Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 22 (2.44 seconds)The Income Tax Act, 1961
Section 11 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 2 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Madras vs Andhra Chamber Of Commerce on 1 October, 1964
[See: East India Industries (Madras) Pvt. Ltd. v.
Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras(1), Commissioner of
Income-tax, Madras v. Andhra Chamber of Commerce(2), Md.
Ibrahim Riza v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Nagpur(3)]. Such
a "trust" would be of doubtful validity, but I refrain from
further comment or any pronouncement upon the validity of
such a trust as that was neither a question referred to the
High Court in this case nor argued anywhere.
Section 261 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
All India Spinners Assn. vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 27 June, 1944
We are not impressed by the submission of the learned
counsel for the appellant that profit under section 2(15) of
the Act means private profit. The word used in the
definition given in the above provision is profit and not
private profit and it would not be permissible to read in
the above definition the word "private" as qualifying profit
even though such word is not there. There is also no
apparent justification or cogent reason for placing such a
construction on the word "profit". The words "general public
utility" contained in the definition of charitable purpose
are very wide. These words, as held by the Judicial
Committee in the case of All India Spinners' Association v.
Commissioner of Income-tax, exclude objects of private gain.
It is also difficult to subscribe to the view that the newly
added words "not involving the carrying on of any activity
for profit" merely qualify and affirm what was the position
as it obtained under the definition given in the Act of
1922. If the legislature intended that the concept of
charitable purpose should be the same under the Act of 1961
as it was in the Act of 1922, there was no necessity for it
to add the new words in the definition.