SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1993 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 36

KERALA HIGH COURT
K. S. Radhakrishnan, J
M/s. Pullala & Rosary Estate – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Agricultural Income Tax – Respondent


Table of Content
1. jurisdiction and assessment context. (Para 1 , 2 , 10)
2. arguments regarding exercise of powers under s.34. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 9)
3. discussion on double taxation avoidance. (Para 6 , 7 , 11)
4. assessment of stock and income determination. (Para 8 , 12 , 14 , 16)

1.This is a revision under S.78 of the Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1991. The assessee is the revision petitioner.

2. Petitioner M/s. Pullala & Rosary Estate is an assessee before the Agricultural Income Tax Officer, Trichur and assessed in the status of tenants in common. Petitioner owns 100.07 acres in Pullala Estate planted with coffee and 242.60 acres planted with coffee, rubber and pepper in Rosary Estate. These properties belong to eight persons as cotenants. They were assessed by the Agricultural Income Tax Officer in the status of tenants in common under the name and style "M/s. Pullala and Rosary Estate". The properties were leased on 1-4-1979 to a partnership by name "M/s. Pullala and Rosary" for a period of 11 months on an yearly rent of Rs.84,000/-. The lease was periodically renewed. The stock of the agricultural produce was also taken over by the lessee who took over the properties as a going c


























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top