Kerala Court September 1999 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. Poyilakada Fisheries P. Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-22-1999
Reported in: [1999]240ITR445(Ker)
Arijit Pasayat, C.J.1. Pursuant to the direction given by this court the following questions have been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench (in short 'the Tribunal'), in proceedings under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee, engaged in the processing and export of shrimps, is entitled to the benefit of Sections 80HH and 80-I of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee engaged in the processing and export of shrimps, is entitled to the benefit of investment allowance under Section 32A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of computer and ice plant ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case- (i) the commission of Rs. 1,08,030 claimed to have been paid by the assessee to foreign agents is an allowable deduction under Section 35B(1)(iv) of the Income-tax Act ? (ii) do the assesse...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Vaikundam Rubber Co. Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-22-1999
Reported in: (2000)158CTR(Ker)455; [2000]241ITR50(Ker)
Arijit Pasayat, C. J.1. Pursuant to the direction given by this court in anapplication under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'theAct'), the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench (in short 'theTribunal'), has referred the following question for opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, intereston the borrowal made by the assessee against the fixed deposit made bythe assessee with the bank is an allowable deduction under Section 57(iii)of the Income-tax Act ?'2. The factual position as indicated in the statement of case is as follows :3. The assessee is a public limited company engaged in plantation business. In addition to its income from plantation business, it has income from interest on fixed deposits with a bank, which were assessable under the head 'Other sources'. Against this interest income, the assessee claimed a sum of Rs. 1,40,647 as deduction towards interest paid by it on loans taken from the bank. The Ass...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Travancore Cements Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-22-1999
Reported in: [1999]240ITR816(Ker)
R. Rajendra Babu, J.1. The question that is referred for consideration of the Full Bench is whether the expenses met by the assessee for the repairs of the car will not fall within the mischief of Section 37(3A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.2. A Division Bench of this court in I, T. R. No. 83 of 1993--CIT v. Travancore Cements Ltd. : [1999]240ITR825(Ker) (Appendix), answered the question in the affirmative in favour of the Revenue following an earlier decision of the same Bench in CIT v. Navodaya : [1997]225ITR399(Ker) . Another Bench of this court including one of us (Usha J.) took a contrary view in CIT v. A. V. Thomas and Co. Ltd. : [1997]225ITR29(Ker) . Since the judgment pronounced by one Bench of this court in CIT v. A. V. Thomas and Co. Ltd. : [1997]225ITR29(Ker) , and another Bench in CIT v. Navodaya : [1997]225ITR399(Ker) , contain contrary views in the matter, the question was referred to this Full Bench for consideration and decision.3. The assessee was a public limited compa...
M.A. Ismail Vs. Commissioner of Gift-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-20-1999
Reported in: (1999)157CTR(Ker)557; [1999]240ITR539(Ker)
Arijit Pasayat, C.J.1. Pursuant to the direction given by this court on an application under Section 26(3) of the Gift-tax Act, 1958 (in short 'the Act'), the following questions have been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal'), for opinion :'1, Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the appellant is liable to gift-tax for the amount of Rs. 1,25,000 ?2. Whether, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in not adjudicating on the question of the applicability of Section 4(1)(a) and Section 4(1)(c) of the Gift-tax Act to the facts of the instant case ?3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal erred in not considering the question as to whether the assessee was entitled for exemption under Section 5(1)(xiv) of the Gift-tax Act?'2. The facts as presented by the parties are essentially as follows : M. A. Ismail (he...
M.M.N.D. Muthiah Rajasabai Vs. Controller of Estate Duty
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-20-1999
Reported in: (1999)157CTR(Ker)365; [1999]240ITR650(Ker)
Arijit Pasayat, C.J.1. This court directed the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, Cochin (in short the 'Tribunal'), to refer the following questions for opinion in an application under Section 64(2) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 (in short 'the Act') :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and having regard to the nature of the business, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is right in estimating the value of the goodwill at three times the super profits ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income tax Appellate Tribunal is right in holding that the profits of the firm of the previous year in which the deceased died would not form part of the computation under the super profits method ?' 2. The Tribunal has referred the questions along with the statement of facts.3. The factual background giving rise to the reference is as follows : M.M. N. Durairaja Nadar (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) died on November 4, 1984. Dur...
income Tax Officer Vs. K.C. Gopalan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-17-1999
Reported in: [2000]107TAXMAN591(Ker)
Usha. J.Appeal at the instance of the revenue is against the order dated 18-11-1998 passed by the Tribunal, Cochin Bench, in Income Tax Appeal No. 72 (Coch) of 1991. The relevant assessment year is 1984-85. Only question to be considered in this case is whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the assessee is entitled to deduction under section 54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') even though for the acquisition of the asset, that is, construction of a house, the amount that was received by way of sale of his property as such was not utilised.2. Section 45 of the Act, provides that 'Any profits or gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset effected in the previous year shall, save as otherwise provided in sections 53, 54, 54B and 54D, be chargeable to income-tax under the head' Capital gains', and shall be deemed to be the income of the previous year in which the transfer took place.' In the facts of the present case, during the accounti...
C.K. Venkataram Naidu Vs. C.R. Vasanthi and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-16-1999
Reported in: AIR2000Ker27
ORDERM.R. Hariharan Nair, J. 1. The 1st defendant is the revision petitioner. The challenge is with regard to the order passed by the Principal Sub Judge, Kochi in I.A. No. 1069/96 in O. Section No. 185/88 directing issuance of a commission to report about 'the dies, spares, scraps and other articles stored in the Coastal Engineering Company, Palluruthy premises and also to approximate the quantity and value of the articles.' The aforesaid items are situated in item 5 of the plaint schedule property. There were several partnership firms of which the plaintiffs and defendants in the suit were partners and the suit is nowlaid for partition. The contention of the defence is that the partible Items have already been partitioned through the intervention of mediators as per an agreement dated. 7-9-1985 and that under the agreement the aforesaid factory comes within the property allowed to the 1st defendant. The contention is that issuance of a commission in the circumstances will cause unnec...
Peria Karamalai Tea and Produce Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-16-1999
Reported in: [2000]241ITR265(Ker)
K.K. Usha, J. 1. Income-tax Reference Nos. 141, 142 and 143 of 1977 arise out of I. T. A. Nos. 2, 3 and 4/Coch of 1975-76 before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, at the instance of the assessee. The relevant assessment years are 1965-66, 1966-67 and 1967-68. Common question referred for the opinion of this court is as follows (see : [1980]124ITR899(Ker) ) :'Whether Circular No. 53 (F. No. 7/2/68-TPL, dated January 11, 1971, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes and in which circular the extent of its application is not specified is applicable to reassessments in respect of the assessment years 1965-66, 1966-67 and 1967-68, even though such reassessments were made only after the aforesaid date of January 11, 1971 ?'2. The Tribunal refused to refer the second question sought to be referred by the assessee. Therefore, the assessee filed compelling reference O. P. Nos. 4241, 4277 and 4240 of 1977 before this court. Pursuant to the direction issued by this court, the s...
Chandramathi Amma Vs. Malanadu Co-operative Bank
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-15-1999
Reported in: AIR2000Ker69
Balasubramanyan, J. 1. The revision petitioner is the judgment debtor. The respondent, a land mortgage Bank purchased the property in enforcement of the right to recover the amounts due to the Bank. Section 18 of the Co-operative Land Mortgage Banks Act. 1960 enables the Bank itself to purchase the property by such a sale. The sale was held on 14-3-1984. The sale was confirmed on 22-8-1985. A certificate in terms of Section 16 of the Co-operative Land Mortgage Banks Act was issued to the respondent on 21-2-1986 (it is shown as 25-10-1985 in the order). Under Section 17 of the Co-operative Land Mortgage Banks Act, 1960 the person to whom a certificate has been issued Under Section 16 of the Act has to apply for delivery Under Section 17 of the Act to the Court. Before the respondent Bank could apply for delivery in terms of Section 17 of the Act, the judgment debtor filed a suit O.S. 73 of 1986 before the Munsiffs Court Devicolam. That suit was filed on 19-3-198G.The same day, an interi...
Sea Mates India Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-15-1999
Reported in: [1999]240ITR484(Ker)
K.K. Usha, J. 1. This tax reference case at the instance of the asses-see arises out of an order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench in I.T.A. No. 570/Coch. of 1989. The relevant assessment year is 1982-83. The following are the questions referred for the opinion of this court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the provisions made towards purchase tax amounting to Rs. 3,86,000 was not allowable expenditure ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that a sum of Rs. 3,86,000 provided by the assessee in the profit and loss account towards the liability for purchase tax for that year was not allowable expenditure,since it was not a statutory liability, overlooking the Supreme Court decision in the case of Kedernath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. : [1971]82ITR363(SC) ? 3. Whether, on the facts and...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »