Kerala Court December 1959 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax, Kerala Vs. Calicut Wynad Motor Service (Pr ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-23-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Ker237
Baghavan, J. 1. This is a reference under Sections 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'A' Bench and the question of law referred is whether the assessees are entitled to development rebate on certain motor vehicles under Sections 10(2)(vi)(b).2. The assessees are a private limited company owning a fleet of motor vehicles and doing transport business. In the year of account 1954-55 the assesses;; purchased four buses at a cost of Rs. 74,327/- for use in their business and in the return submitted by them for the assessment year 1955-56 they claimed either development rebate or initiul depreciation on the cost of these vehicles, whichever was applicable. The Income-tax Officer allowed initial depreciation of 20 per cent of the cost under Sections 10(2)(vi) but disallowed development rebate of 25 per cent under Sections 10(2)(vi)(b). The reasoning of the Income-tax Officer was that motor vehicles were not 'plant installed/'3. The assesses appeal...
Tag this Judgment!Haji Abdul Kader Sahib Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-23-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Ker317; [1961]42ITR296(Ker)
Velu Pillai, J.1. The two questions referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, which may be referred to as the Tribunal, under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act XI of 1922, or simply the Act, are :'(i) Whether there were materials for the Tribunal to hold that the transfer of the assets of the aforesaid business to the limited company aforesaid was on or after 1-4-46?(ii) If the answer to question (i) is in the affirmative, whether Rs. 47,207 the capital gain on the sale of goodwill is assessable under Section 12B?'They arise on the following facts : -- The asses-see owned and carried on a business in Ceylon, the assets of which, movable and immovable, were purported to be transferred by him under two deeds bearing the date 3-5-1946, to a limited company, hereafter called the company, newly formed and incorporated in Ceylon on 15-4-1946, for a total consideration, of 5 lakhs of rupees, which was accounted for by allotting 5000 fully paid-up shares of the face value of Rs. ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Kerala Vs. Calicut Wyanad Motor Service Pr ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-23-1959
Reported in: [1960]38ITR479(Ker)
RAGHAVAN, J. - This is a reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras A Bench, and the question of the law referred is whether the assessees are entitled to development rebate on certain motor vehicles under section 10(2)(vib).The assessee are a private limited company owning a fleet of motor vehicles and doing transport business. In the year of account 1954-55, the assessee purchased four buses at a cost of Rs. 74,327 for use in their business and in the returns submitted by the m for the assessment year 1955-56, they claimed either development rebate or initial depreciation on the cost of these vehicles, which ever was applicable. The Income-tax Officer allowed initial depreciation of 20 per cent. of the cost under section 10(2)(vi) but disallowed development rebate of 25 per cent. under section 10(2)(vib). The reasoning of the Income-tax Officer was that motor vehicles were not 'plant installed.'The assessee appealed to the ...
Tag this Judgment!Sadhoo Beedi Depot Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-22-1959
Reported in: [1960]11STC289(Ker)
M.A. Ansari, J.1. The revision petitioner has been carrying on the business of buying and selling beedies and for the assessment year 1955-56 had reported a net turnover of Rs. 2,68,641-14-4, having claimed on the turnover exemption of Rs. 11,81,158-2-3, which represented sales of beedi and beedi tobacco. The assessee's accounts were not accepted by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, who estimated the taxable turnover to be Rs. 10,05,701-11-3. The revision petitioner had taken two objections to the proposed assessment, the first being that because sales of beedi by the petitioner were not first sales in the State of Madras, they would not be governed by Section 5 (vii) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act. The second objection was concerning inclusion of purchase turnover relating to raw tobacco. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer rejected the first objection and partially accepted the other. He accordingly made deductions and the taxable turnover was refixed at Rs. 7,85,546-4-10. The ap...
Tag this Judgment!P.M. John Vs. Divisional Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-18-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Ker251
S. Velu Pillai, J.1. The Petitioner was employed as the Divisional Manager of Prithvi Insurance Co., Ltd. and Asiatic Government Security Lite and General Assurance Co., Ltd. When life insurance business was nationalised, the petitioner continued to be employed by the Life Insurance Corporation of India, which may be referred to as the Corporation. Thereafter, the petitioner was required by a communication, Ext. P-9, dated the 23rd September, 1957. signed by the Divisional Manager, Trivandrum Division, to work as an Inspector of Agencies and later, by another communication, Ext. P-10, dated the 4th February, 1958, also signed by the Divisional Manager, as a Field Officer.The petitioner's complaint is, that the terms and conditions of his service with the former Insurance Companies as Divisional Manager, which were guaranteed by Sections 11(1) of The Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956, or simply the Act, have thereby been altered to his disadvantage, and he therefore seeks a writ of m...
