Kerala Court October 2002 Judgments
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. K.P. Nelson
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-11-2002
Reported in: (2003)180CTR(Ker)164
S. Sankarasubban, J. 1. This reference is at the instance of the Revenue and two questions of law arise in this case, which are as follows : '1 Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and also in view of the fact noted in the enclosure to the reference application that the refund as per order dt. 27th Feb., 1985, was issued only on 4th Nov.. 1985, the learned Tribunal is right in law and fact in holding that the interest in a sum of Rs. 40,495 which was granted by the order dt. 27th Feb., 1985, cannot be included in the assessment for the asst. yr. 1986-87 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and also in view of the Guwahati High Court decision in N.R. Sirker v. CIT the learned Tribunal was right in holding that the interest income was not assessable in the asst. yr. 1986-87. 2. The assessment year in question is 1986-87. The assessee is the sole beneficiary of a trust by name 'Nelson Trust'. The assessment was made in the hands of the trust...
Tag this Judgment!In Re Ktc Tyres (India) Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-11-2002
Reported in: [2002]125TAXMAN899(Ker)
ORDERK.S. Radhakrishnan, J. These reports have been placed before us on a reference made by the learned single Judge in view of the importance other questions raised. The matter arises in connection with the liquidation proceedings of KTC Tyres (India) Limited, Hendez Electronics Limited and Venad Pharmaceuticals and Chemicals Limited. For the convenient sake we may refer to Report No. 58 in connection with KTC Tyres (India) Limited. Statement and reply statement has been filed by the contesting parties in that case. In the report Official Liquidator prayed for the following reliefs.(i) take this report on record;(ii) direct that no income-tax is payable from the sale proceeds as capital gains tax, advance tax instalments and additional tax, if any, on the sale of the charged assets of the company in liquidation until the dues of the secured creditors and workmen creditors are paid in full;(iii) declare that no advance tax is payable in respect of this company in liquidation for the as...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. G.T.N. Textiles Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-10-2002
Reported in: [2004]269ITR282(Ker)
1. The matter arises under the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Revenue is the appellant. The respondent-assessee is a company deriving income mainly from the business of running a textile mill. The assessment of the respondent for the year 1992-93 was completed on a total income of Rs. 67,09,434 as against Rs. 61,36,906 disclosed in the return. This difference in the income assessed is on account of the disallowance of the claim for deduction of the contribution to the employees' gratuity fund not paid by the assessee within the due date for making such payment under law. The assessee did not file any appeal against the disallowance of this amount. However, in the appeal before the Tribunal, the assessee has taken this issue as an additional ground which reads as follows :'In respect of the assessment year 1991-92, the appellant had claimed gratuity paid on July 3, 1991, amounting to Rs. 4,29,000 as allowable in the assessment year 1991-92. The hon'ble Tribunal has held in the order in I. T....
Tag this Judgment!Deputy Commissioner Vs. Yucos Family Trust
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-09-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)KLT973
S. Sankarasubban, J.1. All these T.R.Cs. are filed against the common order passed by the Agricultural Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Kozhikode. Government has come in revision. Question for consideration is regarding the interpretation of Section 12 of the Agricultural Income Tax Act read with Rule 13 of the Kerala Agricultural Income Tax Rule s.2. The assessment was originally completed by the Agricultural Income Tax Officer, Mananthavady by order dated 4th June, 1996 allowing carry forward of the loss sustained in the previous year and setting off the same against the agricultural income derived during the subsequent year. Subsequently, on verification, the Assessing Authority found that an error had been crept in while granting carry forward of the loss sustained in the previous year, since the assessee had not submitted return in time during the previous year and that by virtue of Rule 13 of the Keraia Agricultural Income Tax Rule s, the assessee is not entitled ...
Tag this Judgment!Swaminathan Vs. Anantharama Subramanian
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-07-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Ker30
ORDERJ. M. James, J.1. The plaintiff in O.S. No. 446/2000 on the file of the First Additional Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram, is the revision petitioner. The suit was filed for partition. The plaintiff claimed 5/12 shares over the Plaint 'A' and 'C' schedule properties and 1/4 share in Plaint 'B' schedule property. During the pendency of the suit, the parties settled the matter among themselves out of Court and therefore filed I.A. No. 1297/2001, compromise petition, signed by all the parties to the suit and their respective advocates, praying that a final compromise decree may be passed accepting the compromise petition. The parties are prepared to pay requisite stamp duty for the preparation of compromise decree. The parties have also agreed to suffer their costs. Plans filed along with the compromise were agreed to form part of the decree. But the learned Munstff, as per the impugned order dated 29.6.2001, dismissed the petition. The revision is aimed against the said dismissal. 2. N...
