Kerala Court September 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.
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sasidhara Shenoy and Brothers.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-03-1996
Reported in: (1998)147CTR(Ker)329
V. V. KAMAT, J. :The question in all these four references is one and the same and it is as follows :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the building constructed by the assessee and used as cinema theatre constitutes plant and is entitled to higher rate of depreciation ?'Although in the first two references the assessee is M/s. Sasidhara Shenoy & Bros., in the other two references the assessee is M/s. New Guna Shenoy & Co., yet all these four references relate to asst. yrs. 1984-85 and 1985-86.2. The Revenue has brought these four references against the finding of the Tribunal treating the building constructed by the assessee and used as a cinema theatre constitutes plant as a whole and, therefore, entitled to higher rate of depreciation.3. Depreciation is an aspect statutorily provided under s. 32 of the IT Act, 1961.4. This Court had an occasion to consider the statutory provisions of the said section in IT Ref. No. 155 of 1991 by the judgment dt. 5th August,...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Navodaya
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-02-1996
Reported in: (1997)138CTR(Ker)90; [1997]225ITR399(Ker)
V.V. Kamat, J.1. These two references brought before us by the Revenue and the assessee, respectively, relate to the assessment years 1985-86 and 1984-85 in the same order. The questions expecting our answer in these two references, as they are differently worded, are being reproduced hereinbelow separately in the same order :Income-tax Reference No. 88 of 1992 : ' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case,-- (i) the interpretation of Section 37(3A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by the Tribunal is right in law ? (ii) the Tribunal is right in law and fact in holding that the expenditure on the cost of production up to the stage of the negative films is capital in nature and is outside the scope of Section 37 and therefore Section 37(3A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? (iii) the assessee is entitled to deduction of Rs. 6,63,954 under Section 37(3A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and also in the light of the de...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›