Court : Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA FRIDAY, THE29H DAY OF MAY20158TH JYAISHTA, 1937 WP(C).No. 6625 of 2013 (C) --------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------- PROF. K.K. GEORGE (DR.) KOLANJIYIL HOUSE, AISWARYA LANE, THOTTAKATTUKARA P.O ALUVA - 683 108, RETIRED AS PROFESSOR AND DIRECTOR SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY. BY ADVS.SMT.M.R.SREELATHA SRI.K.P.SUDHEER RESPONDENT(S): -------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.2. COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY KOCHI - 682 022, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.3. VICE CHANCELLOR, COCHIN UNIVERSTIY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY KOCHI - 682 022.4. FINANCE OFFICER, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY KOCHI - 682 022.5. DEPUTY DIRECTOR, LOCAL FUND AUDIT, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, KOCHI - 682 022. R2-R5 BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Amritsar
Reported in : (1983)5ITD43(Asr.)
1. Involving the same point, these three wealth-tax appeals of the revenue for the assessment years 1974-75to 1976-77 are conveniently considered together and disposed of by a common order.2. The facts relevant to these appeals are briefly stated. The assessee in all the three assessment years is having the status of a HUF and the relevant valuation dates were 31-3-1974, 31-3-1975 and 31-3-1976. It Appeal dismissed as sets included an investment in Post Office 12-Year National Defence Certificates of the value of Rs. 70,000 in the first two assessment years and Rs. 62,000 in the third assessment year. As found by the WTO, these certificates were in the joint names of the assessee and his wife and these were purchased prior to 1-3-1970. Being acquired in the names of two adults, the maximum amount permitted to be invested in such a case for the purpose of Section 5(1)(xvi) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ('the Act'), was Rs. 70,000 and this fact is noted in the AAC' s combined order for th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2000)74ITD190(Mum.)
1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the learned CIT dated 19th January, 1982, passed under s. 263 of the IT Act, 1961 (the Act), for the asst. yr. 1977-78.2. In the first ground, the assessee has challenged the validity of the proceedings initiated under s. 263 and has accordingly disputed the order under s. 263. However, this ground is not pressed at the time of the hearing and hence the same is rejected as such.3. In the second ground, the assessee is aggrieved against the rejection of its claim to be an "industrial company". For the year under consideration, assessee returned an income of Rs. 9,05,910 which was assessed at Rs. 14,61,600. Assessee's claim to be taxed at concessional rate of tax on the ground of its being an industrial company was accepted by the AO and hence was taxed accordingly. On perusal of assessment records, CIT observed that the assessee did not satisfy the conditions for being charged at the rate of tax applicable to industrial co...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Agra
Reported in : (2004)83TTJAgra809
1. The appeals of the assessee for A.Y. 94-95, 95-96, 96-97, 97-98 and 99-2000 are directed against the consolidated order passed by CIT(A)-II, Agra on 30.09.2002. The appeal of the Department pertains to A.Y. 1998-99 is directed against the order passed by CIT(A)-I, Agra dated 20.12.2001.2. Since the sum and substance of grounds of appeals are similar and pertain to assessee M/s. S.E. Investment Limited, therefore, all the appeals are disposed of by this composite order.3. First we take up the appeals filed by the assessee company for A.Ys.1994-95 to 1999-2000 except for the A.Y. 1998-99.4. In all the appeals ground No. 4 has not been pressed during course of hearing before us and ground No. 5 and 6 are general in nature, therefore, the same are rejected and dismissed.5. Ground No. 1, 2, & 3 for all the A.Ys. from A.Y. 1994-95 to 99-2000 except for A.Y. 1998-99 are as under: ITA Nos. 15, 16, 17, 18, & 19 - Asstt. Years: 1994-95, 95-96, 96-97, 97-98, & 99-2000 "1. Because ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2007)106ITD193(Mum.)
