Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.39 seconds)
Documents citing Meenachil Rubber Marketing And ... vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax. on 23 January, 1990

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Pulikkal Medical Foundation Pvt. Ltd. on 5 August, 1993

Co-operative Marketing Society Ltd. [1989] 176 ITR 117 (SC) ; CIT v. Pondicherry Co-operative, Housing Society Ltd. [1991] 188 ITR 671 (Mad); Meenachil Rubber Marketing and Processing Co-operative Society Ltd. v. CIT [1992] 193 ITR 108 (Ker) and CIT v. Gwalior Rayon Silk Mfg. Co. Ltd. [1992] 196 ITR 149 (SC). However, here the controversy is not whether the exemption is to be construed strictly or liberally. What is important is whether the assessee satisfies all the ingredients in Section 10(22A) so as to be entitled to the exemption.
Kerala High Court Cites 46 - Cited by 18 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Kanam Latex Industries P. Ltd. on 12 February, 1996

Meenachil Rubber Marketings case [1992] 193 ITR 108 (Ker) was of the co-operative society as the assessee engaged in marketing of agricultural produce and peculiarly a society purchasing raw latex from its members for the purpose of processing leading to the emergence of centrifugal latex as a result thereof. The societies also claimed exemption under Section 80P of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which was urged and considered as an aspect to a situation of vital national activity in the interest of rural economy. The court thought that the term marketing has to be construed in a manner which would achieve this benevolent purpose of exemption rather than applying the settled rules of construction.
Kerala High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 21 - G Sivarajan - Full Document

The Budhewal Co-Op. Sugar Mills Limited vs C.I.T. Aayakar Bhawan on 22 May, 2009

The issue before the Kerala High Court in Meenachil Rubber Marketing and Processing Co-operative Society Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, (1992) 193 ITR 108 (Kerala) was regarding an assessee-society which purchased raw latex from its members, processed it by scientific method and sold the commodity. The High Court upheld the claim of the assessee by observing that "marketing" had to be construed in a manner which would achieve the benevolent purpose of exemption rather than defeat the said purpose. It was further held that the Co- operative Society was marketing the agricultural produce of the members of the society and the income earned as profits and gains from the business of marketing of the said agricultural produce was liable to be exempted. 18 Income-tax Appeal No. 232 of 2003 The Apex Court in Broach Distt.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 30 - Cited by 8 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs R. Chandran on 28 February, 1991

Ltd. [1988] 169 ITR 466 (Cal), Co-operative Marketing Society Ltd. v. CIT [1983] 143 ITR 99 (MP) and CIT v. Bankipur Iron Works Ltd. [1980] 3 Taxman 484. Five High Courts have unanimously taken the view that the return filed under Section 139(4) of the Act is a return entitled to be considered and the assessee was permitted to carry forward the loss of the previous years.
Kerala High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 4 - K S Paripoornan - Full Document
1