|
|
| 2002-TIOL-1936-SC-IT-LB |
CIT Vs Joseph John (Dated: May 5, 1967) |
Whether speculation loss of a registered firm kept apart under the first proviso to section 24(1) in computing its total income for one year could be apportioned between the partners, the registered firm could claim to carry forward such loss and have it set off against speculation profits of the firm of a later year - NO: SC Whether if it has been admitted by the assessee that no separate account of speculative and hedging transactions was maintained, it was not possible to segregate the transactions from the common account, the transactions under consideration has to be treated as of purely speculative nature - YES: SC |
| 2002-TIOL-1935-SC-IT-LB |
K P Madhusudhanan Vs CIT (Dated: August 21, 2001) |
Whether in the absence of invoking the Explanation to the section specifically, the burden remain on the revenue to bring the assessee’s case within the mischief of the main provisions of section 271(1)(c) - YES: SC Whether when there is failure to return assessee's correct income due to fraud or neglect, any express invocation of the Explanation to section 271 in the notice is, necessary before the provisions of the Explanation therein are applied - NO: SC |
| 2002-TIOL-1934-SC-IT |
ACIT Vs Kalsi Tyre Pvt Ltd (Dated: February 2, 1981) |
Whether if the nature of the activity is of processing, also akin in nature to an industrial or manufacturing activity, can it be called as manufacture, even if an old article has not completely lost its identity or got converted into a new type of goods - NO: HC |
| 2002-TIOL-1933-SC-IT-LB |
CIT Vs J P Kanodia And Co (Dated: April 28, 1970) |
Whether when after the ITO has granted registration to the firm, can he proceed to inquire that the share allocated to a partner is beneficially held by some other person or entity - NO: SC Whether in the computation of income, profits and gains of the year of assessment u/s 10(1), the assessee is entitled to set off speculative losses against profits from other business activities of the same year - NO: SC |
| 2002-TIOL-1932-SC-IT-LB |
Moti Lal Chhadami Lal Jain Vs CIT (Dated: April 8, 1991) |
Whether where there is a valid trust which has the effect of diverting the income at the source and the income thereafter is ceased to be the income of the assessee family then that income from the properties "purported to have been transferred to the trust" is assessable in the hands of assessee family - NO: SC Whether income from the properties "purported to have been transferred to the trust" is assesble in the hands of assessee family - NO: SC Whether where the obligation flows out of an antecedent and independent tide then it is a case of diversion and where the obligation is self-imposed or gratuitous then it is only a case of an application of income - YES: SC Whether mere existence of obligation is sufficient to constitute diversion of income - NO: SC Whether the rent payable by the lessee for the property got diverted by an overriding title to the trust and ceased to be the income of the assessee - NO: SC |
| 2002-TIOL-1931-SC-IT-LB |
Prem Nath Vs CIT (Dated: August 12, 1970) |
Whether the remuneration received by a member of a HUF who has joined a partnership as representing the family in which the assets of the family have been invested, is to be treated as his individual income - YES: SC |
| 2002-TIOL-1930-SC-IT-LB |
Kantilal Manilal Vs CIT (Dated: November 22, 1960) |
Whether even in case the resolution passed did not purport to distribute the right amongst the shareholders as dividend, it took the form of distribution of a right which had a monetary value, its true character could be altered - NO: SC |
| 2002-TIOL-1929-SC-IT |
CIT Vs Karam Chand Thapar And Brothers Pvt Ltd (Dated: February 14, 1989) |
Whether if the court, on a fair reading of the judgment of Tribunal finds that it has taken into account all relevant material and has not taken into account any irrelevant material in basing its conclusions, its decision is still liable to be interfered with, even if the conclusions arrived at by the Tribunal are not proved as perverse - NO: SC |
| 2002-TIOL-1928-SC-IT-LB |
CIT Vs M K K R Muthukaruppan Chettiar (Dated: October 6, 1969) |
Whether when in respect of any year a return u/s 22(2) has been voluntarily submitted before assessment, the ITO cannot ignore the return and consequently the notice of reassessment and assessment u/s 34 ignoring the return are invalid - YES: SC |
| 2002-TIOL-1925-SC-WT-LB |
Henry Joshua Silverston Vs CWT (Dated: September 19, 1991) |
Whether any interference is warranted by the Apex Court upon the decision of High Court, where the question raised is not of much contemporary importance as the relevant statutory provision had been amended - NO: SC |
| 2002-TIOL-1924-SC-IT-LB |
CIT Vs Imperial Surgical Co Pvt Ltd (Dated: August 22, 1991) |
Whether any interference is warranted by the Apex Court upon the decision of High Court, where the question raised is not of much contemporary importance as the relevant statutory provision had been replaced by another provision - NO: SC |
| 2002-TIOL-1923-SC-WT-LB |
CWT Vs Gauri Shankar Bhar (Dated: November 8, 1971) |
Whether it can be said that an individual who inherits some property from some one, becomes a HUF merely because he is a member of the HUF - NO: SC |
| 2002-TIOL-1920-SC-IT-LB |
Dharmadeepti Vs CIT (Dated: July 24, 1978) |
Whether where the business of conducting kuries is held under trust, the income from that business is income derived from property held under trust for charitable purposes - YES: SC Whether the assessee is entitled to exemption on the income from the kurie business u/s 11(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act - YES: SC |
| 2002-TIOL-1919-SC-IT-LB |
Late A M K M Karuppan Chettiar Vs CIT (Dated: August 22, 1968) |
Whether notice u/s 34 can not be issued against an assessee in his individual capacity unless the returns which had already been filed by him were disposed of - NO: SC Whether where in respect of any year a return has been voluntarily submitted before assessment, the ITO cannot ignore the return, and hence the notice of reassessment and consequent assessment u/s 34 ignoring the return are invalid - YES: SC |
| 2002-TIOL-1918-SC-IT |
CIT Vs East West Import And Export Pvt Ltd (Dated: February 8, 1989) |
Whether the assessee can be held to be a company in which the public were substantially interested within the meaning of the Explanation to section 23A(1), in case for a large part of the previous year, the shares were not freely transferable though they were so transferable at the end of the previous year - NO: SC |
| 2002-TIOL-1917-SC-IT-LB |
Bansal Commodities Vs UoI (Dated: February 7, 1992) |
Whether where the order of the CIT directing release of pay orders to assessee, is subsequently revised reversing such order by another CIT, the matter requires restoration for re-adjudication afresh after affording opportunity of hearing to assessee - YES: SC |
| 2002-TIOL-1916-SC-IT |
Banwari Vs ITO (Dated: March 25, 1992) |
Whether an assessee deserves to be discharged from offences punishable u/s 277 of I-T Act r/w/s 420 of IPC for making false statements in the return filed origionaly, where he himself has corrected such mistake in the revised return upon noticing it - YES: SC |
| 2002-TIOL-1915-SC-IT-LB |
Afzalunnissa Begum Vs UoI (Dated: March 12, 1992) |
Whether the immunity conferred by the Special Bearer Bonds Act, 1981, does not extend to the moneys which are discovered by the department otherwise in pursuance of the normal provisions of I-T Act - YES: SC Whether the Special Bond Scheme is completely independent of and does not affect the remedies and processes available to the Department under the provisions of Income-tax Act - YES: SC |
| 2002-TIOL-1913-SC-IT-LB |
| Joint Family Of Udayan Chinubhai Vs CIT (Dated: October 14, 1966) |
Whether once an order u/s 25A(1) has been recorded, clause (3) of section 25A has no application? Whether section 34 of the Indian Income-tax Act confers no general power of reviewing an order passed u/s 25A(1), which is in its very nature effective for all subsequent years. |
| 2002-TIOL-1912-SC-CUS-LB |
| Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Pvt Ltd Vs UoI (Dated: December 6, 1984) |
Whether the levy of customs duty on newsprint used in the production of newspapers is restriction on the activity of publishing a newspaper - Yes: SC |
| 2002-TIOL-1911-SC-CT-CB |