1. This Special Bench has been constituted by the Hon'ble President of the Tribunal under Section 255(3) of the IT Act, 1961, to decide the following issue: Whether, on facts and in law, the assessee, while computing book profits under Section 115JA of the IT Act, 1961, is entitled to reduce the net profit as per P&L a/c by- (i) the profits eligible for deduction under Section 80HHC actually computed under Clauses (a), (b) or (c) of Sub-section (3) of Sub-section (3A) as the case may be (ii) the profits eligible for deduction under Section 80HHC computed with reference to book profits (after adjustments) in the manner specified in Sub-section (3) or Sub-section (3A)of Section 80HHC.2. The appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No. 2711/Mum/2003 in the case of M/s Syncom Formulations (I)(P) Ltd., is the basis for constituting this Special Bench. The said appeal was placed before Tribunal Mumbai 'H' Bench for hearing. In the course of hearing, the Bench found that the computation of ded...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1985KAR955; [1985]152ITR618(KAR); [1985]152ITR618(Karn)
Puttaswamy, J.1. On a reference made by one of us (Puttaswamy j.), this case has been posted before us for disposal. 2. One Y. D. Nanje Gowda of Belur down, Hassan District, who is the petitioner before us, is the karta of a Hindu Undivided Family ('HUF') consisting of himself, his wife and several other members and is an assessee under the W.T. Act of 1957 (Central Act No. 27 of 1957) ('the Act'), on the file of the First Wealth-tax Officer, Hassan ('WTO'). The wife of the petitioner had her own yet wealth exceeding Rs. 1,00,000 during the relevant assessment year. 3. For the assessment year 1977-78, the petitioner in the status of an HUF filed a return under the Act before the WTO, who by his order dated September 20, 1977, (exhibit-A) completed the assessment as on March 31, 1977, at Rs. 5,83,100 and levied tax at the rates chargeable thereto under the Act. On the determination of net wealth made by the WTO, the petitioner is not aggrieved. But, he is only aggrieved by the higher ra...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2009[15]STR17; [2009]22STT123; (2009)25VST97(MP)
R.S. Garg, J.1. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioners are seeking the following reliefs:(a) That, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to declare Section 67 in its present form vis-a-vis the petitioner's activity of service, ultra vires the Constitution, void and inoperative.(b) That, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to declare circular dated 9-7-2001 as ultra vires the Constitution and law and further declare the same as void and inoperative.(c) That, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to declare by an appropriate writ that the petitioner's service activity does not attract the provision of service tax and accordingly forbear the respondents from subjecting the petitioner's activity to levy, assessment and collection of service tax.(d) That, without prejudice to the aforesaid, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to declare that the value of the goods (raw-materials) comprised of any service such as photography paper and chemicals etc. is not ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 2004(3)KLT85; [2006]144STC442(Ker)
N.K. Sodhi, C.J. 1. This Writ Appeal by the State of Kerala and others is directed against the judgment dated January 7, 2004 passed by the learned Single Judge allowing O.P.No.8563 of 2003 filed by the respondent herein challenging the order dated 8.6.2003 by which its application for the grant of eligibility certificate for sales tax exemption had been rejected. Facts necessary for the disposal of the appeal which lie in a narrow compass may first be noticed.2. The respondent, a private Company with unlimited liability (hereinafter referred to as 'the Company'), had set up an industrial unit at the Industrial Development Area at Kanjikode in Palakkad District and it commenced commercial production of soft drinks in March, 2001. It is an industrial unit under the large and medium category. It had set up the unit with its own fund and, therefore, is a self-financed unit within the meaning of the Government notification SRO No. 1092 of 1999. It applied to the Director of Industries and ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
[email protected].(C)No.12859 of 2020 etc. REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.11 OF2022 [Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.12859 of 2020]. Kerala State Beverages Manufacturing & Marketing Corporation Ltd. ...Appellant v. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1(1) ...Respondent W I T H CIVIL APPEAL No.12 OF2022 [Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.12162 of 2020]. CIVIL APPEAL No.13 OF2022 [Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.12768 of 2020]. AND CIVIL APPEAL No.14 OF2022 [Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.14150 of 2020]. JUDGMENT R. SUBHASH REDDY, J.1. Leave granted.2. These appeals are preferred, by the Stateowned Undertaking, Kerala State Beverages Manufacturing & Marketing Corporation Ltd., a 1 [email protected].(C)No.12859 of 2020 etc. company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, engaged in the wholesale and retail trade of beverages, aggrieved by the common judgment and order dated 30.04.2020 passed in I.T.A. No.135; 146 and 313 of 2019 by the High Court of K...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1985)(21)ELT757TriDel
1. This appeal of M/s. Vazir Sultan Tobacco Company Limited (hereafter referred to as the Appellants) is being heard by the present Larger Special Bench constituted under the orders of the President. The Bench had also received an application from M/s. Jay Engineering Works Limited the appellants in Appeal No. ED (SB) (T) 331/79-B (hereafter referred to as the Intervener), to be joined as an Intervener at the hearing of the appeal of M/s. Vazir Sultan Tobacco Company Limited. The Bench agreed to the request of M/s. Jay Engineering Works Limited. We have accordingly heard the representatives of the aforesaid two parties. We have also heard Shri N. V. Raghavan Iyer for the respondent Collector (hereafter referred to as the Respondent).2. On behalf of the appellants, their learned Advocate, Shri T.M.Ansari, referred briefly to the facts of their case, which are not in dispute. The goods in this case were cigarettes, which were cleared between 1-3-1978 and 12-3-1978 The question is whethe...
Tag this Judgment!