Tag this Judgment!Latha Chandy Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-07-2002
Reported in: (2003)179CTR(Ker)463; [2003]260ITR385(Ker)
G. Sivarajan, J.1. The matter arises under the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'). The appellant is a partner in a firm, M. M. Chandy and Co., Kottayam. The assessment year concerned is 1975-76. The assessment of the said partnership firm was completed by making an addition of Rs. 27,040 (rupees twenty seven thousand forty only) as income from undisclosed sources. The assessing authority also made a protective assessment on the appellant in respect of the sum of Rs. 27,040 added in the firm's assessment, as per order dated January 17, 1978 (exhibit A1). The firm filed an appeal against the firm's assessment which was allowed and the sum of Rs. 27,040 was deleted from the firm's assessment. This was on the finding that the said sum of Rs. 27,040 is the undisclosed income of the appellant. Though the protective assessment was made on the appellant, she did not file any appeal against the said assessment order and the same has become final. The appellant, after about 13 years, mad...
Tag this Judgment!Vision Communications Vs. Intelligence Officer, Squad No. Iv and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-07-2002
Reported in: [2006]143STC241(Ker)
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The petitioner is stated to be a registered dealer, but the Sales Tax Officer before whom the petitioner is registered is not made a party in the original petition. The petitioner is challenging two orders issued under Section 47 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 accepting composition of offence for which the petitioner would have otherwise faced prosecution. The petitioner is not questioning the orders granting composition, but is questioning the composition fee collected by the department for both the years 1999-2000 and 2000-2001 at the rate of Rs. 1 lakh each.2. I heard counsel for the petitioner and the Government Pleader. While counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is engaged only in works contract, the tax liability is not determined in assessment and the first respondent has in the proceedings arbitrarily fixed the compounding fee at Rs. 1 lakh each against which the petitioner has no relief by way of appeal or revision. I...
Tag this Judgment!Season Rubber Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-07-2002
Reported in: [2003]263ITR385(Ker)
1. The appellant is a company incorporated under the Companies Act and is engaged in the business of manufacture of centrifuged latex. The assessment of the appellant under the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the year 1986-87 was originally completed on March 15, 1989, in which the Assessing Officer levied a sum of Rs. 16,615 as interest under Section 139(8) and a sum of Rs. 1,32,309 as interest under Section 215 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The appellant took up the assessment order in appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), who granted relief to the appellant. The Assessing Officer gave effect to the appellate order in which interest under Section 139(8) Rs. 8,805 and interest under Section 215 Rs. 63,813 were levied. The appellant filed a petition for waiver of the interest levied under Section 139(8) and also under Section 215 of the Act before the Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 264 of the Act. The Commissioner, as per order dated July 22, 1994, waived the inter...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Khader Vs. Ali
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-05-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)KLT546
ORDERK.S. Radhakrishnan, J. 1. Revision petitioner, the alleged sub lessee, was the second counter petitioner before the Rent Control Court. Eviction was sought for against the counter petitioners under Sections 11 (2)(b) and 11 (4)(i) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act (in short 'the Act'). Rent Control Court dismissed the petition holding that ground of subletting was not established. On appeal by the landlord, Appellate Authority reversed the finding of the Rent Control Court and allowed eviction under Section 11(4)(i).2. For the disposal of this case, we will refer to the parties according to their status before the Rent Control Court. The landlord submitted that the petition schedule building was rented out to the first counter petitioner on a monthly rent of Rs. 700/- as per the rent deed, Ext. A1dated 7.2.1994. Petitioner landlord stated that the first counter petitioner was conducting a wholesale business in rice and later conducted business in coir, coir matt...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. Fertilisers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-05-2002
Reported in: (2002)178CTR(Ker)461
S. Sankarasubban, J.ITA No. 26 of 1999 is with regard to the assessment year 1989-90. This appeal is at the instance of the revenue. Questions of law raised are as follows :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, is the Tribunal right in holding that with reference to the book profit as shown in the profit & loss account of the company the additions made by the assessing officer by way of disallowance of the provision for foreseeable loss on contract, the provision for bad and doubtful debts and the provision for obsolescence of stores, are not in accordance with the provisions of section 115J 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, can not the addition in this case be upheld as a prima facie adjustment in accordance with section 143(1)(a) ?3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the proviso to section 143(1)(a) permits only the disallowance of any loss carried forward, ded...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »