The
Kerala Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1991
(Act 15 of 1991)
[Page maintained by Sri.P.B.Sahasranaman, Advocate]
Sec. 39 - Assessment - Jumping to a particular conclusion
overlooking any intermediate fact or event is process opened to reason.
Requirement of furnishing reasons is a shackle on acting arbitarily and
whimsically. It is the only visible safeguard against possible injustice and
arbitariness. They disclose how the mind is applied to the subject matter for
a decision, whether it is considered in the set up of purely administrative or
quasi judicial order. They should reveal a rational nexus between the facts
and the conclusions reached. Only in this way can opinions and decisions
recorded be shown manifestly just and reasonable. [
R.Chellappan vs Comr.A.I.T. ITR .No. 140 of 1995. Dated 2-11-1999.
Arijit Pasayat (CJ) & K.S.Radhakrishnan (J)]
Sec. 9(2) - Transfer of property by the assessee to his wife satisfies all the
ingredients of the sections. Thus , the income from the property transferred to
the wife is to be clubbed along with the income of the assesse and assessed in
his hands. [H.S.Shivakantappa vs State of Kerala.
T.R.C.NO. 91 of 1999 , Dated 14-7-1999. K.K.Usha & R.Rajendra Babu
{J&J}]
Sec.76 - Suo motu power - limitation period
.Merely because the irregularity was detected after the period prescribed for
initiation or completion of a proceedings, that does not give authority to act
beyond the time limit prescribed. Initiation of the proceeding itself was
beyond four years after the passing of the order of the assessing officer. [Ram
Bahadur Thakur Limited vs. State of Kerala.T.R.C.NO. 117 of 1998. Dated
29-9-1999. Arijit Pasayat (CJ) & K.S.Radhakrishnan(J)]
BACK TO MAIN
PAGE