Tag this Judgment!Kutti Kunhunni Raja Vs. Kuthiravattath Nair's Estate
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-16-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Ker288
ORDER OF REFERENCE Raman Nayar, J. 1. The question here arising is apparently covered by authority -- see AIR 1933 Nag 85 and the unreported decision in C. R. P. No. .1019 of 1958 of this court (since reported in 1959 Ker LT 868) following that case -- but there seem to be difficulties both big and small I think I had better leave it to a division bench to resolve them.2. The suit relates to immovable property claimed in the plaint as belonging in kanom right to the then Kuthiravattath Nair. The Nair was a person who had been adjudged a lunatic and the superintendence of whose property had therefore been assumed by the Court of Wards under the provisions of the Madras Court of Wards Act, 1902. This was in 1949, and, in due course, a manager was appointed for the property under Section 24 of the Act. Under Section 50, the suit should have been brought in the name of the ward, namely, the Nair, with the manager representing him as next friend. Rut, if we turn to the plaint, we find the c...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of I.T., Mysore, T.C. Coorg and Bangalore Vs. Union Tobac ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-16-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Ker276; [1961]41ITR115(Ker)
Ansari, J. 1. The facts leading to the question referred to this Court, which Question has been argued with ability by the counsel of the assessee, may be shortly stated. Twelve persons have formed a partnership under a deed of 23-8-1949. Some of these partners had earlier obtained several tobacco licences for the year 1125 at the auction conducted by the then Cochin Government, and the partnership had been formed to exploit the licences obtained by the partners; ns well as two licences held by the strangers. Para 2 of the partnership deed provides that the shops, for which the lincences were held, should he run under the trade name of 'Union Tobacco Company, Ernakulam' and in accordance with the terms and conditions of the deed. The document further provides that the business should be owned by the partners in four equal shares; one share to be held by a group consisting of three oartners another by a group comprising of two: the third by another group of two partners; and the fourth ...
Tag this Judgment!Varkey Thomas Vs. State of Kerala and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-16-1959
Reported in: [1960]11STC111(Ker)
M.S. Menon, J.1. This petition relates to the levy of the surcharge under Section 3 (1) of the Kerala Surcharge on Taxes Act, 1957. That sub-section (omitting the proviso thereto) reads as follows :-The tax payable under the Travancore-Cochin General Sales Tax Act, 1125 or the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1939, shall in the case of a dealer whose turnover exceeds thirty thousand rupees in a year, be increased by a surcharge at the rate of two and a half per centum of the tax payable for that year and the provisions of the Travancore Cochin General Sales Tax Act, 1125, or the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1939, shall, as the case may be, apply to the levy and collection of the said surcharge.2. The Act came into force on 1st September, 1957. The question whether the surcharge can be levied on the sales tax of 1956-57 (1st April, 1956, to 31st March, 1957) came up for consideration in O.P. No. 60 of 1658 Since reported as Varkey Thomas and Ors. v. State of Kerala and Ors. [1960] 11 S.T....
Tag this Judgment!Bhaskara Menon Vs. Assistant Labour Commissioner and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-16-1959
Reported in: (1960)ILLJ777Ker
T.K. Joseph, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, direction or order quashing an order, Ex. P. 5, passed by the respondent 1, the Inspector, under Section 3 and Rule 7 of the Kerala Industrial Establishments (National and Festival Holidays) Act XLVII of 1958. The petitioner is the general secretary of the Tomco Employees' Union, Ernakulam, and four respondents are:(1) the assistant labour officer,(2) the manager, Tata Oil Mills Company, Ltd.,(3) the secretary, Tata Oil Mills, Workers' Union, Ernakulam, and(4) the secretary, Tata Oil Mills Company, Ltd., Staff Association, Ernakulam.2. The facts may be briefly stated: The petitioner is the general secretary of the Tomco Employees' Union, a trade union registered under the Indian Trade Unions Act, A section of the workers in the Tata Oil Mills Company, Ltd., at Ernakulam are members of this union. Under the standing orders of the company, copy of which has been ...
Tag this Judgment!T.V. Krishna Iyer Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-09-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Ker215; [1960]38ITR144(Ker)
Ansari, J. 1. The two questions stated in this reference are: 1. Whether Gourikutty Amma was the legally wedded wife of the assessee so as to attract the provisions of Section 16(3) of the Indian Income-Tax Act; and 2. Whether Gourikutty Amma's four children, Yesodaran Nair, Gopalakrishnan Nair, Ramanujan Nair, and Harikumari are the legitimate children of the assessee; and the provisions of Section 16(3) of the Indian Income-Tax Act would be attracted to the income derived from the shares and properties in their names. 2. The facts leading to this reference may be shortly stated. The assessee, who has since died, was a Brahmin and a salt manufacturer in South Travancore producing and selling salt from factories owned by him, and also taken on lease. Before 1103 he had married a lady of his own caste, Lekshmi Ammal, and they had a son and a daughter. After 1103 he was living with a Nair lady Gourikutty Amma. This relation appears to have continued for a number of years and the assesse...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »