Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 55 (0.55 seconds)The Wealth-Tax Act, 1957
Section 21 in The Wealth-Tax Act, 1957 [Entire Act]
Section 14 in The Wealth-Tax Act, 1957 [Entire Act]
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Thanthi Trust on 29 January, 1981
In the instant case, having regard to the dictum laid down in CIT v. Thanthi Trust [1982] 137 ITR 735, which is binding between the parties, and, further, having regard to the fact that exemption was granted to the trust with regard to the assessment years prior to the years in question and "nil" demand notices were issued for the years posterior to the years in question, could it be now said that there is any obligation on the part of the appellant trust to file a return. We are unable to see as to how it could ever be contended that after the introduction of section 21A, every trust ought to file a return.
Section 3 in The Wealth-Tax Act, 1957 [Entire Act]
Section 148 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
The Income Tax Act, 1961
Thiagesar Dharma Vanikam vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 22 October, 1962
98. From this point of view we find that the observation in Thiagesar Dharma Vanokam v. CIT [1963] 50 ITR 798 (Mad) extracted above cannot be held to be applicable tot he present case.
Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Kerala vs Thayaballi Mulla Jeevaji Kapasi ... on 15 March, 1967
94. Therefore, it is the trustee who is assessable. Section 41 of the Act lays down the procedure in relation to the service of notice. That makes it very clear that the notice must be served not the person. It is clear by a reading of the decision in CIT v. Thayaballi Mulla Jeevaji Kapasi that service of notice is not a procedural requirement. At page 153 it was laid down as follows :