Court : Kerala
Reported in : [1999]238ITR551(Ker)
J.B. Koshy, J.1. These income-tax reference cases relate to the assessment years 1985-86 and 1986-87. The reference applications under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, were filed by the Commissioner of Income-tax seeking reference of three common questions arising out of the consolidated order of the Tribunal for the above two years. The Tribunal was of the opinion that 'as the main issue involved is whether the assessee is entitled to get the benefit under Section 80HHC on the exports made through export houses', only one question as refrained by it need be referred and the following question was referred for opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the asses-see being a processor and having exported its goods through export houses is entitled to the benefit under Section 80HHC of the Income-tax Act, 1961, without producing the disclaimer certificate from the export house ?'2. Dissatisfied by the same, the Revenue filed two original petitions, v...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : (1981)20CTR(Ker)357; [1981]128ITR694(Ker)
Balakrishna Eradi, C.J.1. These two references, involving a common question of law, have been made to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench (hereinafter called 'the Tribunal'), under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (for short ' the Act '), at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Kerala. They arise out of assessments made against the same assessee, a limited company, for the years 1971-72 and 1973-74.2. I.T.R. No. 14 of 1976:For the year 1971-72, the company was assessed on a total income of Rs. 24,74,230. In the course of the accounting year the assessee had made donations amounting to Rs. 50,000. These donations were eligible for deduction under Section 80G of the Act to the extent of 50% of the sums donated. The assessee had been allowed such deduction while computing the taxable income for I.T. assessment purpose and the assessee's income mentioned above had been arrived at after such deduction. 3. For the purpose of assessment to surtax under...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : (1998)149CTR(Ker)376
J. B. Koshy, J.:These IT reference cases related to the assessment years 1985-86 and 1986-87. The reference applications under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax seeking reference of three common questions arising out of the consolidated order of the Tribunal for above two years. The Tribunal was of opinion that 'as the main issue involved is whether the assessee is entitled to get the benefit under section 80HHC on the exports made through export houses' only one question as reframed by it need be referred and the following question was referred for opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee being a processor and having exported its goods through export houses is entitled to the benefit under section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961, without producing the disclaimer certificate from the export house ?'Dissatisfied by the same, revenue filed two original petitions, viz. O.P. Nos. 20497 of 1997...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : (1988)68CTR(Ker)189; [1988]170ITR197(Ker)
T. Kochu Thommen, J. 1. The following two questions have been, at the instance of the assessee, referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is right in holding that the gross interim dividend declared by M/s. Nirlon Synthetic Fibres & Chemicals Ltd., Bombay, before the valuation date, i.e., on March 25, 1975, but encashed alter the valuation date, was an asset includible in the net wealth of the assessee for the assessment year 1974-75 ?2. If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the grossdividend and not the net dividend, i.e., interim dividend declared less tax deducted at source, is to be included as the value of the asset in the net wealth of the assessee for the assessment year 1975-76 ?'2. The assessee held shares in M/s. Nirlon Synthetic Fibres & Chemicals Ltd., Bombay. In th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1965Ker146; [1964]51ITR47(Ker)
M.S. Menon, C.J. 1. This is a reference fey the income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras Bench, under Section 66 (1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, The assessment year concerned is 1960-61; and the accounting period, the twelve months ended 29-2-1960, The question referred is:'Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessee company is entitled to a deduction of Rs. 12,873/- being the wealth tax paid during the account year ended 29-2-1960, against the profits and gains of its business for the assessment year 1960-61 under Section 10 (2) (xv) of the Indian Income-tax Act'?2. The liability to pay wealth tax arises from the Wealth Tax Act, 1957. The substantive provisions of that Act are Sections 3 to 7. Of these, Section 3 is the charging section, it follows closely the language adopted for the charge of income-tax in Section 3 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and reads as follows:'Subject to the other provisions contained in this Act, there shall be charged for eve...