the Super Profits Tax Act, 1963 ?' The facts leading to this reference may now be stated. The assessment year under consideration is 1963-64, the relevant previous year being the calendar year ended December 31, 1962. The assessee-company was after the relevant dates amalgamated with Messrs. M.G. Inves...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1977)ILLJ161Mad
Mohan, J.1. This writ petition is to quash the order dated 30th July, 1976 made by the Joint Commissioner of Labour, Madras-5 (first respondent) in Lay-Off Application No 2 of 1916.2. The short facts are as follows : The petitioner is engaged in engineering industry and has among others, a plant called Plant No. II at Sembiam, Madras-11.3. Amendment to the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to as the Parent Act) was enacted by the Parliament called the Industrial Disputes Amendment Act of 1976 Central Act 32 of 1976)(hereinafter referred to as the Amendment Act). One of the sections introduced by the Amendment Act was Section 25M. The broad feature of Section 25M was that it required an establishment covered by the new Chapter V (B) within which the establishment should apply for permission to effect lay-off of its workmen when such lay-off was due to shortage of power or natural calamities. By Sub-section (2) of Section 25M it was provided where workmen of such establishmen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : [1992]196ITR366(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta J.1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following questions of law have been referred to this court for the assessment year 1971-72 :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that Rs. 1,79,569 should be excluded for the purpose of computing the disallowance under Section 40(a)(v) ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the income earned by the assessee from transporting the crude belonging to Oil & Natural Gas Commission along with its own crude was attributable to the business of production of mineral oil within the meaning of item 3 of the list of articles and things specified in the Sixth Schedule to the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with Section 80B(7) and Section 80-I of the said Act ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee was entitl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : [1964]54ITR592(Cal)
SINHA J - This is preference under section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act. The facts are as follows : The assessee, Sri Annapurna Cotton Ltd., is a company with a limited liability. The assessment year is 1952-53 corresponding to the accounting year, being the calendar year 1951-52. The assessee company raised a loan of Rs. 10,00,000 by issuing debentures. A debenture trust deed, dated 26th January, 1950, was executed by and between the company and Kumar Promotha Nath Roy and others as trustees. A copy of the said deed has been annexed to the statement of case and appears at pages 8-37 of the proper-book. According to the trust deed, the debenture was redeemable by ten annual instalments of rupees one lakh each, commencing from 31st December, 1954, and ending on the 31st December, 1963, bearing interstate the rate of 7% per annum payable half-yearly. The company secured payment of principal and interest by charging the properties described in the first schedule to the indeture of trust. T...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Reported in : (1997)139CTR(Gau)64
S. L. SARAF, J. :By this writ application, the petitioner challenges the order passed by the Asstt. Commr. of Taxes(A), Gauhati, respondent No. 1, on 9th June, 1992, and the order passed by the Agrl. ITO on 10th May, 1991, and praying for cancellation of the aforesaid two orders and a further direction that the respondent should allow the deductions in respect of contributions made on account of workmen and staff welfare as the same was incurred wholly and exclusively for earning and deriving the agricultural income under s. 8(2)(f)(vii) of Assam Agrl. IT Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the State Act').2. The facts in a nutshell are as follows :The petitioner is a public limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at Talap in the District of Tinsukia, Assam. The company has several tea gardens in the State of Assam and engaged in the business of cultivation, manufacture and sale of tea.For the asst. yr. 1984-85, while computing the in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.OF2013(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.8283 of 2012) State of Rajasthan and others ... Appellants Versus M/s. Basant Agrotech (India) Ltd. ...Respondent WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.OF2013(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.8288 of 2012) State of Rajasthan and others ... Appellants Versus M/s. Solaris Chemtech Industries Ltd. ...Respondent WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.OF2013(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.8291 of 2012) State of Rajasthan and others ... Appellants Versus M/s. Madhyabharat Phosphate P. Ltd. ...Respondent WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.OF2013(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.10815 of 2012) State of Rajasthan and others ... Appellants Versus M/s. Liberty Phosphate Ltd. ...Respondent WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.OF2013(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.10816 of 2012) State of Rajasthan and others ... Appellants Versus M/s. Asian Fertilizer Ltd. ...Respondent WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.OF2013(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.14654 of 2012) State of Rajasthan and o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.2830 OF2022(Arising out of SLP(C)No.24288 OF2018 Augustan Textile Colours Limited Appellant(s) (Now Augustan Textile Colours Pvt Limited) VERSUS Director of Industries & Anr. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Hrishikesh Roy, J.Leave granted.1. Heard Mr. Ritin Rai, the learned Senior Counsel representing the appellant. Also heard Mr. C.K. Sasi, the learned counsel representing the respondents. 12. The issue to be considered here is whether the benefit of tax exemption in respect of works contract granted in the process of revival of the industry, under the relevant provisions of the Sick Industrial Companies Act, 1985 (for short the SICA) based on the Kerala Government communication dated 20.3.2004 (Ext. P-2) can be withdrawn, by the subsequent government order dated 21.11.2006 (Ext. P-3).3. It was the appellants say that they had taken over a sick industrial unit by the name of M/s Teak Tex Processing Complex Lt...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE THE AG.CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE MONDAY, THE8H DAY OF DECEMBER201417TH AGRAHAYANA, 1936 WA.NO. 250 OF2011----------------------- AGAINST JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 31820/2005 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED0701-2011 APPELLANT(S)/RESPONDENTS1TO4IN THE WPC: ------------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.2. THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF TOURISM, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA STATE, PIN-695 043.4. THE TAHSILDAR, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT KERALA STATE, PIN-695 121. BY ADVS.SRI.JAYADEEP GUPTA (SR.) BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI T.T. MUHAMOOD RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONERS2& 3 AND RES. 5 & 6 IN THE : ------------------------------------------------------- 1. HOTEL LEELAVENTURE LTD. AND3OTHERS REGI...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Reported in : (1989)28ITD41(Delhi)
1. This is an appeal filed by the Inspecting Asstt. Commissioner (Asst.), Range XIII, New Delhi against the order of the Commissioner (A)-I, New Delhi contending that the learned Commissioner (A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 6,19,68,285 made as interest on protested advances.2. By going through the order passed by the Income-tax Officer it is found that in this year under appeal the bank has taken credit for an interest of Rs. 6,19,68,285 on protested advances and that the same was not shown in the return of income filed by the bank. The Bank's case was that in cases where certain advances were not likely to be recovered either in part or in full, these were transferred to a register known as "Protested Advance Register". It was further submitted that in all these cases the recovery of the principal amount itself was in doubt. There was therefore no justification or question of taking credit for the interest accrued on such doubtful advances. It was also submitted that as and...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Pune
Reported in : (1992)40ITD467(Pune.)
1. This is an appeal by the assessee which is directed against the revisional order of the CIT Pune, dated 14-3-1988 wherein he has held that the order passed by the ITO for the assessment year 1985-86dated 1-12-1986 was prima facie erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue, inasmuch as he has allowed excess bonus of Rs. 14,918 as deduction under Section 36(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee has taken grounds to urge that the CIT erred in his direction and conclusion that the first proviso to Section 36(1)07) is applicable to the assessee company and disregarding the instructions of the CBDT contained in Circular No. 206 dated 9-8-1986. Therefore, it was prayed that the order of the CIT should be vacated and the order of the ITO be restored.2. The assessee is a Resident company and the assessment year involved is 1985-86 for which the accounting year ended on 31-12-1984. The original assessment order was passed on 1-12-1986. This order was considered to be err...
Tag this Judgment!