Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 130 (0.66 seconds)
Documents citing Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Madras vs K. R. M. T. T. Thiagaraja Chetty & Co on 14 October, 1953

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Vijay Laxmi Trading Co. Ltd. on 15 July, 1983

The sum of Rs. one lakh odd was, therefore, held to have accrued to the firm as its income and that this remained unaffected by the existence of the cross-claim. The -contention which was repelled by the Income-tax Officer was addressed to us as a ground for disputing the inclusion of the Rs. 89 thousand odd as the income of the firm in its excess profits tax assessment. We see no substance in the point urged. Learned counsel referred us to the decision of this coxirt in Commissioner of Income-tax v. K. R. M. T. T. Thiagaraja Chetty & Co. [1953] 24 ITR 525 (SC) and to the observations at p. 529. We consider that the decision far from supporting the appellant is really against him."
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 6 - Cited by 13 - Full Document

The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,Bombay ... vs M/S. Harivallabhdas Kalidas And Co on 19 February, 1960

In the Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras v. K. R. M. T. T. Thiagaraja Chetty & Co. (1), the assesses firm was, under the terms of the Managing Agency Agreement, entitled to a certain percentage of profits and in the books of the Company a certain sum was shown as commission due to the assessee firm and that sum was also adopted as an item of business expenditure and credited to the Managing Agents' commission account but subsequently it was carried to suspense account by a resolution of the Company passed at the request of the assessee firm in order that the debt due by the Firm might be written off. The accounts were kept on mercantile basis and it was held that on that basis the commission accrued to the assessee when the commission was credited to the assessee's account and subsequent dealing with it would not affect the liability of the assessee to income-tax. It was also held that the quantification of the commission could not affect the question as it was not a condition precedent to the accrual of the commission. At page 267 Ghulam Hassan J., observed:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 8 - J L Kapur - Full Document

Mayawati,, New Delhi vs Department Of Income Tax on 22 June, 1978

13.15. Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. K.R. Honnappa 180 ITR 660 have held that being MLA might have afforded him an opportunity to render service in the constituency to the people in general and 70 ITA 4259/D/07, 2078 & 2079/Del/09 DCIT Vs. Ms. Mayawati earn their esteem but payment on account of such esteem or affection does not mean that it arises from the exercise of the profession or vocation merely because vocation affords an opportunity for earning this receipt. Hon'ble High Court further held that gift was not by way of quid pro quo for the services rendered by him to the contributors but it was on account of his qualities or personal character in rendering services to the constituency in general and on account of the esteem in which he was held. Hon'ble High Court went further to hold that he being MLA might have facilitated him to render services to the people of the constituency and also to general public but for that reason alone, it can not be assumed that gifts were for any specific service to any specific contributor.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 41 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Continental Commercial Corporation vs Income-Tax Officer And Anr. on 9 January, 1975

In Commissioner of Income-tax v. R.K. Saraf, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that the provisions relating to the penalty are of penal character and their object being to punish the assessee so as to deter him from transgressing the law in future, the quantum of penalty would have to be determined with reference to the law prevailing on the date when the act of concealment was committed and not when the penalty proceedings are initiated or completed.
Madras High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 46 - V Ramaswami - Full Document

Amway India Enterprises vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 15 February, 2008

In the case of K & Co. (supra) decided by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, the expenditure in question was on maintenance and upgradation and was held to be revenue in nature. In the case of Southern Roadways Ltd. 288 ITR 15 (Mad.), the expenditure in question was on upgradation of Computer Software and the finding of fact was that the expenditure was incurred only for improving the efficiency of the existing system. The Court has also reiterated the law that there was no single rigid formula to find out whether expenditure was capital or revenue. These decisions of the Hon'ble High Courts have to be considered as laying down general guidelines but in each case the facts and other surrounding circumstances have to be taken into account before applying the ratio laid down therein,
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 66 - Cited by 19 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax, U. P. & vs P. V. Kalicharan Jagannath. on 13 May, 1960

The other case of the Supreme Court reported in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Thiagaraja Chetty & Co. is also of no further assistance as, in that case, the only question that camp up for consideration was whether income received as commission by the assessee could or could not be said to have accrued in a particular previous year when that commission had to be computed as a percentage of the profits of the business in which the assessee was employed and such profits of the business could be computed only after the expiry of that previous year. The question, that arose for decision, thus was whether the commission could or could not be subjected to tax when it was no more than a right to receive. The contention that it could not be charged to tax was repelled holding that the arguments in support of this contention involved a fallacy that profits do not accrue unless and until they are computed. The computation of profits, whenever it may take place, cannot be allowed to suspend their accrual. In the case of income when there is a condition that commission will not be payable until the expiry of a definite period or marking up of the account, it might be said with some justification, though that point was not decided, that the income had not accrued, but, in the case before the Supreme Court, there was no such condition. The clauses of the agreement, which were relied upon, were held to mean no more than this that the commission was to be quantified only after certain reductions had been made and not that the commission would not accrue until the profits had been ascertained. The quantification of the commission was not a condition precedent to its accrual. On these facts and circumstances, it was held that the commission accrued as income even before it was ascertained or quantified. In the case before us the assessee has not relied on the circumstance that the exact amount subsequently paid to him had not been ascertained in the relevant previous year. Reliance is placed on the other circumstance that in the relevant previous year, even the right to receive any money, whether already ascertained or yet to be computed in future, had not accrued to the assessee. Consequently, this decision of the Supreme Court also does not go at all against the view taken by us in the present case.
Allahabad High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 18 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Hindusthan Housing And Land ... on 9 January, 1973

27. The decisions of the Supreme Court in the cases of Commissioner of Income-tax v. K. R. M. T. T. Thiagaraja Chetty & Co. , Keshav Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax , Indermani Jatia v. Commissioner of Income-tax and Commissioner of Income-tax v. A. Krishnaswami Mudaliar deal mainly with the question of the nature and effect of the mercantile system of accounting. The principles enunciated in the said decisions are well-settled.
Calcutta High Court Cites 21 - Cited by 268 - A N Sen - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next