Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 40 (0.26 seconds)Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947
Section 2 in Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
The Rajasthan Finance Act, 1961
Section 45 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Article 299 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Jeewanlal (1929) Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, West ... on 25 July, 1968
12. In the light of the above general background, details of a more specific nature relating to the kind of business which the assessee here carried on may now be noticed. Shri Kapila submitted (and it was not disputed by Shri Sharma) that details relating to the export incentives offered for exporters of engineering goods have been recorded in the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Jeewanlal (1929) Ltd. v. CIT [1983] 139 ITR 865. We would, therefore, turn to this judgment for assistance. The Court noted that there was a Special Export Promotion Scheme for engineering goods drawn up by the Government of India, Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Department of International Trade. This Scheme applied to the exports of Indian goods other than 'rolled steel', which had not undergone any substantial processing but the exports had to be effected by those registered with the Engineering Export Promotion Council, Calcutta. The Scheme came into force from 1-4-1973, and was applicable to export of goods covered by the Scheme with effect from or after 1-4-1963. The Scheme was to remain in force on a permanent basis until further orders. All the previous Schemes in this regard were superseded as regards export of such goods effected from 1-4-1963.
Minerva Mills Ltd. & Ors vs Union Of India & Ors on 31 July, 1980
We may now go back in time, as it were, and note the source of the authority under which the above Export Incentive Scheme was notified by the Government. Here again, Shri Kapila suggested that it would be profitable to look at a Full Bench decision of the Delhi High Court, which has recorded the relevant position. This is in the case of Bansal Exports (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India and Indo Foreign Import & Export Corpn. v. Union of India [1984] 145 ITR 642. The Court recorded the following position :
Union Of India & Ors vs M/S. Indo-Afghan Agencies Ltd on 22 November, 1967
This view of the Allahabad High Court, as noted already, is based on two decisions of the Supreme Court, viz., Probhudas Morarjee Rajkotica's case(supra) and Anglo Afghan Agencies' case(supra). Since, in our view, there is no bounty or gift or reward involved here, the question of examining the assessee's claim for exemption under Section 10(17B) does not arise.
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Satya Paul Virmani on 29 October, 1969
As in the Calcutta High Court's case of Satya Paul (supra), here also the assessee having got an import licence, after affecting a foreign exchange remittance, transferred the same to a third party and got Rs. 67,125. This was assessed by the 1TO himself as a capital gain. The Tribunal held that no capital gain was involved as the licence had not cost anything to the assessee in terms of money in its creation or acquisition.