Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 15 (0.37 seconds)
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs India Sea Foods on 9 March, 1977 cites

The Deputy Commissioner Of ... vs M.K. Ahammed Kutty on 9 April, 1976

12. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the basis of the judgment in Commissioner of Income-tax v. K. Ahamad [1974] 95 ITR 599 (Ker) [FB] would require re-examination in the light of the principle of the Full Bench decision in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Gujarat Travancore Agency [1976] 103 ITR 149 (Ker) [FB]. The ground for the submission was that while the earlier Full Bench decision had proceeded on the basis that penalty proceedings are criminal in nature, the latter Full Bench has stated that proceedings are not criminal. One of us (myself) is by no means sure that there is any warrant for the submission that there is a conflict in principle between the two Full Bench rulings. My learned brother, Kochu Thommen J., is quite clear and definite that there is none. Both of us are agreed that for the purpose of this case, it is quite unnecessary to go into this region.
Kerala High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 9 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Gujarat Travancore Agency on 10 September, 1974

13. Even accepting the view contended for by counsel for the revenue that, as expounded in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Gujarat Travancore Agency. [1976] 103 ITR 149 (Ker) [FB], a penalty imposed is only an additional tax, there is enough warrant for the proposition, as evidenced by the decisions, to which we have referred earlier, that the terminal for the imposition of a penalty is something different from the terminal for the imposition of a tax in assessment proceedings. As this aspect of the matter has not been gone into by the Appellate Tribunal, we answer the question in the negative, i.e., in favour of the department and against the assessee. The Tribunal will pass an order on the appeals before it in the light of the answer^madeTjy us to the question of law referred.
Kerala High Court Cites 60 - Cited by 46 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax, West ... vs Isthmian Steamship Lines on 12 November, 1951

The Inspecting Assistant Commissioner took the view that as the returns in which the concealment had been made were filed only after April 1, 1968, the penalty imposable was to be computed as per the provisions as substituted with effect from April 1, 1968. So he imposed a minimum penalty of Rs. 87,765 which is equal to the income concealed for the assessment year 1966-67 and a minimum penalty of Rs. 1,64,587 for the assessment year 1967-68, The assessee appealed to the Tribunal. It was the contention of the department that the concealment takes place only when the return is filed, and this having been done after March 31, 1968, the concealment took place after March 31, 1968, that the law at the time of the commission of the offence is the law as it stood after the amendment by the Finance Act, 1968, and, therefore, the minimum penalty had to be computed according to that law. Reliance was placed on behalf of the department on the decision in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Isthmian Steamship Lines [1951] 20 ITR 572, 577 (SC). The Tribunal held that there was nothing either expressed or implied in the Finance Act of 1968 to show that the law as amended would apply to penalty proceedings prior to the assessment year 1968-69, where returns are filed after March 31, 1968. It was, therefore, of the view that the computation of the penalty for the assessment years in question had to be made according to the provision of law as it stood prior to the Finance Act of 1968. In other words, the Tribunal was of the view that the law as on the 1st April of the assessment year was the law that should apply to the penalty proceedings. It did not go into the question whether for the assessment year 1966-67, the return in which income is concealed is the return filed on February 13, 1967, or on June 13, 1968, because it thought that such a finding was not material for the disposal of the appeals.
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 74 - Full Document

Addl. Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Medisetty Ramarao on 26 December, 1975

(1) Commissioner of Income-tax v. K. C. Befaera [1976] 103 ITR 479 (Orissa), (2) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Mukanddas Visknukumar [1976] 102 ITR 613 (Raj), (3) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Data Ram Satpal [1975] 99 ITR 507 (All), (4) Additional Commissioner of Income-tax v. Jeewan Lal Shah [1977] 109 ITR 474 (All), (5) Additional Commissioner of Income-tax v. Medisetty Ramarao [1977] 108 ITR 318 (AP), (6) Rajputana Stores v. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [1975] 99 ITR 499 (Gauhati) and (7) Continental Commercial Corporation v. Income-fax Officer [1975] 100 ITR 170 (Mad).
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 15 - Cited by 10 - Full Document

Rajputana Stores vs Inspecting Assistant Commissioner Of ... on 25 May, 1973

(1) Commissioner of Income-tax v. K. C. Befaera [1976] 103 ITR 479 (Orissa), (2) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Mukanddas Visknukumar [1976] 102 ITR 613 (Raj), (3) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Data Ram Satpal [1975] 99 ITR 507 (All), (4) Additional Commissioner of Income-tax v. Jeewan Lal Shah [1977] 109 ITR 474 (All), (5) Additional Commissioner of Income-tax v. Medisetty Ramarao [1977] 108 ITR 318 (AP), (6) Rajputana Stores v. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [1975] 99 ITR 499 (Gauhati) and (7) Continental Commercial Corporation v. Income-fax Officer [1975] 100 ITR 170 (Mad).
Gauhati High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 6 - B Islam - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Data Ram Satpal on 21 February, 1974

(1) Commissioner of Income-tax v. K. C. Befaera [1976] 103 ITR 479 (Orissa), (2) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Mukanddas Visknukumar [1976] 102 ITR 613 (Raj), (3) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Data Ram Satpal [1975] 99 ITR 507 (All), (4) Additional Commissioner of Income-tax v. Jeewan Lal Shah [1977] 109 ITR 474 (All), (5) Additional Commissioner of Income-tax v. Medisetty Ramarao [1977] 108 ITR 318 (AP), (6) Rajputana Stores v. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [1975] 99 ITR 499 (Gauhati) and (7) Continental Commercial Corporation v. Income-fax Officer [1975] 100 ITR 170 (Mad).
Allahabad High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 21 - Full Document
1   2 Next