Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.37 seconds)
Voltamp Transformers P. Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Gujarat-I on 9 October, 1980 cites

Commissioner Of Wealth-Tax, Andhra ... vs Officer-In-Charge (Court Of Wards) ... on 6 August, 1976

4. It is true that in this case we have to deal essentially with findings of fact arrived at by the Tribunal, but as has been pointed out by the Supreme Court in CIT v. Officer-in-charge (Court of Wards), Paigah [1976] 105 ITR 133, if the Tribunal has applied wrong principles of law and has relied upon incorrect principles of law for arriving at its conclusion on facts, then those conclusions which become in such cases mixed questions of law and fact are vitiated and it is open to this court, in exercise of its jurisdiction under s. 256 of the I. T. Acts, to arrive at its own conclusions in the light of facts which are otherwise not in dispute or facts which otherwise emerge from the materials on record.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 61 - M H Beg - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bombay ... vs Hind Commission Agents on 17 August, 1962

Thus, taking an overall picture on the ground of fair price for the services rendered by the sole selling agents, it cannot be said that the commission paid was exorbitant or excessive or unreasonable, nor can it be said that Voltamp Associates were selected by the assessee-company as their sole selling agents simply because two of the partners of Voltamp Associates were wives of two of the directors of the assessee-company and the third partner, B. H. Patel, was a director of the assessee-company. If services are in fact rendered by the sole selling agent, it is immaterial whether the partners of the sole selling agency firm personally do not attend to the work or get the work attended to by their employees. The question is whether services were in fact rendered by the sole selling agents to the principal, the manufacturer-assessee in this case, and, secondly, whether the remuneration which was paid to them was the fair market value for the services rendered by them. The correct principles in this connection are to be found laid down by the Bombay High Court in CIT v. Hind Commission Agents [1963] 48 ITR 615. There the Bombay High Court has pointed out (p. 625) :
Bombay High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 6 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Edward Keventer (Successors) P. Ltd. on 13 November, 1979

In CIT v. Edward Keventer P. Ltd. [1972] 86 ITR 370 (Cal), on the facts before it, the Calcutta High Court held that the ITO did not apply the correct principles in forming his opinion as to the reasonableness of the sums paid to the directors. He had not given any proper consideration to the legitimate business needs of the company and, on the aspect of benefit, his view was mainly influenced by applying his mind to the kind of physical or hard labour done by the directors. The ITO considered the sums paid to the directors to be unreasonable on the basis of percentage in relation to the profits of the company. The ITO did not appreciate that for a company of that kind which had two producing centres and other distributing centres with a huge annual turnover ranging from over Rs. 23, 66,000 to Rs. 30,86,000 during the relevant years, total head office expenses of about Rs. 5,000 per month inclusive of all payments to directors, both on account of remuneration and commission, could not by any proper standard be said to be unreasonable, having regard to the legitimate business needs of such a company. There appeared to be no justification for the finding that the payment of the commission was by way of allocation of profits.
Delhi High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 68 - S Ranganathan - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income Tax, West Bengal vs Edward Keventer (Private) Ltd. on 24 August, 1978

This decision of the Calcutta High Court was confirmed by the Supreme Court in CIT v. Edward Keventar (p) Ltd. [1978] 115 ITR 149, and the Supreme Court observed that no fault could be found with the reasoning of the Calcutta High Court in taking the view that the Tribunal was right in holding that the disallowance was not justified.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 28 - P N Bhagwati - Full Document

Bengal Enamel Works Ltd vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, West ... on 9 December, 1969

So far as the decision in Bengal Enamel Works's case [1970] 77 ITR 119 (SC) is concerned, there a very large amount was being paid by the assessee concerned to a doctor of medicine who was not an expert in enamelware, and the principal business of the assessee was making and selling enamelwares. In such a situation, the Supreme Court disallowed the extra expenditure in the shape of the amount of commission paid to the doctor of medicines, who happened to be the son-in-law of the principal shareholder and managing director of the company.
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 30 - J C Shah - Full Document

Juggilal Kamlapat, Kanpur vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Lucknow on 31 July, 1969

It is well settled, as was held by the Supreme Court in Juggilal Kamlapat's case [1970] 75 ITR 186, that the veil of Corporate existence and corporate personality can be pierced in order to arrive at correct facts if it is necessary by lifting the veil, in the field of taxation. But in the instant case, there was no veil to be pierced for the purpose of arriving at its conclusion. The only question was whether the payment was excessive, unreasonable or exorbitant and,secondly, whether there was commercial expediency in paying Rs. 80,000 odd as commission to the sole selling agents. What we have set out hereinabove clearly shows that as a result of the sole selling agents efforts, the sales of transformers have jumped from rupees eighteen lakhs to rupees fifty lakhs and a great deal of credit for these larger sales must go to the sole selling agents and the efforts of the firm of sole selling agents in selling the transformers manufactured by the assessee-company.
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 123 - J C Shah - Full Document
1