Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: agricultural income tax act 1957 section 36 income escaping assessment Sorted by: old Court: kerala Page 11 of about 752 results (0.305 seconds)

Jul 29 1968 (HC)

CochIn Company Private Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Reported in : [1969]24STC295(Ker)

..... nor the subordinate authorities have considered any of these matters in rejecting the petitioner's accounts. a division bench of this court in oommen v. commissioner of agricultural income-tax [1963] k.l.t. 211 said:acceptance of accounts kept in the usual course of business is the rule; and their rejection must be the exception, ..... which could not reasonably be entertained or the facts found are such that no person acting judicially and properly instructed as to the relevant law would have come to the determination in question.in omar salay mohammed sait v. commissioner of income-tax, madras a.i.r. 1959 s.c. 1238, the supreme court again said ..... by a reputed firm of chartered accountants. its accounts have been fully accepted by the sales tax department in the previous and subsequent years. a copy of the order of assessment made by the income-tax officer, ernakulam, under the income-tax act, 1961, for the year 1964-65, which it produced before the appellate tribunal along with several .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 01 1968 (HC)

Plantation Corporation of Kerala Vs. Commissioner of Agricultural Inco ...

Court : Kerala

Reported in : [1969]73ITR23(Ker)

isaac, j.1. the following question of law has been referred to this court by the kerala agricultural income-tax appellate tribunal under section 60(1) of the agricultural income-tax act, 1950, on the application of the assessee: ' whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, depreciation and maintenance expenditure were not allowable in respect ..... assessee filed an appeal before the appellate assistant commissioner who took the view that the rent of rs. 1,669 received by the assessee was agricultural income liable to tax under the act. at the same time he disallowed the claim for repairs and depreciation on the ground that allowances on account of expenditure were not admissible until ..... any particular year. in support of this contention he relied on a decision of the supreme court in travancore rubber and tea co. ltd. v. commissioner of agricultural income-tax, [1961] 41 i.t:r. 751 (s.c.). in that case the assessee claimed a deduction of an amount expended by it for the upkeep and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 16 1968 (HC)

S. A. Ramaraj Vs. Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, KeralA.

Court : Kerala

Reported in : [1969]71ITR108(Ker)

..... . - this is a reference made by the kerala agricultural income-tax appellate tribunal under section 60(1) of the agricultural income-tax act, 1950, on application of the assessee. the question referred is :'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was justified in law in including the sum of rs, 3,600 as agricultural income in the assessment of the hindu undivided family ..... represented by its karta, s. a. ramaraj ?'the assessee is a hindu undivided family and its income .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 20 1968 (HC)

Commissioner of Agrl. Income-tax, Kerala State, Trivandrum Vs. Nilambu ...

Court : Kerala

Reported in : AIR1969Ker238

..... not the same in this respect. he submitted that under clause (i) of section 5 of the agricultural income-tax act, the expenditure must be one laid out or expended 'for the purpose of deriving the agricultural income', while under clause (xv) of section 10 (2) of the indian income-tax act, it is enough if it is laid out or expended 'for the purpose of such business, profession ..... isaac, j.1. these are two references made by the kerala agricultural income-tax appellate tribunal under section 60 (1) of the agricultural income-tax act 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the act) on the application of the commissioner of the agricultural income-tax, kerala. the assessee is the same in both the cases; and the questions of law referred are also the same, and they read as follows;--1. whether in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 20 1968 (HC)

Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, Kerala Vs. Nilambur Rubber Co ...

Court : Kerala

Reported in : [1969]71ITR686(Ker)

..... the same, and they read as follows :'1. whether, in the circumstances of the case, the expenses for preparation of the agricultural income-tax returns are expenses allowable in determining the assessable income under the agricultural income-tax act 2. whether, in the circumstances of the case, the floating charge on the states in kerala will come under mortgage or ..... submitted that the provisions of the two statutes are not the same in this respect. he submitted that under clause (j) of sections 5 of the agricultural income-tax act, the expenditure must be one laid out or expended 'for the purpose of such business, profession or vocation'. he submitted that the expression 'the purpose of ..... other capital charge in section 5(f) of the agricultural income-tax act ?3. whether the floating charge on the estate in kerala can be a charge on the said property unless and until the amount or a portion .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 21 1968 (HC)

