Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1997(4)BomCR165; [1998]229ITR510(Bom)
F.I. Rebello, J. 1. The question to be considered and decided in this petition is whether conveyance allowance paid to the members of the petitioners association is exempted from payment of tax under section 10(14) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. Section 10(14) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, reads as under : '(14)(i) any such special allowance or benefit, not being in the nature of a perquisite within the meaning of clause (2) of section 17, specifically granted to meet expenses wholly, necessarily and exclusively incurred in the performance of the duties of and office or employment of profit, as may be prescribed, to the extent to which such expenses are actually incurred for that purpose : (ii) any such allowance granted to the assessee either to meet his personal expenses at the place where the duties of his office or employment of profit are ordinarily performed by him or at the place where he ordinarily resides, or to compensate him for the increased cost of living, as may be presc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2007(3)BomCR468; [2006(111)FLR743]; (2006)IIILLJ598Bom; 2006(44)MhLj136
D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. Rule, by consent of Counsel returnable forthwith. Respondents waive service. By consent and at the request of Counsel, taken up for hearing and final disposal.A purchaser in a sale conducted by the State Financial Corporation has challenged an attachment levied under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. The issues that have been canvassed before the Court here relate to (i) the meaning and extent of the first charge statutorily created by Section 11(2) of the EPF Act, 1952; (ii) whether, as the petitioner contends, the charge cannot be enforced in the hands of a purchaser in a sale conducted under the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951; and (iii) whether the charge and the priority created by Parliament in the payment of PF dues is confined to insolvency and winding up alone. We have declined to accept the line of argument pressed before us. The first charge on the assets of the establishment created by Parliament while enacti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : [2007(112)FLR898]; (2007)2LLJ182Bom
Abhay S. Oka, J. 1. The submissions of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties were heard on the last date and the judgment was reserved. Today, the Appeal is kept for dictation of judgment.2. The Appeal is preferred under Section 82 of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the ESI Act). The Appeal will lie only on a substantial question of law. The Appellant- Employees' State Insurance Corporation and its officers have taken exception to the judgment and order dated September 18, 1995 passed by the learned Judge of the Employees' State Insurance Court, Solapur. By the impugned judgment and order, the learned Judge of the ESI Court allowed the application filed by the Respondent under Section 75 of the ESI Act. By the impugned judgment and order, the learned Judge held that the Respondent was not a factory within the meaning of Section 2(12) of the ESI Act and its members are not employees within the meaning of Section 2(a) of the ESI Act. The learn...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : [1964]54ITR578(AP)
P. CHANDRA REDDY J - The question that requires an answer in this reference is framed in the following words :'Whether the proportionate income accruing on the sale of tobacco after the process of flue-curing, is income exempt under section 4(3)(viii) of the Act being agricultural income within the meaning of section 2(1)(b) of the Act ?'The reference relates to the assessment year 1955-56. The assessee is a Hindu undivided family. One of the businesses carried on by the assessee is export in tobacco, which is grown on the assessees lands. Exemption from tax was claimed by the assessee under section 4(3)(vii) of the Indian Income-tax Act in respect of income arising on the sale of tobacco as agricultural income. The department allowed the claim in part. The income ascribable to the operations carried on up to the stage of 'flue-coring' of the tobacco was regarded as agricultural income, while that accruing from subsequent activities up to and including the sale of tobacco by export to ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (2005)196CTR(P& H)72; [2005]276ITR638(P& H)
N.K. Sud, J.1. In pursuance to the direction of this Court, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (for short 'the Tribunal'), has referred the following question of law arising out of its order dt. 30th April, 1985, for the opinion of this Court:'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the share application money of Rs. 3,05,000 received, but pending allotment on the first day of the computation period, i.e., 13th May, 1979, is not to be treated as part of the capital for purposes of computation of capital employed under Section 80J?'2. The assessee is a limited company. It invited applications for raising its authorised capital in response to which certain persons made applications for allotment of shares and a sum of Rs. 3,05,000 was received towards the application money. However, the shares were not allotted to these persons before the end of the financial year relevant to the asst. yr. 1980-81, an...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1998SC1575; [1998]230ITR643(SC); JT1998(2)SC74; 1998(2)SCALE1; [1998]1SCR1069
