Court : Kerala
Decided on : Sep-26-1985
Reported in : (1986)51CTR(Ker)122; 161ITR729(Ker)
..... purchases and invoices and other relevant evidence on record correctly ? 2. whether the assessee is entitled to weighted deduction under section 35b of the income-tax act, 1961 ?' 2. annexure a is the copy of the assessment order of the income-tax officer dated december 23, 1974. annexures b and c are, respectively, the order and the decision of the appellate assistant commissioner and the ..... the business of export of canned and processed shrimps. for the assessment year 1972-73, the assessee has claimed weighted deduction of rs. 11,832 under section 35b of the income-tax act, 1961 ('the act'), it being one-third of rs. 35,495 paid by way of commission to a foreign agent for the promotion of business. the ..... is whether the assessee is entitled to weighted deduction under section 35b of the act with respect to the payment alleged to have been made. there is no case for the revenue that the payment of rs. 35,495 had not been made by the assessee. the income-tax officer declined to accept the claim of the assessee for weighted deduction on two ..... the ambit of any of the clauses in section 35b of the act for entitlement to weighted deduction. we are also not persuaded to accept the contention that the tribunal was under a legal obligation to make a further enquiry in the matter or remand the matter to the income-tax officer for the purpose.7. the result, therefore, is that we answer .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kerala
Decided on : Nov-28-1985
Reported in : 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!
Court : Kerala
Decided on : Aug-06-1985
Reported in : (1986)52CTR(Ker)19; 160ITR872(Ker)
..... years in the present petition. we are, indeed, appreciative of the very learned arguments advanced by shri shenoy.4. we shall consider the scope of section 256(2) of the income-tax act for the purpose of this case.5. section 256(2) reads thus :'if, on an application made under sub-section (1), the appellate tribunal refuses to state the case on ..... bhaskaran nambtar, j.1. the state bank of travancore has filed this application under section 256(2) of the income-tax act for compelling the appellate tribunal to refer a question of law to this court after the tribunal refused to refer the question. this application relates to the assessment year 1977- ..... phraseology in the 1922 act and later in section 256(2) of the present act and relied on the decisions of the madras high court in cwt v ..... in state bank of travancore v. cit : 110itr336(ker) and appeals are pending before the supreme court. it cannot, therefore, be concluded that no question of law arises. he traced the legislative history of section 256(2) of the act, invited our attention to the provisions of the 1918 act, the report of the all india income-tax committee necessitating the change in the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kerala
Decided on : Jul-12-1985
Reported in : 159ITR519(Ker)
..... the employee would be deemed to be a businessloss, in order to obtain the benefit of carry forward under section 72(1)(i)of the income-tax act, 1961, two conditions are to be fulfilled : (1) the set-off sought should be against the profits and gains of any business or ..... debt, that being the amount due from the judgment-debtor in their appropriation case. the income-tax officer rejected the claimbthat the requirements of section 36(2) of the income-tax act, 1961, were not satisfied. the income-tax officer also held that the deduction claimed by the assessee could not be allowed under section 37 ..... of the act. annexure 'a' is the copy of the order of the assessing authority dated ..... the business or profession for which the loss was originally computedcontinued to be carried on by him in the previous year relevant for thatassessment year. the income-tax appellate tribunal, in a brief order,annexure 'e', points out: 'the loss, if any, is in the business of banking. now, it carries ..... 36(2) of the act, it being a loss sustained by the assessee in the course of the carrying on of the business, the deduction could be allowed. aggrieved by the decision of the appellate assistant commissioner, the revenue filed an appeal to the income-tax appellate tribunal, cochin bench, .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kerala
Decided on : Jul-02-1985
Reported in : 158ITR211(Ker)
..... disputed. therefore, the only question to be considered is whether vacancy allowance is allowable or not and that brings me to the provisions of section 24(1)(ix) of the income-tax act. since the cochin bench, in its order referred to above, had already interpreted that provision and i have gone through the reasonings expressed by the bench in that order and ..... right in law in holding that the assessee is entitled to vacancy allowance under section 24(1)(ix) of the income-tax act, 1961 ?'section 24(1)(ix) of the act provides as follows :'24. deductions from income from house property.--(1) income chargeable under the head 'income from house property' shall, subject to the provisions of sub-section (2), be computed after making the following deductions ..... property let out and claiming vacancy allowance for the period the property remained vacant. the income-tax officer accepted the loss and completed the assessment. a copy of the assessment order is annexure c. the commissioner of income-tax interferred with the assessment order under section 263 of the income-tax act. as far as part of the property which was vacant throughout the year was concerned ..... , the commissioner held that the reasons given for the year 1970-71 held good and no vacancy allowance could be allowed and, as such, the full letting value of the portion had to be brought to tax. the commissioner was also .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kerala
Decided on : Apr-10-1985
Reported in : 154ITR598(Ker)
..... disagreed with the opinion expressed by beaumont c.j. and held that 'there is nothing in law to preclude common partners constituting two separate firms for the purpose of the income-tax act'. since, however, the question whether there were actually two firms or only one had not been considered, the tribunal was directed to determine the question of fact for the purpose ..... word 'dealer', it will be apparent that a firm is an independent assessable unit for the purposes of the act. indeed, a firm has been given the same status under the act as is given to it under the income-tax act. under section 3 of the income-tax act also, a 'firm' is treated as a unit of assessment and as a distinct assessable entity. though under ..... tax, it is a legal entity ..... the partnership law, a firm is not a legal entity but only consists of individual partners for the time being, for tax law, income-tax as well as sales .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Mar-04-1985
Reported in : (1986)53CTR(Guj)274; 159ITR253(Guj)
..... reason in support of the view which we are inclined to take and that is the insertion of a new provision in section 35d in the income-tax act, 1961, which of course permits the amortisation of capital expenditure, inter alia, for preparation of feasibility report under specified conditions. in other words, ..... 'ships'. 12. it is no doubt true that so far as the term 'ships' is concerned, there is no legislative dictionary in the income-tax act. it is also equally true that in its ordinary literal meaning, a pontoon cannot be considered as ship. but having regard to the legislative intent ..... be considered to be a ship in its ordinary meaning and not in the meaning given to it by the legislature for the different purposes under the income-tax act. the ordinary dictionary meaning of the term 'pontoon' is 'flat-bottomed boat used as ferry-boat, etc.' (see the new oxford illustrated dictionary ..... 72, the tribunal affirmed the view of the appellate assistant commissioner that the assessee-company is entitled to the relief under section 80j of the income-tax act, 1961, in respect of all the three units on the concession of the parties that the earlier decision of the tribunal holding that the ..... whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal has been right in law in allowing relief under section 80j of the income-tax act, 1961, in respect of sikka 4th expansion unit, bombay cement mills 1st expansion, and asbestos products division 1st expansion unit by the assessee : (3 .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Oct-23-1985
Reported in : (1986)53CTR(Guj)365; 162ITR612(Guj)
..... charitable or religious objects, it is the surplus realised or available on commercial principles that has to be taken into consideration and not as per the provisions of the income-tax act, is correct in law 3. in the subsequent assessment year 1972-73, the assessee changed to the cash system of accounting. it submitted a return showing a deficit of rs. ..... rs. 76,972 by way of deduction as an amount applied for charitable purposes under section 11(1)(a) of the income-tax act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'thejact'). in that year, the assessee was following the mercantile system of accounting. the income-tax officer refused the deduction whereupon the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the appellate assistant commissioner. the appellate assistant commissioner ..... under : '(1) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the income-tax appellate tribunal was justified in law in holding that income-tax liability for an amount of rs. 76,972 should be allowed as deduction under section 11(1)(a) of the income-tax act, 1961 and (2) whether the finding of the tribunal that in order to give meaning to ..... the expression 'income', the deduction of income-tax liability must be taken as an outgoing before the surplus could be ascertained and that while determining the 'income' or the surplus available to the trust for the purpose .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Sep-02-1985
Reported in : (1986)55CTR(Guj)154; 163ITR7(Guj)
..... to carry on the same business in the same name and style in the adjacent shop, the amount received could only be branded as a revenue income and brought to tax under section 28 of the income-tax act. he further submitted that the statement made in the receipt by the assessee-firm was an admission that the payment was by way of compensation for ..... that it took, it dismissed the appeal. the assessee, therefore, sought a reference which was granted on the question reproduced earlier under sub-section (l) of section 256 of the income-tax act. 6. mr. k. c. patel, the learned advocate for the assessee, submitted that the authorities below had solely gone by the language of the receipt and had not endeavoured to ..... the assessee was for loss of earnings and, therefore, assumed the character of a revenue receipt. this view of the appellate assistant commissioner was assailed by the assessee before the income-tax appellate tribunal, a bench, ahmedabad. the tribunal also took the view that the payment of rs. 1,51,000 was by way of compensation for loss of business/earnings and ..... section 28 is income derived from the profits and gains of business. it is, therefore, the primary duty of the revenue to show that the receipt of rs. 1,51,000 is liable to tax under section 28 of the act. the recital in the receipt - compensation for loss of business sustained for winding up the business - is not decisive of the real .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Sep-12-1985
Reported in : (1986)53CTR(Guj)186; 163ITR102(Guj)
..... and bombay. the assessee mainly operated the rajkot account. the deposits were kept in his non-resident account, but after the amendment of section 10(4a) of the income-tax act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the act'), the exemption was restricted to interest on moneys deposited in a 'non-resident (external) account' only. in view of this change in law, the assessee requested his ..... assessee to credit the amounts due to it as commission in the account books of the assessee without remitting them to japan until further instructions. the income-tax authorities treated the assessee as the statutory agent of the japanese company under section 43 of the indian income-tax act, 1922, and assessed the amounts credited in the assessee's books to the japanese company as ..... income derived by the japanese company in india through the assessee. the assessee contended that mere entry in the account books cannot amount to receipt and the ..... be transferred to the suspense account. in this connection, he invited our attention to the letter, annexure 'b', dated october 5, 1974, written by the bank of india to the income-tax officer, rajkot. in paragraph (ii), it was stated that the interest amount was kept in suspense account pending approval from the reserve bank of india to convert the account into .....Tag this Judgment!