A. K. T. K. M. Vishnudatta Antharjanam Vs. Commissioner of Agricultura ...

Court : Kerala

Reported in : [1969]71ITR733(Ker)

..... of teak trees for the purpose of planting the area with rubber is capital in nature and exempt from the agricultural income-tax act.2. if the answer to the above question is in the negative, whether the expenses incurred in the prior years for the purpose of obtaining the said ..... isaac j. - the following two questions have been referred for the decision of this court by the kerala agricultural income-tax appellate tribunal under section 60(1) of the agricultural income-tax act, 1950, on the application of the assessee :1. whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the receipt from the sale ..... observation contained in the decision of the privy council in raja mustafa ali khan v. commissioner of income-tax. we have no doubt that income received by sale of trees planted for the purpose of deriving income is 'agricultural income' as defined in the act, by whatever name the planting of the said trees called. the supreme court has considered elaborately .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 1968 (HC)

Commr. of Agrl. I.T. Vs. Pullangode Rubber and Produce Co. Ltd.

Court : Kerala

Reported in : [1970]76ITR10(Ker)

..... isaac, j.1. this is a reference made by the kerala agricultural income-taxappellate tribunal under section 60(1) of the agricultural income-tax act 1950,on the application of the commissioner of agricultural income-tax, kerala. thequestions referred are:'(i) on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, is the tribunal right in holding ..... result, we decline to answer questions nos. 1 and 2; and we answer question no. 3 in the negative and in favour of the commissioner of agricultural income-tax, subject to the observations made in paragraph 6 of this judgment. the partner will bear their own costs. a copy of this judgment will be forwarded ..... yusuff, the inspecting assistantcommissioner stated that what was sold was not old and unyielding trees, andthat the said amount also constitutes income. 5. the assessee filed an appeal before the deputy commissioner of agricultural income-tax, who was the appellate authority, and he accepted the claim of the assessee regarding the sum of rs. 24,000 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 13 1968 (HC)

B.F. Varghese (No. 2) Vs. State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Reported in : [1969]72ITR726(Ker)

isaac, j.1. these two references have been made by the kerala agricultural income-tax appellate tribunal under section 60(3) of the agricultural income-tax act, 1950, as directed by this court on applications made by the assessee, who is the same in both the cases. i.t.r. case no. ..... account; and that the estimate made by the appellate assistant commissioner regarding the yield of pepper was reasonable.3. for the assessment year 1961-62 the agricultural income-tax officer estimated the total agricultural income of the assessee at rs. 36,395 as against rs. 4, 128.39 returned by the assessee, after rejecting his books of account. the pepper ..... from 11,200 yielding pepper vines was 8 candies 10 thulams. the assessing authority estimated the yield at 20 candies on the ground that enquiries conducted by the agricultural income-tax officer, taliparamba, revealed that 3/4 kgms. of pepper could be obtained from each pepper vine of the locality. the appellate assistant commissioner, in appeal, reduced .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 13 1968 (HC)

B.F. Varghese (No. 1) Vs. Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax

Court : Kerala

Reported in : [1969]72ITR724(Ker)

isaac, j.1. this is a reference made by the kerala agricultural income-tax appellate tribunal under section 60(3) of the agricultural income-tax act, 1950, as directed by this court on the application of the assessee. the question referred is :'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances ..... of the case, the imposition of a penalty of rs. 1,000 for default in the payment of the tax assessed for the year 1961-62 as per the assessment order of the agricultural income-tax ..... officer dated january 21, 1965, which was act aside in appeal by the appellate assistant commissioner can be sustained ?'2. the assessee was assessed to agricultural income-tax for the year 1961-62 by the agricultural income-tax officer as per his order dated january 22, 1965. he .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 18 1968 (HC)

K.S. Kannan Kunhi Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Kerala

Reported in : [1969]72ITR757(Ker)

..... undisclosed sources, the assessee contended that the said amount came from past remittances from ceylon out of the earnings of the family and from savings from agricultural property. the above explanation was rejected by the income-tax officer; and his finding was affirmed both by the appellate assistant commissioner and the appellate tribunal. the appellate assistant commissioner, however, held that the sum of ..... and circumstances of the case, or it rejects the explanation without stating any grounds whatsoever, or upon a view of facts which could not reasonably be entertained by any person acting judicially, the case would fall within the principle laid down by the supreme court in mehta parikh & co.'s case, and the finding of the tribunal would not be valid .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //