Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Wealth Tax Act

9 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

SUSHILA N. RUNGTA (D) LRS.versusTHE TAX RECOVERY OFFICER-16(2) AND ORS.

2018 INSC 102030 October 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners challenged a show‑cause notice issued under the Gold Control Rules, arguing that it should not survive the repeal of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 by the Gold (Control) Repeal Act, 1990. The central issue was whether a repeal simpliciter without an explicit saving clause automatically invokes Section 6 o

SURINDER SINGHversusPUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, PATIALA AND ORS.

2014 INSC 68125 September 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The Punjab State Electricity Board recruited 21 Accounts Officers by direct recruitment, reserving seats for candidates from the backward class. Surinder Singh, a Chartered Accountant, secured 164 marks and was appointed under the backward‑class reservation. Respondent Anil Kumar Uppal challenged the appointment, alleg

COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, GUJARATversusVIMLABEN VADILAL MEHTA

1983 INSC 15621 October 1983Dismissed

The Gujarat Commissioner of Wealth Tax appealed against a decision allowing Shri Vadilal Mehta to deduct certain tax liabilities in computing his net wealth for the 1964-65 wealth‑tax assessment year. The assessee sought deductions for income‑tax, wealth‑tax and gift‑tax liabilities that were quantified by assessment o

COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX-I, AHMEDABADversusGOLD COIN HEALTH FOOD PVT. LTD.

2008 INSC 93818 August 2008Disposed off

The assessee, Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd., filed a return showing a loss. The Income Tax Department levied a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, alleging concealment of income. The issues were whether the term “income” includes losses, whether the penalty can be imposed when the returned fi

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MADHYA PRADESH, BHOPALversusH.H. MAHARANI USHA DEVI

1998 INSC 24114 May 1998Dismissed

The ex‑Ruler of the former Holkar State sold two pieces of heirloom jewellery in the assessment year 1972‑73 and claimed that the proceeds were not taxable because the jewellery were "personal effects" within the meaning of Section 2(14) of the Income‑Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal rejected this contention, but the Madhya

THE COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, GUJARAT, AHMEDABADversusKANTILAL MANILAL ETC. ETC.

1985 INSC 5613 March 1985Dismissed

The assessee sought to deduct wealth‑tax liabilities of Rs 22,679 (assessment year 1960‑61) and Rs 39,692 (assessment year 1961‑62) while computing net wealth for the valuation dates of 31 March 1961 and 31 March 1962. The Wealth Tax Officer rejected the claim, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner allowed part of it, a

TRIBHOVANDAS BHIMJI ZAVERIversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1993 INSC 2898 September 1993Dismissed

The appellants, a partnership firm, were searched under section 132 of the Income‑Tax Act on 28 October 1975 and cash, jewellery, diamonds and books of account were seized. On 31 December 1975 they filed a declaration of concealed income under section 3(1) of the Voluntary Disclosure of Income and Wealth Ordinance/Act

COMMISSIONER OF GIFT TAX, BOMBAY ETC.versusSMT. KUSUMBEN D. MAHADEVIA ETC.

1979 INSC 2605 December 1979Dismissed

The assessees, a private limited investment company, claimed that the value of their shares should be determined by the profit‑earning method prepared by chartered accountants, while the Gift Tax and Wealth Tax officers used the break‑up method, resulting in a higher tax liability. The Tribunal accepted the profit‑earn

ASHOK KUMAR THAKURversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS

1995 INSC 5324 September 1995Case Allowed

The petitioners challenged the criteria adopted by the States of Bihar and Uttar Pradesh for identifying the 'creamy layer' to be excluded from reservation benefits under Articles 14 and 16(4) of the Constitution. Both states had introduced multiple conditions – such as a minimum salary of Rs.10,000 per month, a gradua

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search