Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 14 (0.33 seconds)
Victory Motor Transport (Nilgiris ... vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 29 March, 1973 cites

E. D. Sassoon And Company Ltd vs The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,Bombay ... on 14 May, 1954

19. We are, therefore, of the view that the decision of the Supreme Court in Gobald Motor Service (P.) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax, supports the stand taken by the revenue that as a result of the additions made to the income returned by the assessee in the earlier two years, there are no losses to be wiped out from and out of the profits earned in the subsequent two years and that, therefore, Section 23A has rightly been invoked by the Income-tax Officer. As already stated, the additions to the income made by the Income-tax Officer in the earlier two years have not been questioned by the assessee. Therefore, it has to bs taken that the book results in respect of those years did not reflect the true position, and the additions made by the Income-tax Officer towards suppressions of income have to be taken into account for finding out whether there were in fact losses in the earlier years. Therefore, it is only by taking into account the additions made, the true income for the earlier two years could be ascertained. If that were the true and correct position, the assessed income for the earlier two years has to form the basis and not the book results, for determination of the "losses incurred in the earlier years". We are of the view, therefore, that the determination by the Income-tax Officer of the available profits in the case of the assessee is correct.
Supreme Court of India Cites 31 - Cited by 1764 - N H Bhagwati - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bombay ... vs Asiatic Textile Co. Ltd., Bombay on 17 September, 1954

In Commissioner of Income-tax v. Asiatic Textiles Ltd., an assesses had a distributable balance of Rs. 91,116 and Rs 60,761., respectively, in the years 1955-56 and 1956-57, but it did not declare any dividend because it had suffered a loss of 12 lakhs of rupees on account of depreciation in the value of certain shares it held in another concern. The question was whether the Income-tax Officer could invoke the provisions of Section 23A(1) to levy an additional super-tax on the distributable surplus for those years. Their Lordships of the Supreme Court held that the depreciation in the value of shares though a capital loss has to be taken into account, that the payment of any dividend during the relevant years could not have been considered reasonable by a body of directors, that, therefore, any payment of dividend during the years would have been unreasonable and that the Income tax Officer was not, therefore, justified in invoking Section 23A(1).
Bombay High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 34 - B P Sinha - Full Document

Gobald Motor Service (P.) Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Madras on 16 December, 1965

17. The principle in Gobald Motor's case is that whenever it is found that the book results do not represent the real commercial or accounting profits in the assessment year or of the real commercial or accounting losses of the earlier years, then the additions made to the total income have to be taken into account. But it is not all the additions that have been made to the total income in the course of the assessment that can be treated as really commercial or accounting profits. For instance, if certain expenditure incurred is claimed as a deduction and the Income-tax Officer disallows sucb expenditure, the disallowance will result in an addition to the total income returned. But such an addition cannot be taken into account, for the amount disallowed is not an amount available with the assessee for distribution as dividend.
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 17 - Full Document
1   2 Next