Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.19 seconds)Section 4 in Income Tax Rules, 1962 [Entire Act]
Income Tax Rules, 1962
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Blue Mountain Engineering Corporation on 1 July, 1977
Referring to CIT v. Blue Mountain Engineering Corporation [1978] 112 ITR 839 (Mad), it was pointed out that under the provisions of the Act. The assessment made on the firm as an unregistered firm, after the assessment made earlier in the case of one of the partners, was not legal. We are of the view that the principles enunciated in the aforesaid decision would govern these references as well.
Section 2 in Income Tax Rules, 1962 [Entire Act]
Commissioner Of Income-Tax, U.P vs Kanpur Coal Syndicate on 30 April, 1964
In considering whether such an option was available to the Income-tax Officer under section 3 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the Supreme Court in CIT v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate held that section 3 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, impliedly gave an option to assess the total income of either an association of persons or the members of such an association individually.
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 256 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Universal Commercial Company vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 2 July, 1979
We may also usefully refer in this connection to the decision in Universal Commercial Co. v. CIT . In that case, a firm consisting of two partners constituted under a deed of partnership dated December 9, 1964, filed an application claiming registration for the assessment year 1965-66 on December 29, 1964. On June 30, 1965, the business of the firm was closed and one of the partners left for a different place and as the assessee did not file any return, the Income-tax Officer issued a notice under section 148 of the Act calling upon the assessee to file a return of income to which there was no response. On the available materials, the Income-tax Officer assessed the assessee in the status of an association of persons and he also refused registration to the firm on the application filed earlier. On appeal by the assessee to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, it was held that the status was rightly fixed as an association of persons and some meagre relief was granted to the assessee, against which an appeal was preferred before the Tribunal and the Tribunal held that as one of the partners of the firm had been assessed on her income from the firm, there was no jurisdiction to assess the assessee and that led to the cancellation of the assessment made on the assessee in the status of an association of persons.
J.C. Thakkar vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Central, ... on 18 February, 1955
To similar effect is the decision in J. C. Thakkar v. CIT [1955] 27 ITR 658 (Bom), where it has been laid down that the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, advisedly and clearly gives an option to the income-tax authorities either to assess the unregistered firm and then proceed to assess each individual partner of that firm or not to assess the unregistered firm at all, but to assess each individual partner and include his share of the profits in the firm in his assessment but that the choice must be carefully exercised and no prejudice should be caused to the assessee resulting in a deprivation of his rights or adding to his tax burden.