| Illuri Subbayya Chetty And Sons Vs State Of Andhra Pradesh (Dated: January 25, 1963) |
Whether where an order of assessment has been made by an appropriate authority under the provisions of this Act, any challenge to its correctness and any attempt either to have it set aside or modified must be made before the appellate or the revisional forum prescribed by the relevant provisions of the Act and a suit instituted for that purpose would be barred u/s 18A? |
| 2002-TIOL-1910-SC-IT-CB |
| Hussain Bhai Vs CIT (Dated: April 16, 1971) |
Whether section 4 of the Indian Income-tax (Amendment) Act, 1959, saves the fresh notice from the bar of limitation. |
| 2002-TIOL-1908-SC-IT-LB |
Karam Chand Thapar And Brothers Pvt Ltd Vs CIT (Dated: February 20, 1969) |
Whether the sum of Rs. 51,550 earned from the sale of the colliery was a profit in the nature of revenue and therefore liable to tax when the Assessee was carrying on the business of coal mining and prospecting of coal was a part of the coal mining business - Whether, the loss of Rs. 34,891 in respect of sale of Dry Ice Factory was allowable as a deduction against the business income of the assessee for the A.Y 1950-51 when the Factory was sold in September, 1948 but price for which the business was sold was settled in December, 1949. |
| 2002-TIOL-1907-SC-IT-LB |
|
Kantamani Venkata Narayana And Sons Vs ITO (Dated: October 27, 1966) |
Whether mere production of the books of account it can be inferred that there had been full disclosure of the material facts necessary for the purpose of assessment - Whether the conditions which invested the ITO with power to re-open the assessment did exist when there was prima facie, evidence on which the ITO had reason to believe that the assessee had omitted to disclose fully and truly all material facts and that in consequence of such non-disclosure income had escaped assessment. |
| A Gasper Vs CIT (Dated: August 21, 1991) |
Whether the jurisdiction of the High Court in a reference under the Income-tax Act is in the nature of advisory jurisdiction and only such issues can be and are answered as arise properly on the facts and the questions referred to the High Court - YES: SC |
|
CIT Vs Wesman Engineering Company (P) Ltd (Dated: January 24, 1991) |
Whether where an appeal has been preferred to the AAC on the matter of liability of the company to deduct taxes, the AAC is well within his competence to pass an order on the quantum also - YES: SC Whether u/s 248, a person having deducted and paid tax u/s 195 may appeal to the AAC denying his liability to make such deduction and for a declaration that he is not liable to make such a deduction - YES: SC |
|
Union Co-operative Insurance Society Ltd Vs CIT (Dated: March 23, 1967) |
Whether the insurer who has incurred a liability may allocate an estimated amount out of the P&L A/c and enter it in the P&L appropriation account - YES: SC Whether where the Controller certifies the accounts, the expenditure cannot be disallowed by the ITO, merely because it is not entered in the P&L A/c, and is found appropriated in the P&L appropriation account - YES: SC Whether the expenditure incurred by an entity for payment of bonus, is a permissible allowance u/s 10(2)(xv) of the Income-tax Act - YES: SC |
|
First ITO Vs Short Brothers Pvt Ltd (Dated: December 15, 1965) |
Whether realization of appreciated value of assets in commercial practice is regarded as realization of capital rise, and not of profits of the business - YES: SC Whether unless the appreciation in the value of capital assets is included in the capital gains, distribution by the liquidator of the rise in the capital value will not be deemed dividend for the purpose of the Income-tax Act - YES: SC |
|
State Of Madhya Pradesh Vs Sirajuddin Khan (Dated: April 22, 1964) |
Whether it is appropriate to describe a particular tax as attributable to an income from a particular head, or to describe that a part of the super-tax is payable in respect of an income from a particular source - NO: SC Whether where the income-tax takes in super-tax, the non-existence of super-tax in a particular year does not make any difference in ascertaining the average, for the income-tax for that year will be the income-tax without the addition of super-tax - YES: SC |