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH FRIDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF AUGUST 2013 1ST BHADRA, 1935 WP(C).No. 20745 of 2013 (P) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------- 1. DR. GEORGE MATHEW, AGED 6 YEARS S/O.LATE P.K.MATHEW, A-402, KAJANJANGA APARTMENTS PALARIVATTOM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.2. SOJI GEORGE, AGED 5 YEARS W/O.DR.GEORGE MATHEW, A-402, KAJANJANGA APARTMENTS PALARIVATTOM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.ALIAS M.CHERIAN RESPONDENT(S): ----------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD ERNAKULAM PIN 68.030.2. THE SPEICIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND ACQUISITION) NATIONAL HIGHWAY NO.3, VYTTILA, ERNAKULAM PIN 68.019.3. KOCHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION, VYTTILA, ERNAKULAM PIN 68.019 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.4. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) C.R BUILDING, IS PRESS ROAD, ERNAKULAM PIN 68.018. R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SOBHA ANNAMMA EAPEN. R BY SRI.K.JAJU BABU,SC,KOCHI METRO RAIL LTD ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : [2000]244ITR177(Ker)
Arijit Pasayat, C.J. 1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following questions have been referred under Section 18 of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 (in short 'the Act'), read with Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the I. T. Act'), by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench (in short 'the Tribunal') :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case,-- (i) the Tribunal is right in law in holding that unless the total income is assessed to tax, there can arise no liability under the provisions of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, (ii) is the assessment under the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act wrong and against law ?' 2. The factual position as set out in the statement of case is as follows: The assessee, Taiyo Gyogyo Kabushiki Kaisha, is a multi-national company of Japan with diverse business interests ranging from shipping to sugar refining. During the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1979-80, the assesse...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : (2000)162CTR(Ker)394
S. Sankarasubban, J.These Income Tax references relate to the assessment years 1988-89 and 1989-90 arise out of ITA Nos. 666 and 667/Coch/1993. The questions of law referred for the opinion of this court are as follows :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal right in law and fact in holding-(i) the trust cannot be treated as an Association of persons(ii) the beneficiaries are to be treated as individuals(iii) they are not liable to deduct tax at source as per section 194A of the Income Tax Act (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case (the trust being neither an 'individual' nor an HUF, which alone are exempt from the provisions of section 194(A) the levy of interest is unjustified (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case-(i) should the tests of an Association of persons or Association of persons be satisfied in order to assess trustees as Association of persons or Association of persons (ii) do not the t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : (1988)68CTR(Ker)165; [1988]172ITR597(Ker)
T. Kochu Thommen, J. 1. The following questions have been, at the instance of the assessee, referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the valuation of the shares held by the assessee in Collis Line P. Ltd. should be made by applyingRule 1D of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957, for the assessment years 1967-68to 1974-75? (2) Whether the Tribunal was justified, for the assessment years 1967-68 to 1,974-75, in holding that in applying Rule 1D of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957, it is only the value of the ships that appear in the balance-sheet of the company that should be taken into account and not the written down value of these ships adopted for the purpose of income-tax assessment of Collis Line P. Ltd. ?' 2. Question No. (1) has to be, in the light of the decision of this court in CWT v. Mamman Varghese : [1983]139ITR351(Ker) , answered in the affirmative, that i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : [2001]247ITR395(Ker)
S. Sankarasubban, J. 1. Both these writ appeals are filed against the judgment in O. P. No. 10606 of 1985 (see : [1991]189ITR534(Ker) ), While W. A. No. 829 of 1990 is filed by the respondents in the original petition, the other writ appeal, W. A. No. 868 of 1990 is filed by the petitioner in the original petition. 2. The petitioner in the original petition. O. P. No. 10606 of 1985 is one T. K. Shahal Hassan Musaliar. He is one of the sons and legal representatives of the late A. Thangal Kunju Musaliar. Thangal Kunju Musaliar died on February 19, 1966. He was as assessee under the Travancore Income-tax Act and, on its repeal, under the Indian Income-tax Act. The income-tax liabilities of the late Thangal Kunju Musaliar for the assessment years 1119 and 1120 M. E. were settled as per proceedings of the Ministry of Finance, Government of India, by order No. 74 (29)II/57, dated September 25, 1957 and for the assessment years 1950-51 to 1956-57 by the Central Board of Revenue. As per the t...
Tag this Judgment!