Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.44 seconds)Messrs. Calcutta Company Ltd vs The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,West ... on 12 May, 1959
24. Learned counsel for the Department referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case in the case of Indian Molasses [1959] 37 ITR 66. But this decision does not in any way affect the principle laid down in the Calcutta Co.'s case. In the case of Indian Molasses Co. It was found that the amount in respect of which a deduction was claimed was only a contingent liability and that there were certain circumstances in which the trust contemplated to be set up would fail and there would be a resulting trust in favor of the assessed itself. In the present case, having regard to the terms of the agreement as well as a realistic assessment of the legal position in the legal position in the light of the Delhi Tenants' Relief Act there is absolutely no doubt that the assessed must have to incur substantial expenditure to evict the tenants from the land. Indeed, it does not appear that it has succeeded in doing so to any considerable extent; at least till 1972 none of the tenants had been evicted. There was, therefore, a clear liability that had accrued and the only question was that of quantifying that liability. But this difficulty in quantification, as pointed out by the Supreme Court, will not preclude the assessed being entitled to a deduction.
H.M. Kashiparekh And Co. Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bombay ... on 2 April, 1960
There are a series of decisions on the doctrine of real income but it will be sufficient to refer to those in H. M. Kashiparekh & Co. Ltd. v. CIT , CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas and Co. and Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT .
Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bombay ... vs Shoorji Vallabhdas And Co. on 27 March, 1962
There are a series of decisions on the doctrine of real income but it will be sufficient to refer to those in H. M. Kashiparekh & Co. Ltd. v. CIT , CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas and Co. and Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT .
Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bombay on 19 April, 1965
There are a series of decisions on the doctrine of real income but it will be sufficient to refer to those in H. M. Kashiparekh & Co. Ltd. v. CIT , CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas and Co. and Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT .
The Income Tax Act, 1961
Section 10 in Income Tax Rules, 1962 [Entire Act]
Rao Bahadur M.S.P. Senthikumara Nadar ... vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 1 February, 1957
The case of M. S. P. Senthikumara Nadar & Sons v. CIT [1957] 32 ITR 138 (Mad), referred to by the learned counsel for the Department, also stands on the same footing. In that case the assessed had committed certain defaults in the performance of its Obligations under a contract entered into with the Coffee Board. The contract also contained certain provisions for the assessed being made liable to a penalty or liquidated damages for breaches of contract. During the relevant accounting year the branches made by the assessed had not been discovered by the other party. There was even every possibility that such breaches might not have been noticed at all. Later on, the Coffee Board discovered the breaches on the part of the assessed and ultimately the assessed had to pay substantial amount by way of damages. The assessed claimed this as a deduction in the year in which the branches had occurred, a point of time when the other party to which the breaches had occurred, a point of time when the other party to the contract was not even aware of their existence. The Madras High Court was only a contingent liability and that it could be said to have become an accrued liability only when the Coffee Board discovered the lapses and made up its mind as to which of the remedies available to it under the contract should be enforced against the assessed. The facts in this case and the decision therein are not helpful in the present case.
Section 3 in The Delhi (Urban Areas) Tenants Relief Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
1