Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Court: kerala Year: 1985 Page 1 of about 55 results (0.031 seconds)

Sep 11 1985 (HC)

Good Hope Agencies (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Agricultural Income-t ...

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Sep-11-1985

Reported in : [1986]162ITR300(Ker)

..... (i) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the lease rent paid by the applicant is an allowable deduction under section 5(j) of the agrl. income-tax act ? (ii) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the commissioner was justified in holding that no rent was payable by the assessee after april 1, 1970 ..... found that that was a sum with respect to which the assessee was entitled to deduction under section 5(j) of the agricultural income-tax act, 1950, which reads as follows ;' 5. computation of agricultural income.--the agricultural income of a person shall be computed after making the following deductions, namely :--... (j) any expenditure (not being in the nature of capital expenditure or personal ..... capital expenditure and which was not an expenditure deductible under section 5(j) of the agricultural income-tax act.5. counsel for the revenue drew our attention to the provisions contained in section 5(b) of the agricultural income-tax act, which reads as follows:' 5. computation of agricultural income.--the agricultural income of a person shall be computed after making the following deductions, namely :--... (b) any ..... the landlord or superior landlord, as the case may be, in respect of land, from which the agricultural income is derived. ' 6. according to him, the very fact that deduction was not claimed under section 5(b) of the agricultural income-tax act is indicative of the fact that the payment was not made by way of rent, but only as an .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 28 1985 (HC)

Pullangode Rubber and Produce Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Agricultura ...

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Nov-28-1985

Reported in : [1986]160ITR339(Ker)

..... the expenditure incurred for levelling the football ground was an allowable expenditure in terms of section 5(j) of the kerala agricultural income-tax act, 1950.4. referring to section 37(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, the bombay high court held (at p. 747):'if land has been levelled and could be used as a playground ..... of rs. 3,035.31 relating to cash in transit insurance and cash in safe insurance as items deductible under section 5(j) of the kerala agricultural income-tax act, 1950 ?' 2. question no. 2 which has been referred at the instance of the revenue has, in the light of the decision in i.t. ..... assessee as being incidental to the activities of the assessee company.'5. section 37(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, which was considered in the bombay case is much wider in scope than section 5(j) of the kerala agricultural income-tax act, 1950. section 5(j) reads:'5. (j) any expenditure (not being in the nature ..... of capital expenditure or personal expenses of the assessee) laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of deriving the agricultural income.'6. in order to come within section 5 ..... rs. 9,116.66 and rs. 1,838.66 as levelling expenses to make a football ground was disallowed by the income-tax officer whose decision was confirmed in appeal by both the authorities. relying upon the decision of the bombay high court in teksons p. ltd. v .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 03 1985 (HC)

Peter John Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jul-03-1985

Reported in : [1986]157ITR711(Ker)

..... before which the matter came up for hearing at the first instance. the question of law referred to this court by the income-tax appellate tribunal, cochin bench, under section 256(2) of the income-tax act, 1961, pursuant to the direction by this court in the judgment dated february 28, 1978, in o. p. nos ..... : [1964]53itr151(sc) and ramanathan chettiar v. cit : [1967]63itr458(sc) , the land acquisition interest of rs. 80,253 included by the income-tax officer under section 5(l)(b) of the income-tax act, 1961, in the total income for 1968-69 assessment, accrued de die in ..... commissioner should not have deleted the interest amount in that assessment year. the tribunal for reasons stated in its order upheld the view of the income-tax officer and sustained the assessment for the assessment year 1968-69. it, therefore, dismissed the departmental appeal as well as the cross-objection of ..... similarly included on accrual basis under section 5(l)(b) of the i.t. act, 1961, in the income for the six assessment years from 1962-63 to 1967-68 inclusive, as had already been done by the income-tax officer by his orders dated june 6, 1972, for the 1967-68 and 1969- ..... . 4770 and 4772 of 1975, reads as follows ;' whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, as per the ratio of the supreme court decisions in shamlal narula v. cit .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 28 1985 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kerala Road Lines Corporation

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Oct-28-1985

Reported in : [1986]162ITR669(Ker)

..... other evidence to show that he had received these two sums from seth krishnadas ramdas. on the other hand, ramdas had made a statement, albeit in another proceeding under the income-tax act, to the effect that he did not have the source to make the aforesaid payment and that it was not his habit to make any payment in excess of rs ..... we do not attach any weight to the statement. the position cannot be now improved by remanding the case to the income-tax officer.'8. the tribunal has, in our view, cast the burden wrongly. it overlooked section 68 of the income-tax act, 1961. it erroneously ignored the importance and significance of the statement of the deceased, ramdas.9. the returns submitted by the ..... assessee in regard to the two entries in question had not been accepted by the income-tax officer. the burden was on the assessee to produce reliable evidence in ..... as his witness, then the appellant should be allowed an opportunity to cross-examine such witness in accordance with the provisions of the evidence act. thereafter, on the basis of the available evidence, the income-tax officer should determine whether the entries in the books pertaining to the loans are genuine or not. for this purpose, the assessment for the year 1962-63 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 19 1985 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Indo Marine Agencies (Kerala) Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Dec-19-1985

Reported in : (1986)52CTR(Ker)189; [1986]158ITR604(Ker)

..... is justified in law in holding that expenses incurred by the assessee towards storage and duty are entitled to weighted deduction under section 35b of the income-tax act ? 2. whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there are materials for the tribunal to hold that expenses towards storage ..... that the revenue contended in appeal was that the section was wrongly understood by the appellate assistant commissioner in so far as he disagreed with the income-tax officer. this is what the revenue stated in its appeal :' the appellate assistant commissioner has erred in giving weighted deduction under section 35b for expenses ..... be an allowable deduction, nor would be the local duty paid at new york after discharge.7. the assessee's claim was disallowed by the income-tax officer on a wrong understanding of the law, as is clear from paragraph 5 of his order. this is what he stated :'in view ..... s claim for weighted deduction under section 35b(1)(a) and (b)(iii) for the assessment years 1969-70 and 1971-72 was disallowed by the income-tax officer. it was allowed on appeal by the appellate assistantcommissioner. the revenue appealed to the tribunal against that decision, but without success.3. the relevant section ..... while in transit.......... ' 4. this section was interpreted by this court in itr no. 71 of 1972 in k. e. kesavan & co. v. cit (see appendix p. 608 infra) in the following words (at p. 610);'from the above, it follows that a claim for weighted deduction in respect of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 06 1985 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Travancore Rayons Ltd. and anr.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Nov-06-1985

Reported in : (1986)50CTR(Ker)51; [1987]164ITR134(Ker)

..... . it is clear that the 4th c. f. plant installed in the accounting year cannot be considered as a new industrial undertaking eligible for relief under section 80j of the income-tax act.'the assessment order was under challenge before the appellate assistant commissioner. the appellate assistant commissioner found that inasmuch as the 'c. f. plant no. iv' is capable of being ..... c. f. plant no. iv. since this is a new undertaking established by the assessee in the accounting year, the assessee company claimed relief under section 80j of the income-tax act, for short, the act, calculated at 6% of rs. 1,12,50,113, the capital employed by the company to establish this undertaking.5. the assessing authority, however, rejected the above ..... :'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the income-tax appellate tribunal is right in law in holding that the provision for gratuity made by ..... , j.1. the questions arise out of the same order of the income-tax appellate tribunal, cochin bench, for short, the appellate tribunal (annexure c). the facts are : disposing of o.p. no. 4733 of 1977-l filed by the commissioner of income-tax, kerala-i, ernakulam, this court directed the income-tax appellate tribunal, cochin bench, to refer the following question for our opinion .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 19 1985 (HC)

Popular Workshops Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Dec-19-1985

Reported in : [1987]166ITR348(Ker)

..... discharged (see addanki narayanappa v. bhaskara krishnappa, : [1966]3scr400 ).6. it is, therefore, clear that for the purpose of assessment of a dissolved firm under section 189 of the income-tax act, 1961, the income of the firm has to be computed with reference to the market value of the closing stock and not the book value of such stock. on the other hand ..... assessee-firm was rs. 1,04,770. this was on the basis that the closing stock was correctly valued at rs. 94,390.75. subsequently, the assessment was reopened. the income-tax officer held that on dissolution of the firm on june 30, 1971, the closing stock should have been taken not at the cost price as shown in the books, but ..... , he determined the value of the closing stock as on june 30, 1971, at rs. 1,17,987, and the taxable income was determined on that basis. on appeal, the appellate assistant commissioner affirmed the principle followed by the income-tax officer, but gave some reduction by determining the market value of the stock on the closing day by adding 20 per cent ..... t. kochu thommen, j.1. the following question has been, at the instance of the assessee, referred to us by the income-tax appellate tribunal, cochin bench :'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the closing stock should be valued at the market value as claimed by the department .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 05 1985 (HC)

Rafeeq Timbers Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Nov-05-1985

Reported in : [1986]162ITR839(Ker)

..... on it for the assessment year 1974-75, disputing the status adopted as unregistered firm, was competent?' 2. the assessee-firm made an application to the income-tax officer for registration under section 184 of the income-tax act, 1961. since the application was filed 37 days out of time, it was accompanied by a separate application for condonation of delay. the application for ..... condonation of delay was rejected by the income-tax officer by his order marked as annexure c. by his order marked as annexure d, the assessee was assessed on ..... on merits after giving proper opportunity to the party. the assessee, however, appealed against the order of the appellate assistant commissioner refusing to interfere with the order of the income-tax officer rejecting the application for condonation of delay. the department also appealed against the order of the appellate assistant commissioner. the tribunal allowed the department's appeal, but did ..... an order against the assessee, where the assessee denies his liability to be assessed under this act or any order of assessment under sub-section (3) of section 143 or section 144, where the assessee objects to the amount of income assessed, or to the amount of tax determined, or to the amount of loss computed, or to the status under which he .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 07 1985 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Periyar Chemicals Ltd.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Nov-07-1985

Reported in : (1986)50CTR(Ker)48; [1987]164ITR174(Ker)

..... the roads in question were buildings. in doing so, the tribunal followed the decision of the bombay high court in cit v. colour-chem ltd. : [1977]106itr323(bom) .2. section 32 of the income-tax act, 1961, in so far as it is material, reads :'32. depreciation.--(1) in respect of depreciation of buildings....... ..... as buildings or part of the buildings and allowing depreciation for the same ?'the assessee contended before the income-tax officer that it was entitled to claim depreciation in terms of section 32 of the income-tax act, 1961, in respect of the roads owned and used by it for the purposes of its business. ..... [1967]65itr377(sc) , the supreme court stated that the word 'building' in clause (vi) of section 10(2) of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (section 32 of the present act), means a structure and does not include the site. the reason is that there cannot be any destruction of the site unlike in the case ..... this contention was rejected by the income-tax officer stating that the roads were not buildings, but at best an improvement on ..... when owned and used by the assessee for the purposes of business, attract depreciation at the rates specified in part i of appendix i to the income-tax rules, 1962.6. the character of the road in the context of a claim for depreciation has to be determined in each case on the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 30 1985 (HC)

Travancore Rayons Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Oct-30-1985

Reported in : (1986)55CTR(Ker)141; [1986]162ITR732(Ker)

..... 40(c) ' 2. the answers to these questions depend on the construction of sections 40(c) and 40a(5) of the income-tax act, 1961. the fundamental question is whether, in computing the income of a company chargeable under the head 'profits and gains of business or profession', the expenditure arising or incurred in respect of its ..... either of them, or any expenditure or allowance in respect of any assets of the company used by such a person, if in the opinion of the income-tax officer such expenditure or allowance, having regard to the legitimate business needs of the company and the benefit derived by it, is excessive or unreasonable. however, ..... 30 - 39 in so far as they provide to the contrary. clause (c) of this section says that, in the case of a company, the income-tax officer is empowered to disallow any expenditure which results directly or indirectly in the provision of any remuneration or benefit or amenity to a director or to a ..... used by any person referred to in sub-clause (i) either wholly or partly for his own purposes or benefit, if in the opinion of the income-tax officer any such expenditure or allowance as is mentioned in sub-clauses (i) and (ii) is excessive or unreasonable having regard to the legitimate business needs ..... 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, for the assessment year 1972-73, .....

Tag this Judgment!


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