Kerala Court August 1996 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Joseph J. Chakola Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-07-1996
Reported in: [1998]231ITR239(Ker)
V.V. Kamat, J.1. These references relate to the assessment years 1979-80 and 1980-81 in the context of wealth-tax proceedings. We are expected to answer the following two questions :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that in view of the decision of the Kerala High Court in CWT v. Gopinathan Nair (K.) : [1976]103ITR23(Ker) the claim that the gratuity liability shown in the balance-sheet was not an admissible deduction for valuation of the shares of a company under rule 1D of the Wealth-tax Rules ? 2. Whether, in view of the decisions of the Supreme Court in Vazir Sultan Tobacco Co. Ltd. v. CIT : [1981]132ITR559(SC) and Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. v. CIT : 1986ECR276(SC) , the Tribunal ought to have held that the decision of the Kerala High Court stood overruled and gratuity liability actuarially determined is a 'debt owed' and was an admissible deduction ?' 2. Reading these questions it would be clear that the first one rela...
Santhosh Kumar Vs. Regional Transport Authority
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-07-1996
Reported in: I(1997)ACC116
S. Sankarasubban, J.1. Original Petition is filed challenging Ext, P6 proceedings passed by the second respondent/Regional Transport Authority, Trivandrum. Second respondent decided to grant a regular permit on the route, Poonthura-Pappanamcode in Trivandrum city. But the regular permit was not issued, as the grantee did not produce the current records and because of the pendency of O.P. No. 16137/95 before this Court. The route is reserved for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe.2. Thereafter, it was decided to grant temporary permit on theroute. By Ext. P1 dated 18.12.1995, Regional Transport Authority, Trivandrum decided to grant temporary permit for 20 days on the route to the petitioner. On the expiry of the permit, there were two applications; one by the petitioner and the other by the third respondent. Secretary preferred the petitioner on the ground that he is operating on the route. This is evidenced by Ext. P2 order dated 6.1.1996. Subsequently, applications for temporary per...
A.S. Ramachandran Pillai Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-06-1996
Reported in: [1998]231ITR98(Ker)
P.A. Mohammed, J.1. These tax revision cases have been presented under Section 78 of the Kerala Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1991.2. The petitioner is an assessee under the provisions of the Agricultural Income-tax Act. The assessment years involved are 1970-71 and 1971-72. The original assessments in these cases were completed by the assessing authority as per orders dated June 13, 1972, assigning the status as 'registered firm'. Subsequently, the Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax and Sales Tax in exercise of the powers under Section 34 of the Act cancelled the original assessments assigning the status as 'registered firm'. Consequently, the Commissioner directed the assessing authority to modify the assessments assigning the status as 'unregistered firm'. Pursuant to the direction issued by the Commissioner revised assessment orders assigning the status as 'unregistered firm' were passed. These revised assessment orders were challenged in first appeal before the Appellate Assis...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. C.T. Jacob (Kelachandra) and Sons
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-06-1996
Reported in: [1998]231ITR227(Ker)
V.V. Kamat, J.1. In both these references relating to the assessment years 1983-84 and 1984-85 the question is as to whether a hotel building can constitute a plant for the purpose of claim for depreciation under Section 32 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The questions are as follows :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case- (i) the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that the hotel building constituted plant ? (ii) the assessee is entitled to higher depreciation and extra-shift allowance on the consideration that the hotel building is a plant ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that the mere fact that with effect from April 1, 1988, the Income-tax Rules have provided for higher depreciation on the hotel building as buildings will not derogate from the fact that the hotel building constituted a plant in the earlier years ?'2. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has considered the ...
N.J. Mathew (Late) and anr. Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-06-1996
Reported in: [1998]231ITR37(Ker)
V. V. Kamat, J.1. We are expected to answer the following two questions :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the reopening of the assessment was valid, warranted and/or sustainable under Section 17(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act ? 2. Whether it is permissible to exclude the advance tax payment made under Section 210 of the Income-tax Act, in determining the market value of unquoted equity shares ?' 2. They are referred to us in pursuance of the directions of this court dated March 8, 1984, in 0. P. No. 4250 of 1980. The situation takes us to the assessment year 1972-73. The first question is whether the reopening of the assessment is justified and the second question relates to the exclusion of advance tax payment under Section 210 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. This is with regard to the determination of the market value of unquoted equity shares with regard to the assessment proceedings before the auth...
