Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 15 (0.26 seconds)Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bihar vs Ramnik Lal Kothari. on 5 October, 1963
6. We have given our careful consideration to the arguments of the respective counsel and find that there is a divergence of opinion amongst the various High Courts on this issue. The leading case, accepting the contention of the assessee is that of Gujrat High Court in the case of CIT v. Rasik Lal Bala Bhai 119 ITR 303 (Gujrat) . The Madras, Orissa, Patna, Kerala and Gujrat High Courts are of the view that when a Firm carries on business, it is business carried on by the partners of that Firm. The income from; house property owned by an assessee and used in business carried on by the partnership Firm in which the assessee is a partner would qualify for exemption as provided in Section 22 of the Act.
Commissioner Of Income-Tax Bombay Etc vs Podar Cement Pvt. Ltd. Etc on 27 May, 1997
The cases relied upon by the learned standing counsel namely Commissioner of Income Tax v. Podar Cement Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and Commissioner of Income Tax v. Bhoopalam Commercial Complex and Industries Pvt. Ltd. (supra) have no bearing to the issue involved in the, present case. The ratio of these cases are not material and helpful for the decision of the controversy involved in the present case.
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Bhoopalam Commercial Complex And ... on 30 January, 2003
The cases relied upon by the learned standing counsel namely Commissioner of Income Tax v. Podar Cement Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and Commissioner of Income Tax v. Bhoopalam Commercial Complex and Industries Pvt. Ltd. (supra) have no bearing to the issue involved in the, present case. The ratio of these cases are not material and helpful for the decision of the controversy involved in the present case.
Commissioner Of Income-Tax, West ... vs Ramendra Nath Ghosh on 19 August, 1971
5. CIT v. Ravindra Nath Bhol (1995) 211 ITR 799 (Orissa).
Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Mysore vs K.N. Guruswamy on 27 August, 1963
These High Courts have dissented from the view of the Karnatka High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. K.N. Guruswami 146 ITR 34, on which strong reliance has been placed by the counsel for the Revenue.
Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Madras vs P.K.N. Co. Ltd. on 10 December, 1965
8. A plain meaning of Section 22 of the Act undoubtedly supports the contention of the learned standing counsel for the department. The Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. K.N. Gurusmami (supra) has held that property owned by an assessee and occupied by him for the purpose of his own business or profession, only then such assessee is entitled to exemption under Section 22. The Learned Judges of the Karnataka High.
Bhai Sundar Dass & Sons vs The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, New ... on 26 May, 1971
Court have relied upon the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Bhai Sunder Das & Sons v. CIT (1972), 85 ITR 28 (Delhi) as well as the decision of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Sarvmangla Properties Limited v. C.I.T. (1973), 90 ITR 267 (Calcutta).
Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Madras vs R.M. Chidambaram Pillai Etc on 17 November, 1976
The Gujrat High Court has relied upon the following passage from the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. R.M. Chidambaram Pillai (1977), 106 ITR 292:-