Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.20 seconds)Section 36 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Second Income-Tax Officer And Ors. vs M.C.T. Trust And Ors. on 14 March, 1975
More particularly, with respect to the identical provision with which we are here concerned, namely, Section 11 of the I.T. Act and Rule 17 of the Rules, it has been ruled that the time element incorporated in Form No. 10 in the matter of investment of the accumulated amounts in Government securities or Post Office Savings Banks, etc., is ultra vires the provisions of the section and the rule (vide Second ITO v. M. C. T. Trust [1976] 102 ITR 138--decided by the Madras High Court--and C1T v. Shri Krishan Chand Charitable Trust [1975] 98 ITR 387--decided by the Jammu and Kashmir High Court). We are in complete agreement with the principle of these two decisions. Even apart from these decisions, on the terms of the section and the rule, in the light of the principle expounded by the Supreme Court decision, which we have noticed, we are clearly of the opinion that the provision of a time element in para. 2 of Form No. 10 of the I.T. Rules is clearly beyond the provisions of Section 11 and Rule 17. The decision of the Tribunal to that effect is, therefore, correct.
Section 139 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 256 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 2 in Public Debt Act, 1944 [Entire Act]
1