Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Court: kerala Year: 1968 Page 1 of about 52 results (0.037 seconds)

Sep 13 1968 (HC)

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

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Sep-13-1968

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. ..... impression gathered by the enquiry or inspection as laid down in the decision of the high court of kerala in george oommen v. commissioner of income-tax, [1964] 52 i.t.r. 933. the appellate assistant commissioner has found that no inspection or enquiry as stated in the assessment order had ..... candies based on the estimate for the previous year. the appellant's learned representative strenuously urges that the estimate was made by the agricultural income-tax officer on the basis of certain inspections and enquiries and that no such inspection or enquiry was conducted and that no estimate could be made ..... 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 ..... yield at 18 candies as was done for the previous assessment. accordingly, he set aside the order of assessment and remitted the case to the income-tax officer for making a fresh assessment. the assessee filed an appeal before the appellate tribunal claiming that his books of account relating to the pepper .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 20 1968 (HC)

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

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Aug-20-1968

Reported in : AIR1969Ker238

..... referred are also the same, and they read as follows;--1. whether in the circumstances of the case the expenses for preparation of the agrl. income-tax returns are expenses allowable in determining the assessable income under the agri. income-tax act.2. whether in the circumstances of the case, the floating charge on the estates in kerala will come under 'mortgage or other capital charge ..... ' in section 5 (f) of the agrl. 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 of it becomes irrecoverable ..... counsel submitted that the above clause corresponds to cl. (xv) of section 10 (2) of the indian income-tax act, 1922 and to section 37 of the income-tax act, 1961. we shall also read the relevant part of section 10 of the 1922 act:--'10. business.--(1) the tax shall be payable by an assessee under the head 'profits and gains of business, profession or vocation' in ..... ) the bombay high court held that the fees paid by an assesses to his income-tax consultant in connection with proceedings before the income-tax officer were not allowable under section 19 (2) (xv) of the indian income-tax act. 1922. similarly the allahabad high court held in j. k. cotton . v. commissioner of income-tax. : [1962]46itr970(all) that the fees paid by an assessee to chartered .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 01 1968 (HC)

A. Balakrishna Menon and anr. Vs. Inspecting Asst. Commr. of Agricultu ...

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jan-01-1968

Reported in : AIR1969Ker1

..... legal representatives in management of the properties of deceased person could represent the estate of the deceased for the pur-pose of reassessment proceedings under section 34 of the indian income-tax act, 1922. the court said;'the definition of a legal representative under section 2(11) of the code of civil procedure also runs on the same lines: it means a person ..... pleadings therein before us. therefore, we are unable to cons icier this contention.mathew, j.14. the charging provision in the agricultural income-tax act, 1950, hereinafter referred to as 'the act', reads:'3 (1). agricultural income-tax at the rate or rates specified in the schedule to this act shall, be charged for each financial year in accordance with and subject to the provisions of this ..... raman nayar, j.1. the question is whether the tax due under the provisions of the (kerala) agricultural income-tax act, 1950 (for short, the act) in respect of income derived by a sthanamdar from stha-nam property is, after his death, leviable from the person or persons on whom the property has devolved. the tax, of nearly rs. 85,000, assessed in this case was in ..... respect of income derived during the period, 1-11-1958 to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 08 1968 (HC)

Nelliyil Ummer Kutty Vs. State of Kerala and anr.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Oct-08-1968

Reported in : [1970]77ITR489(Ker)

