Court : Kerala
Reported in : (2002)176CTR(Ker)268; [2002]258ITR679(Ker)
B.N. Srikrishna, C.J. 1. This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India impugns the constitutional validity of Service Tax levied under the Finance Act, 1998 (2 of 1998) on taxable service rendered by practising Chartered Accountants.2. The petitioner is an Association of Chartered Accountants in Kerala registered under the Travancore Cochin Charitable Societies Act, which impugns the service tax levied on its members by reason of Sections 64 to 96 of the Finance Act, 1994, (32 of 1994), as amended by Finance Act, 1998 (2 of 1998).Background of the levy : As an off-shot of the recommendations of the Dr. Raja Chelliah Committee in 1990, for the first time, in the Union Budget for 1994-95, a levy of service tax on service relating to three categories, ie., stock brokers, general insurers and telephone services was imposed. The Raja Chelliah Committee had observed that indirect tax at the Central level should be broadly neutral in relation to production and consumption ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1966Ker46
ORDERP. Govindan Nair, J. 1. The petitioners in these writ applications, challenge the constitutional validity of the Luxury Tax on Tobacco (Validation) Act, 1964, (Act 9 of 1904). Actually, this is a later development in almost all of these writ applications. At the time they were filed, Act 9 of 1964 referred to above was not in the statute book. The petitions originally contained only the prayer for a direction to refund licence fees collected from the petitioners for granting the various classes of licences as envisaged by the two enactments; the Travancore Tobacco Act (1 of 1087) and the Cochin Tobacco Act (VII of 1084) and the Rules framed thereunder. This collection itself was once challenged in certain writ applications moved before this Court. The point then taken was that by virtue of Section 13(2) of the Finance Acl 1950 (Act 25 of 1950), and the extension of the Central Excises and Salt Act 1944 to the Travancore-Cochin State from 1950, the two enactments, the Travancorc To...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 1981(8)ELT515(Ker)
Viswanatha Iyer, J.1. All these original petition raise a common question, namely, whether the tariff value for plywood tea-chest refixed with effect from 34-1979 by Notification No. 8 of 1979, dated 3-1-1979 issued under Section 3(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 is valid and enforceable against the petitioners. The petitioners are manufacturers of plywood of different descriptions in small scale industrial units. Plywood and plywood tea-chests are excisable goods included in item.l6B in Schedule of the Act. Plywood for tea-chest when cut to size in panels or shooks and packed in sets is dutiable at 10% ad valorem. By Section 3(2) of the Act a power is delegated to the Central Government to fix by notification tariff values for excisable goods dutiable ad valorem. In exercise of that power from time to time the Government used to fix tariff value for many excisable goods including plywood. By Notification No. 8/79, dated 3-1-1979 the tariff value was refixed by the Governm...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : [1993]202ITR186(Ker)
T.L. Viswanatha Iyer, J. 1. These are references at the instance of the Revenue. The assessee in all these cases is the same, namely, the Kerala Financial Corporation Limited. The question referred is whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to deduction under Section 36(1)(viii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on the total income before making any deduction under Section 36(1)(viii) ?2. This question is really concluded against the Revenue by the decisions in the assessee's own cases in I.T.R. Nos. 33 and 34 of 1985, and I.T.R. No. 68 of 1989, pertaining to the assessment years 1977-78, 1978-79 and 1979-80 respectively. In answering those references, this court had followed the decision in Kerala State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. v. CIT : [1989]180ITR323(Ker) as also the decision in I.T.R. Nos. 205 to 208 of 1984 (subsequently reported in CIT v. Kerala State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. (No. 2) : [1990]182ITR67(Ker) ). Th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : (1992)110CTR(Ker)261; [1992]195ITR412(Ker)
K. P. RADHAKRISHNA MENON J., - The Commissioner of Wealth-tax is before us.The question referred to us for our opinion reads :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in directing the Wealth-tax Officer to value the shares held by the assessee by allowing the provision for taxation as a liability without deducting the advance tax payment ?'There is no need to state the facts because the answer to the question depends purely upon the construction of the relevant rule. However, we would refer to the relevant parts of the order from which the above question arises and pertaining to the issue. They read :'... But, we find that this very question' was considered by the Bombay High Court in a very recent decision in the case of CWT v. Pratap Bhogilal : [1987]167ITR501(Bom) , wherein the High Court had considered all the High Court decision on this point and have in favour of the assessee. Since the High Court had considered all the d...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : [1990]182ITR464(Ker)