V.V. Agencies Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-06-1996
Reported in: [2003]129STC56(Ker)
P.A. Mohammed, J.1. The subject of this tax revision case is the levy of penalty under Section 29A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (for short, 'the Act').2. The petitioner is a partnership firm dealing in purchase and sale of soaps and soap products manufactured by Tata Oil Mills Limited. It is a registered dealer on the files of the Sales Tax Officer, Alathur. By annexure B proceeding of the Sales Tax Officer, II Circle, Palakkad, security deposit of Rs. 3,837 was realised from the petitioner as penalty for attempting to evade payment of tax under Section 29A of the Act. The case of the respondent is that the petitioner had transported the goods covered by the sale bills Nos. 810 and 811 dated December 7, 1990 to Trichur and the vehicle was intercepted by the Sales Tax Inspector, II Circle, Palakkad on suspected evasion of tax. It was after the enquiry conducted under Section 29A(4) the Additional Sales Tax Officer, II Circle, Palakkad imposed the said penalty. As against th...
Khaders International Constructions Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-ta ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-05-1996
Reported in: [1998]229ITR452(Ker)
P.A. Mohammed, J. 1. This income-tax reference came up before us at the instance of the assessee known as 'The Khaders InternationalConstructions Ltd.' The questions referred to us for answer are the following :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the remuneration paid to the managing director in Libyan dinars for services rendered in Libya and as approved by the Central Government is covered by Section 40(c)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the rupee equivalent of the payment of remuneration in foreign currency in excess of Rs. 72,000 is to be disallowed ? (2) Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in having held that the rupee equivalent of the remuneration paid to the managing director in Libyan dinars and incorporated in the accounts of the company is to be disallowed to the extent it is in excess of Rs. 72,000 even if there is no finding that such remuneration was excessi...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Damodar Corporation
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-05-1996
Reported in: [1997]225ITR699(Ker)
V.V. Kamat, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal acting on the order dated April 11, 1991 (see : [1992]193ITR272(Ker) ), of this court in O. P. No. 10709 of 1987 has placed the following question for our answer (at page 273) :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the hotel run by the assessee was 'plant' entitled to depreciation at 15 per cent, and investment allowance ?'2. The assessee is a firm carrying on business in the name and style of 'Hotel Pankaj'. The assessment year under consideration is 1982-83. What was contended by the assessee was that the entire hotel complex has to be treated as a plant for the purpose of a claim for depreciation and that too at a flat rate of 15 per cent. On this basis an amount of Rs. 5,89,080, is claimed as depreciation.3. However, the Income-tax Officer allowed permissible depreciation on certain individual items of capital nature and that too as per the prescribed rates under the In...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Damodar Corporation Hotel Pankaj.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-05-1996
Reported in: (1997)137CTR(Ker)574
V. V. KAMAT, J. :The Tribunal acting on the order dt. 11th April, 1991 of this Court in O. P. 10709 of 1987 has placed the following question for our answer :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the hotel run by the assessee was plant entitled to depreciation at 15% and investment allowance ?'2. The assessee is a firm carrying on business in the name and style of Hotel Pankaj. The assessment year under consideration is 1982-83. What was contended by the assessee was that the entire hotel complex has to be treated as a plant for the purpose of a claim for depreciation and that too at a flat rate of 15% on this basis an amount of Rs. 5,89,080 is claimed for depreciation.3. However the ITO allowed permissible depreciation on certain individual items of capital nature and that too as per the prescribed rates under the IT Rules. He worked out the figure on the count at Rs. 4,23,458 which could be considered for grant of deprecia...
Banerji Memorial Club Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-02-1996
Reported in: [1997]223ITR732(Ker)
V.V. Kamat, J. 1. The following two questions expect our answer with regard to the proceedings under the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, in the matter of the assessee, Banerji Memorial Club, for the assessment year 1978-79 :' (1) Whether, on a reading of the bye-laws and rules of the applicant-club the Appellate Tribunal had material to come to the conclusion that the applicant was not a public charitable trust ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessment of the applicant which was an association of persons, under the Wealth-tax Act in the status of an 'individual' was proper and legal ?' 2. As regards question No. 1 as to whether the applicant-assessee is a public charitable trust or not, a bare reading of the background as available from the document (annexure 'D') relied upon in support of the contention would be more than enough. The said background is as follows :' A score of prominent gentlemen of Trichur, after the day's work was through, used to meet r...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »