Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 25 (2.44 seconds)
Documents citing Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bombay ... vs C.N. Patuck on 22 January, 1968

Warner Lambert Co. Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 12 June, 1998

11. This court in the case of CIT v. C. N. Patuck [1969] 71 ITR 713, has held that a charge was created for payment of monthly sums in favour of the daughters of the assessee. This court was dealing with a case, where there was a compromise decree for dissolution of marriage between the assessee and his wife. In the said decree, the assessee took responsibility to pay monthly sums to his daughters. After the decree a tripartite agreement was entered into between the assessee, his daughters and the partners of the partnership firm in which the assessee was one of the partners, to pay a fixed sum to the daughters out of the assessee's share of profit in the partnership firm. As a result of the compromise decree in the suit for dissolution of marriage and in view of the tripartite agreement between the assessee, his daughters and the partners, this court came to the conclusion that the assessee created a charge in favour of his daughters and because of an overriding title, money paid to the daughters ceased to be the remuneration and/or profit of the assessee, hence, it could not be taxed in his hands. Thus on the facts of the said case, this court came to the conclusion that the income was diverted at source by an overriding title.
Bombay High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 1 - A Y Sakhare - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs State Bank Of India on 10 April, 1987

"Therefore, it was by virtue of an overriding title in favour of the creditors that the total income which the assessees received did not represent their 'real income'. By virtue of the overriding title in favour of the creditors, the income of the family had to be diverted to pay off within the principle in Bejoy Singh Dudhuria's case [1933] 1 ITR 135 (PC) rather than under the principle in P. C. Mullick's case [1938] 6 ITR 206 (PC)."
Bombay High Court Cites 31 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Fancy Corporation Ltd. vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax on 22 September, 1999

In the case of C. N. Patuck (supra), the Hon'ble Bombay High Court had to consider the deductibility of certain payments made to daughters towards maintenance charges in terms of a Court decree and such is not the issue in the present case. The liability incurred by the assessee for the discharge of the mortgage debt is not because of any pre-existing right against the assessee in the mortgage. The liability is the result of simply a commercial debt incurred by the assessee.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 24 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Smt. Savita Mohan Nagpal vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 4 April, 1984

13. The decision in Patuck's case, [1969] 71 ITR 713 (Bom), was again followed by the Bombay High Court in CIT v. Nariman B. Bharucha & Sons, [1981] 130 ITR 863 (Bom). In that case, according to a particular clause in the partnership deed, after the death of one of the partners, the partnership business was to be continued by the other two partners, who were the sons, in equal shares, but subject to paying their mother 25% of the net profits of the partnership. It was held that the document of partnership created an overriding title in the mother of the two surviving partners to the extent of 25% of the profits of the partnership firm, and that the said amount was liable to be diverted before the profits reached the partnership of the assessee-firm.
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 15 - Cited by 13 - Full Document

Udayan Chinubhai And Ors. vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax And Anr. on 27 April, 1976

On the facts of the case before it in C. N. Patuck's case [1969] 71 ITR 713 (Bom), the Division Bench held that upon the two documents which were material in that case, the assessee had created a charge in favour of his two daughters and there arose an overriding right or title in favour of two daughters who got the remuneration and profits, to the extent of that right or title, ceased to be remuneration and/or profits of the assessee. In that view, the income could not be taxed in his hands. But the Division Bench further held (page 732) :
Gujarat High Court Cites 53 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

Sunil J. Kinariwala vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 29 October, 1993

Against the order of the ITO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the AAC. After referring to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Bhagya Laxmi & Co. (1965) 55 ITR 660 (SC) and the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. C.N. Patuck (1969) 71 ITR 713 (Bom) the AAC held that there was no application of income in the present case, but it was a case of diversion of income at source. He, therefore, allowed the appeal and directed the ITO to exclude the addition of Rs. 20,141.
Gujarat High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 4 - M B Shah - Full Document
1   2 3 Next