ORDERD.P. Wadhwa, J.1. This is assessee's appeal against judgment dated April 29, 1981 of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court on a reference under Section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 (1922 Act, for short) on the following question:'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the payment of gratuity in the sum of Rs. 4,08,622/- which the assessee made to M/s. Rallies India Ltd., was an allowable deduction?'2. The High Court answered the question in favour of the revenue and against the assessee.3. As to how the reference arose, we may notice a few facts. The assessee, a private limited company, was wholly owned subsidiary of Rallis India Ltd. One of its activities was the distribution of the products of M/s. Taddington Chemical Factory Private Ltd. which was also another wholly owned subsidiary of the Rallis India Ltd. With effect from May 1, 1959 the assessee closed its unit for distribution of the products of Taddington Chemical Factory Private Ltd. which ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1998)145CTR(SC)360; (1998)6SCC113
D.P. Wadhwa, J.1. This is the assessee's appeal against the judgment dated 29-4-1981 of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court on a reference under Section 66(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 ('1922 Act' for short) on the following question: 'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the payment of gratuity in the sum of Rs 4,08,622 which the assessee made to M/s. Rallis India Ltd. was an allowable deduction?' 2. The High Court answered the question in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. 3. As to how the reference arose, we may notice a few facts. The assessee, a private limited company, was wholly owned subsidiary of Rallis India Ltd. One of its activities was the distribution of the products of M/s. Taddington Chemical Factory Private Ltd. which was also another wholly owned subsidiary of the Rallis India Ltd. With effect from 1-5-1959 the assessee closed its unit for distribution of the products of Taddington Chemical Factory Private Ltd. which busine...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2010SC868; 2010(1)BomCR255; 2009(111)BomLR4483; JT2009(13)SC106; (2010)ILLJ644SC; (2009)8MLJ758(SC); 2009(13)SCALE280; (2009)10SCC123; 2009(10)LC4574(SC)
G.S. Singhvi, J.1. Leave granted.2. Whether the sugar bags pledged by Kannad Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. and Gangapur Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. in favour of the appellant-bank as security for repayment of the loan together with interest could be attached and sold for realization of the dues of provident funds etc. payable by the employer i.e., the management of the Sugar Mills under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short `the Act') is the question which arises for determination in these appeals filed against order dated 29.6.2007 passed by the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Civil Application Nos. 1680 and 1681 of 2007 in Writ Petition No. 6824/2005 and order dated 19.7.2007 passed in Civil Application No. 245/2007 in Letters Patent Appeal No. 28/2004.3. We shall first notice the facts from the record of the appeal arising out of S.L.P.(C) No. 15243/2007.4. During crushing season 2000-2001, the appellant advanced loan of Rs. 40...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : (1970)IILLJ665Ker
V. Balakrishna Eradi, J.1. The petitioner before me was holding the post of Superintending Engineer (Civil) in the service of the Kerala State Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to as the Board). On the 4th of November, 1968, he intimated the Board as per Ext. P-1 that he wished to proceed on voluntary retirement as per the provisions of Clause (iii) of the Board's Order No. R. Dis. 25790/66 dated 28.4.1967 since he had put in more than 10 years of qualifying service. He enclosed also an application for leave and requested that he may be granted with effect from 15th January, 1969 all the leave for which he was eligible and that he may be permitted to proceed on voluntary retirement at the end of such leave. There was a further request made in that petition for the grant of permission to tae petitioner to be self-employed professionally and to take up employment under a private agency as per Article 125, Section 5, Chapter VII, Part III of the Kerala Service Rules. The Board by it...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : (1977)6CTR(Ker)35
K. K. Narendran, J. - A question of some importance in taxation law arises for consideration in these Original Petitions. The question is this. An assessment made in accordance with law became final. Sub-sequently, in a similar case it was established by a judicial decision that the assessment was unlawful. Can a demand be made for the tax assessed and will this court interfere with the demand in a proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution, in view of Article 265 of the Constitution of India which says that no tax shall be levied or collected except by authority of law.2. The petition is these Original Petitions were assessed to the land cess by the 2nd respondent Panchayat under S. 66A of the Kerala Panchayats Act, 1960, and the Kerala Panchayats (Levy & Collection of Land Cess) Rules, 1971. The assessments became final. But, later this Court in Cochin Malabar Estate and others vs. Executive Officer, Varantharappilly Panchayat held that similar demands made under S. 66A of the...
Tag this Judgment!