COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. ANNAMMA ALEXANDER
LAWS(KER)-1991-3-40
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Decided on
March 13,1991
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
Appellant
VERSUS
MRS. ANNAMMA ALEXANDER
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
GIRISH CHUNDER LAHIRI V. SHOSHI SHIKHARESWAR ROY [REFERRED TO]SHAM LAL NARULA VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX PUNJAB JAMMU AND KASHMIR HIMACHAL PRADESH AND PATIALA [REFERRED TO]
MAHANT NARAYANA DASJEE VARU THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES THE TIRUMALAI TIRUPATHI DEVASTHANAM VS. BOARD OF TRUSTEES THE TIRUMALAI TIRUPATHI DEVASTHANAM MAHANT NARAYANA DASJEE VARU [REFERRED TO]
T N K GOVINDARAJU CHETTY VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX MADRAS [REFERRED TO]
LUCY KOCHUVAREED VS. P MARIAPPA GOUNDERAND VICE VERSA [REFERRED TO]
REV FATHER K C ALEXANDER OF KUTTIKANDATHILAYA KOLLAKULHIYIL VS. NAIR SERVICE SOCIETY LTD [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. PERIYAR AND PAREEKANNI RUBBERS LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. MARIAPPA GOUNDER P [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. RANI PRAYAG KUMARI DEBI [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS. CHIRANJI LAL MULTANI MAL RAI BAHADUR P LTD [REFERRED TO]
Cited Judgements :-
ANNAMMA ALEXANDER VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [LAWS(KER)-1992-4-5] [REFERRED TO]KONKAN BARGE BUILDERS (P) LTD VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER [LAWS(BOM)-2007-8-260] [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. B RAI [LAWS(P&H)-2003-8-24] [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)At the instance of the Revenue, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law, for the decision of this Court, in the above referred cases:
"R.A. No. 160 (Coch.)/83:
1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amount of interest receipt on the mesne profits is income under the Income Tax Act
R.A. No. 161 (Coch.)/83:
2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the entire interest receipt as per the judgment of the High Court passed on 23-12-65 is assessable in the assessment year 1966-67
3. Should not the Tribunal have considered the question of the year or years in which the amount is to be assessed -
(2.)The assessee is common, in both the cases. Both the cases relate to the assessment year 1966-67, for which the accounting period ended on 31-3-1966. The references arise out of the common appellate order passed by the Appellate Tribunal dated 14-3-1983 in I.T.A. No. 390 (Coch)/1980 (Appeal filed by the assessee) and I.T.A. No. 391 (Coch)/1980 (Appeal filed by the Revenue). The Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the assessee (I.T.A. No. 390 (Coch)/1980), but dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue (I.T.A. No. 391 (Coch)/1980). That resulted in the Revenue filing two different applications for referring certain questions of law for the decision of this Court. It is in pursuance to the said two applications (R.A. Nos. 160 & 161/Coch./1983), the above three questions have been referred for the decision of this Court, in the two referred cases, at the instance of the Revenue.
(3.)The original assessee in this case was one of the legal heirs of late Rev. Fr. K.C. Alexander. Before The Appellate Tribunal and in the reference proceedings, one of the legal heirs Mrs. Annamma Alexander alone contested the proceedings. After, the hearing of the referred cases was over, Mrs. Annamma Alexander died on 3-1-1991. The sisters and brother of the deceased Mrs. Annamma Alexander, who are the legal representatives, have been impleaded as per their statement dated 24-1-1991. Advocate Mr. P. Balachandran filed Vakalath for the legal heirs, the sisters and brother of the deceased Mrs. Annamma Alexander, who have been impleaded as additional respondents 2 to 5. The matter was heard again.
"R.A. No. 160 (Coch.)/83:
1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amount of interest receipt on the mesne profits is income under the Income Tax Act
R.A. No. 161 (Coch.)/83:
2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the entire interest receipt as per the judgment of the High Court passed on 23-12-65 is assessable in the assessment year 1966-67
3. Should not the Tribunal have considered the question of the year or years in which the amount is to be assessed -
(2.)The assessee is common, in both the cases. Both the cases relate to the assessment year 1966-67, for which the accounting period ended on 31-3-1966. The references arise out of the common appellate order passed by the Appellate Tribunal dated 14-3-1983 in I.T.A. No. 390 (Coch)/1980 (Appeal filed by the assessee) and I.T.A. No. 391 (Coch)/1980 (Appeal filed by the Revenue). The Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the assessee (I.T.A. No. 390 (Coch)/1980), but dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue (I.T.A. No. 391 (Coch)/1980). That resulted in the Revenue filing two different applications for referring certain questions of law for the decision of this Court. It is in pursuance to the said two applications (R.A. Nos. 160 & 161/Coch./1983), the above three questions have been referred for the decision of this Court, in the two referred cases, at the instance of the Revenue.
(3.)The original assessee in this case was one of the legal heirs of late Rev. Fr. K.C. Alexander. Before The Appellate Tribunal and in the reference proceedings, one of the legal heirs Mrs. Annamma Alexander alone contested the proceedings. After, the hearing of the referred cases was over, Mrs. Annamma Alexander died on 3-1-1991. The sisters and brother of the deceased Mrs. Annamma Alexander, who are the legal representatives, have been impleaded as per their statement dated 24-1-1991. Advocate Mr. P. Balachandran filed Vakalath for the legal heirs, the sisters and brother of the deceased Mrs. Annamma Alexander, who have been impleaded as additional respondents 2 to 5. The matter was heard again.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.