Follow Us:

Supreme Court of India

Vazir Sultan Tobacco Company Ltd. Vs. CIT (1981) 132 ITR 559 (SC)

September 25, 1981 5553 Views 0 comment Print

Super Profits Tax Act, 1963 and Company’s (Profits) Sur-tax Act, 1964-Rule I of Second Schedule-Scope of- ‘Provision” and “Reserve’-Distinction- A sum of money transferred from current profits to general reserves- Dividend paid from that fund-General reserve how calculated.

CIT vs R.M. Chidambaram Pillai (SC) – 1977 AIR 489

November 17, 1976 9772 Views 0 comment Print

Rule 24 of the Income Tax Rules, 1922 states that income derived from the sale of tea grown and manufactured by the seller shall be computed as if it were income derived from business and 40 per cent of such income shall be deemed to be income, profits and gains liable to tax.

CIT vs M/S. Vegetables Products Ltd. (Supreme Court) 88 ITR 192

January 29, 1973 32594 Views 0 comment Print

If two reasonable constructions of a taxing provision are possible that construction which favours the assessee must be adopted. This is a well ‘accepted rule of construction recognised by this Court in several of its decisions.

UOI & others vs. Ogale glass Works – Supreme Court -1971 AIR 2577

September 1, 1971 2001 Views 0 comment Print

Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India and others v Ogale glass Works 1971 AIR 2577 held that the award of industrial tribunal cannot stand in the way of enforcing the statutory provision cast on the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner under the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952.

SC judgement in the case of CIT West Bengal Vs. Durga Prasad More

August 26, 1971 8175 Views 0 comment Print

In the Supreme Court of India. CIT west Bengal filed appeal before SC against the order of High Court and SC delivered judgement on 27.8.1971. The name of the assessee was Sh. Durga Parshad More.

CIT vs. Birla Spinning and Weavings Ltd. Supreme Court) (1971) 82 ITR 166 (SC)

August 17, 1971 4082 Views 0 comment Print

The expression for the purpose of the business in s. 10(2)(xv) is wider than the expression for the purpose of earning profits. The former covers, not only the running of the business or its administration but also measures for the preservation of the business and protection of its assets and property.

AO mandatorily bound to exercise power U/s. 154

July 21, 1970 2610 Views 0 comment Print

Hirday Narain Vs. ITO (Supreme Court) Exercise of power to rectify an error apparent from the record is conferred upon the Income-tax Officer in aid of enforcement of a right. The Income-tax Officer is an officer concerned with assessment and collection of revenue, and the power to rectify the order of assessment conferred upon him to ensure that injustice to the assessee or to the Revenue may be avoided.

ITO vs. Seth Brothers 1969 (74) ITR 836 (SC)

July 15, 1969 10570 Views 0 comment Print

Section 132 does not confer any arbitrary authority upon the Revenue Officers. The Commissioner or the Director of Inspection must have, in consequence of information, reason to believe that the statutory conditions for the exercise of the power to order

Shree Meenakshi Mills Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Supreme Court)

September 20, 1966 12662 Views 0 comment Print

Expenditure incurred to resist in a civil proceeding the enforcement of a measure-legislative or executive, which imposes restrictions on the carrying on of a business or to obtain a declaration that the measure is invalid would.

CIT v. Malayalam Plantations Ltd. (Supreme Court of India)

April 11, 1964 8607 Views 0 comment Print

For the two accounting periods the assessee, a resident company, incorporated outside India paid -estate duty payable on the death of its certain share holders not domiciled in India and debited the said amounts to revenue in its accounts in ascertaining the profits and gains of its business for the said years.

Search Post by Date
May 2026
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031