Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.22 seconds)
The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Smt.A.Sivakami on 23 November, 2009 cites

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Fazilka Dabwali Tpt. Co. Pvt. Ltd. on 24 August, 2004

6. Thus, the assessee has made available all the documents relating to the business and also established before the authorities that she is a beneficial owner, though not her name has not been shown as owner of the buses in the permit as well as the R.C.book and she is virtually the beneficial owner and receiving the income from exploitation of buses and incurred expenses as stated above. The above stated principle laid down by the Supreme Court and other High Courts is in favour of the appellant and in similar circumstances. Hence we are of the view that the view taken by the first appellate authority as confirmed by the Tribunal is in accordance with the requirements of the statutory provision, which has been explained by the Supreme Court and other various High Courts. As such, there is no illegality or irregularity in the order of the Tribunal, which warrants interference by this Court by entertaining the appeals.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 20 - N K Sud - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax Bombay Etc vs Podar Cement Pvt. Ltd. Etc on 27 May, 1997

5. From the above provision, it is clear that the provision required that the tangible assets should be owned by the assessee wholly or partly. The words "owned wholly or partly" have been considered by the Supreme Court and various High Courts and explained that under the common law owner means a person who has got a valid title legally conveyed to him after complying with the requirements of law such as Transfer of Property Act, the Registration Act, etc., in the context of the income Tax Act, 1961, having regard to the ground realities and further having regard to the object of the Act viz., to tax the income, "owner" is a person who is entitled to receive income from the property in his own right. In order to claim the benefit of Section 32 of the Income-tax Act, it is not necessary that the assessee should be a complete owner. The expression "owner" used in Section 32 of the Act has been considered by taking into account all its phrases and aspects. The owner need not necessarily be a lawful owner entitled to pass on the title of the property to another. Vide CIT VS. PODAR CEMENT PVT.LTD.
Supreme Court of India Cites 55 - Cited by 654 - K Venkataswami - Full Document
1