..... that the wakf in question is not for wholly religious or charitable purpose and is not entitled to exemption under section 4(3) of the agricultural income-tax act, 1950. the tribunal recorded that for the years in question the accounts did not show that a sum of one anna in the rupee had ..... wholly for a charitable purpose, and therefore not entitled to exemption under section 15b read with section 4(3)(i) of the income-tax act, 1922. kanga in his law and practice of income-tax (1958 ed., page 218) has noticed with reference to the authorities, that even before the amendment of the last paragraph of ..... 1941] 9 i.t.r. 375 (mad.). this decision noticed that the words in the last clause of section 4(3)(i) of the income-tax act, denying exemption to income of a private religious trust which does not enure for the benefit of the public, were added by the amendment made in 1939, and observed ..... not enure for the benefit of the public does not qualify for the exemption. such a clear provision is absent in section 4 of the agricultural income-tax act. by the explanation to the said section the requirement of general public utility is postulated only with reference to a charitable, but not a religious, ..... sub-section (3) of section 4 of the indian income-tax act, 1922, by the addition of the words excluding private religious trusts from the operation of the sub-section, courts held that some of the so- .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 1968 (HC)

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

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Aug-30-1968

Reported in : [1970]76ITR10(Ker)

..... the 'kanadukathan bank' which was carrying on business in british india, can be assessed under section 42 of the indian income-tax act, 1922, as agent of the 'pudukottai bank', which was carrying on business in an indian state in respect of the income from six loans given by the pudukottai bank to certain branches of the kanadukathan bank in burma. their lordships-examined ..... 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 that there is nothing in the agreement dated 19th ..... position.11. the learned counsel for the assessee referred us to the following passage appearing in the judgment of the privy council in bank of chettinad ltd. v. commissioner of income-tax, [1940] 8 i.t.r. 522 (p.c.):'their lordships think it necessary once more to protest against the suggestion that in revenue cases 'the substance of the matter' may ..... transaction is embodied in a document, depends upon the meaning and effect of that document or the substance of the transaction in article 63 (pages 49 to 51), simon's income-tax, second edition, volume 1. in inland revenue commissioners v. wesleyan and general assurance society, [1948] 16 i.t.r. (suppl.) 101, 103 viscount simon stated the principles in these words .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 18 1968 (HC)

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

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Sep-18-1968

Reported in : [1969]72ITR757(Ker)

..... tribunal, madras bench, under section 66(2) of the indian income-tax, act, 1922, 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 addition of rs. 60,813 or any portion thereof as the income of the assessee-family from undisclosed sources during the previous year ..... discarded it in relation to a sum of rs. 30,000.'11. we shall now examine the decision in govindarajulu mudaliar v. commissioner of income-tax. in that case, the income-tax officer found that the income of the assessee, chargeable to tax, was rs. 54,600 for the assessment year 1945-46, rs. 27,500 for the year 1946-47 and rs. 54,500 for ..... the high denomination bank notes (demonetisation) ordinance, 1946, promulgated on 12th january, 1946. for the assessment year 1947-48, for which the accounting year was the calendar year 1946, the income-tax officer called upon the assessee to explain the possession of these 61 high denomination notes. the assessee submitted that they were received by him in the course of his business ..... 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 rs. 3,000 invested .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 05 1968 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Kerala, Ernakulam Vs. Travancore Sugars an ...

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Apr-05-1968

Reported in : AIR1969Ker196

..... supreme court was whether those amounts were allowable deductions. subba rao, j., as he then was, observed that under section 10(1) of the income-tax act, tax shall be payable by an assessee under the head 'profits and gams of business' in respect of profits and gains of any business carried on ..... is the business profits and not statutory profits. he further observed that the real profits of a businessman under section 10(1) of the income-tax act cannot obviously include the amounts returned by him by way of rebate to the consumers under statutory compulsion and that it is as if he ..... they reached the assessee by an overriding title and (2) whether the amount is an allowable deduction under section 10(2)(xv) of the income-tax act.6. the supreme court has held that the payment of the amount was not towards purchase price because the unpaid purchase price was neither ..... out of the real profits of the company. there is we must remember the distinction between apparent profit and real profit. what is taxed under the income-tax act is only the profits of the company calculated on commercial the privy council case of indian radio and cable communications co. ltd ..... and exclusively incurred for the purpose of the business and was an admissible deduction under section 10(2)(xv) of the income-tax act.12. in poona electric supply co. ltd. v. commissioner of income-tax, bombay, : [1965]57itr521(sc) the company carried on the business of distribution of electricity under a licence issued .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 25 1968 (HC)

United Mercantile Co. (P) Ltd., Calicut Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax ...

