Kerala Court December 1998 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. A.M. Zainalabdeen Musaliar
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-01-1998
Reported in: [1999]240ITR499(Ker)
Om Prakash, C.J. 1. As per direction given under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal referred the following question relating to the assessment year 1978-79 for the opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in finding that the assessee was entitled to a deduction of Rs. 50,000 paid to Rajan and that the provisions of Section 40A(3) do not stand in the way of the payment being allowed ?'2. The facts as found by the Appellate Tribunal are that the assessee made local purchases of cashew kernels. These purchases include purchase of 1,134 kgs. of cashew kernels worth Rs. 50,000 made from one Sri Rajan. The Assessing Officer discovered that the payment was made through the bearer cheque dated June 10, 1977, drawn on Federal Bank Ltd., Quilon. To test the genuineness of the payment, the Assessing Officer issued summons to Rajan, who was never produced for examination before him...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. A.M. Zainalabdeen Musaliar
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-01-1998
Reported in: [1999]106TAXMAN635(Ker)
Om Prakash, CL - As per direction given under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), the Tribunal referred the following question relating to the assessment year 1978-79 for the opinion of this Court :'Whet her, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in finding that the assessee was entitled to a deduction of Rs. 50,000 paid to Rajan and that the provisions of section 40A(3) do not stand in the way of the payment being allowed ?'2. The facts as found by the Appellate Tribunal are that the assessee made local purchases of cashew kernels. These purchases include purchase of 1134 kgs. of cashew kernels worth Rs. 50,000 made from one Sri RRian. The assessing officer discovered that the payment was made through a bearer cheque dated 10-6-1977 drawn on Federal Bank Ltd., Quilon. To test the genuineness of the payment, the assessing officer issued summons to Rajan, who was never produced for examination before him or before any othe...
P. P. Rajan Vs. Union of India
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-01-1998
Reported in: (1999)152CTR(Ker)426
P. Shanmugam, J.The petitioner is a social worker having an income of Rs. 1,500 per month as an honorarium for the services rendered to an organisation. The petitioner is living in Mulanthuruthy which comes within the Urban Agglomeration of Cochin. In his original petition he has sought for a declaration declaring that the provisions contained under the proviso to section 139 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') as illegal and unconstitutional and for a direction not to implement the conditions enumerated under the proviso to section 139.2. The main contention of the petitioner is that the conditions set out in the proviso, namely, that a person in occupation of an immovable property exceeding a specified floor area by way of ownership, tenancy or otherwise within the city specified, and that the persons subscribing a telephone, have no nexus with the objective of assessment of income-tax. According to him, these conditions imposed against those persons wh...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›