Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 35 (4.42 seconds)
Documents citing Mis. Bhor Industries Ltd vs The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,Bombay ... on 12 January, 1961

Hindustan Motors Limited vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 20 February, 1995

In Bhor Industries v. CIT , it was urged by the assessee that before determining the dividends payable by the company, the interest payable along with the tax should be deducted. The Supreme Court negatived this contention and held that there was nothing to show that the interest was to be treated as tax. Here, in this reference, the interest is to be paid in addition to the duty payable on the importation of the goods at the time of clearance of the same.
Calcutta High Court Cites 51 - Cited by 14 - R Pal - Full Document

Saraya Sugar Mills (P.) Ltd., Gorakhpur vs The Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 11 May, 1978

In Bhor Industries Ltd. v. Commr. of Income-tax (42 ITR 57) : (AIR 1961 SC 1100) the Supreme Court considered whether Section 23-A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, which required the assessable income to be reduced by the amount of income-tax and super tax, included interest also. The Court held that there was nothing to show that interest was to be treated as tax. It retained its character of interest, though it was recoverable along with the tax.
Allahabad High Court Cites 31 - Cited by 24 - R M Sahai - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Ramchand & Sons Sugar Mills (P.) Ltd. on 4 November, 1982

and urged that the conclusion in the instant case arrived at by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is, in this regard, not in consonance with the observations made by the Supreme Court. We are unable to accept this submission of the learned counsel. The observation made by the Supreme Court merely brings out that for the purposes of the first part of Section 23A and for determining the extent of the amount on which the company would be required to pay super-tax, in case other conditions laid down in the section are fulfilled, the amount paid by the company as penal interest under Section 18A is not to be taken into account. These observations have no bearing for the purpose of considering the question as to whether, as contemplated by the second part of the section in view of the smallness of the profit and the payment of a dividend or a larger dividend than that declared by the company would be unreasonable.
Allahabad High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Shreeniwas & Sons vs Income-Tax Officer, "B" Ward And Ors. on 10 January, 1974

In Bhor Industries Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax, one of the questions for consideration before the Supreme Court was, whether in making an order under Section 23A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, in respect of the profits and gains of the company concerned, the assessable income of the previous year concerned was to be reduced not only by the amount of income-tax and super-tax payable by the company in respect thereof, but also by the amount of interest charged to it in accordance with the provisions of Section 18A of that Act. The Supreme Court observed that there is nothing to show that it is to be treated as tax, and it thus retains its character of interest but it is recoverable along with the tax. Indeed Section 29 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, makes a distinction between penalty and interest.
Calcutta High Court Cites 17 - Cited by 7 - Full Document

Sudhir Chatterjee & Co. (P.) Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 8 November, 1973

23. Mr. Pal, in our opinion, rightly points out that the facts of the present case have also a great deal of similarity with the facts in the case of Aviquipo of India (P.) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax (I. T. Ref. No. 5 of 1962), which is reported in [1966] 21 Taxation 84 (Cal). In the said case, the Division Bench more or less on similar facts took the view that application of the provisions of Section 23A was not justified.
Calcutta High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - A N Sen - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next