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jul-25-1968

Reported in : AIR1969Ker227

..... and that, therefore, it would amount to a capital expenditure under section 58-k (1) of the income-tax act, 1922, corresponding to rule 14 (1) of the 4th schedule, part a of the income-tax act, 1961.' the assessee filed an appeal from the order of the income-tax officer first before the appellate assistant commissioner and then before the appellate tribunal, both without success; and it ..... come within the category of capital expenditure; (ii) rule 14 (1) of part a of the 4th schedule to the 1961 act which corresponded to section 58-k (1) of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as the 1922 act) characterised the amount transferred by an employer to maintain a provident fund for the benefit of the employees in trust for the ..... , was a capital expenditure within the meaning of rule 14 (1) of part a of the 4th schedule of income-tax act, 1961, and was, therefore, not a permissible deduction under section 37(1) of the act'.2. the appellate tribunal has furnished a very clear statement of the case; and it is enough, if we quote paragraphs 2 and 3 of that statement ..... isaac, j. 1. this is a reference bythe madras bench of the income-tax appellate tribunal under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 1961 act) on the application of the assessee. the question referred is:'whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appellate tribunal was right in law in holding .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 29 1968 (HC)

income Tax Officer, Kottayam Vs. R.M. Subramania Iyer S/O Ramasubha Iy ...

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Oct-29-1968

Reported in : AIR1970Ker14; [1970]77ITR453(Ker)

..... respondent seeking to quash a notice ext. p-1 purported to he under section 147 of the income-tax act, 1961 as well as a further notice ext. p-5 under section 143(2) of the same act. various contentions were raised before the learned single judge and had been considered by the single judge ..... pertain to the question as to whether a notice under section 147 can and should be issued; matters well within the jurisdiction and competence of the income-tax officer to decide.3. the assessee has filed a return in pursuance of the notice and has taken his objections as evidenced by ext. p-4 ..... assistant commissioner had 'instead of treating the assessment order as a nullity and having the same set aside, illegally remanded the case back to the income-tax officer to save limitation'. it would be noticed that at its highest, this ground can mean that the result of the remand order was to attempt ..... move the high court under article 226 and contend that a notice issued against him is barred by time. that is a matter which the income-tax authorities must consider on the merits in the light of the relevant evidence.apart from this aspect of the matter however, the plea of limitation ..... respondent no. 1 himself. the jurisdiction conferred on the high court under article 226 is not intended to supersede the jurisdiction and authority of the income tax officers to deal with the merits of all the contentions that the assessees may raise before them, and so it would be entirely inappropriate to permit .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 29 1968 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. P.P. Johny and anr.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jul-29-1968

Reported in : [1969]73ITR459(Ker)

..... is to be charged in the hands of one person or another can certainly be determined under section 3 and other relevant provisions of the income-tax act. section 3 is clear enough to indicate that the same income cannot be charged repeatedly in the hands of different persons or in the hands of the same person. in fact, when examining this argument advanced ..... by learned counsel for the opposite party, we put a question whether he could point out any specific provision in the income-tax act under which there was a bar to the income of one individual for one previous year being repeatedly assessed and charged to tax. he was unable to point out any and we had to fall back on section 3 of the ..... persons ' for the purpose of assessment was not right. the act applicable in the instant case is the indian income-tax act, 1922. the main charging section in that act is section 3, it is in the following terms :' where any central act enacts that income-tax shall be charged for any year at any rate or rates tax at that rate or those rates shall be charged for ..... individually under one of the alternatives provided under section 3 of the income-tax act. this assertion of the petitioners is admitted by the opposite party, the income-tax officer, in the counter-affidavit filed on his behalf. the income having once been charged to tax, it is urged that it could not be charged to tax again in the hands of the association. learned counsel for the .....

Tag this Judgment!

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