Varghese Kalliath, J. 1. At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Cochin, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, has referred the following questions of law for the decision of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case- (i) the assesses is entitled to depreciation at the rate of 40% ? (ii) the claim on the basis of a rule that came into force on July 24, 1980, for the assessment year 1980-81 is not a debatable issue ? (iii) the learned Tribunal is right in allowing the application of the assessee under Section 154 of the Income-tax Act ?' 2. The assessee is a bus operator. While completing the assessment, depreciation at the rate of 30% was allowed by the Income-tax Officer. The assessment was for the year 1980-81. The assessee filed an application under Section 154 of the Income-tax Act and claimed depreciation at the rate of 40%. The Income-tax Officer did not allow it. The assessee claimed 40% depreciation on the basis of the amendme...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : I(2006)ACC646; 2006(1)KLT188
Rajeev Gupta, C.J.1. The Regional Transport Officer, Idukki, the respondent in the Original Petition, is the appellant before us in this Writ Appeal, filed against the judgment dated 6.4.2001 passed in O.P. No. 8536/2001.2. The respondent herein who was the petitioner in the Original Petition filed the Original Petition, for the following reliefs:--i) to quash Ext. P4 issued by the respondent by the issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order;ii) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the respondent to issue No Objection Certificate (clearance certificate) in respect of KEH.900 as requested in Ext.P3, forthwith;iii) to issue an interim direction directing the respondent to issue No Objection Certificate (clearance certificate) in respect of KEH.900, forthwith, pending disposal of the Original Petition;iv) to issue any other appropriate writ, direction or order which this Honourable Court deem fit in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : [1962]44ITR828(Ker)
M.S. MENON J. - This is a reference by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras Bench 'A', under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The question referred is :'Whether 60% of the income of the assessee applied to the development of Arya Vaidyasala and the conduct of the hospital and school aforesaid is not exempt under section 4(3)(i) having regard to clause (b) of the proviso to that sub-section ?'Section 4 deals with the application of the Act. Sub-section (3) thereof directs that any income, profits or gains falling within the classes specified therein shall not be included in the total income of the person receiving them. The class of income specified in clause (i) of sub-section (3) is :'... any income derived from property held under trust or other legal obligation wholly for religious or charitable purposes, in so far as such income is applied or accumulated for application to such religious or charitable purposes as relate to anything done within the taxable terr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : II(2001)ACC559
P.K. Balasubramanyan, J.1. These Original Petitions challenge the competence of the authorities under the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act to tax the vehicles owned by the petitioner and operated exclusively within the area of the Cochin Port Trust. These vehicles are essentially trailer chassises having four wheels to the rear and no wheels in front and intended to be loaded with containers disembarked for ships to be conveyed to e godowns located in the wharf itself. The period relevant for these Original Petitions is the period prior to 1987. In the year 1987 these vehicles were registered under the Motor Vehicles Act and become exigible to tax subject of course to seeking exemption under S.5 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act. In these Original Petitions we are not concerned with the period subsequent to the registration of these vehicles in the year 1987.2. According to the petitioner these are imported trailer chassises intended only for mounting the unloaded containers ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : (1996)132CTR(Ker)193; [1996]221ITR117(Ker)
V.V. Kamat, J.1. This is a petition by the Department having a grievance against the order (annexure 'C') dated December 10, 1993, of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench.2. The year in question is 1985-86. The assessee is undisputedly a company engaged in the manufacture of hosiery and handloom goods. During the accounting year in question, a part: of its own weaving shed was parted with to the Civil Supplies Corporation for storage of rice ona rental of Rs. 77,700 in the context. The Income-tax Officer by an order (annexure 'A') dated March 2, 1987, completed the assessment accepting the said amount of income of Rs. 77,700 as income derived from letting out the building under the head 'Business income'.3. This completed assessment under the provisions of Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was opened by the Commissioner of Income-tax by order (annexure 'B'), directing the Income-tax Officer to assess the amount in question not as 'business income', but as 'income from...
Tag this Judgment!