nWhile assessing the tax payable by a company that ran a hotel, the income tax authorities refused to give a higher tax rebate based on the depreciation of the hotel building. The assessing officers believed that the hotel wasn’t eligible for the rebate as a part of the building was let out to shops while another section was used to house employees, which, according to them, was not connected to the hotel business. On appeal, the commissioner of income tax ruled that maintaining shops as well as providing accommodation for the staff was part of the business. The Madras High Court upheld the commissioner’s ruling and directed the income tax authorities to provide the tax rebate to the hotel (CIT vs Sangu Chakra Hotels P. Ltd Madras).
nThe income tax department treated the loan an assessee had taken from relatives as income from undisclosed sources and taxed it because the man could not produce one of the lenders. The man approached the Income Tax Tribunal, which ruled in his favour after the missing lender appeared in court. The income tax authorities challenged the judgement. The Punjab and Haryana High Court held that there was no merit in the appeal especially as the tribunal had noted that the revenue department had raised no questions as to the capability of the relatives to lend the amount (Commissioner of Income Tax vs Jeeta Khan).
nA woman’s petition for divorce and alimony was pending in the family court when the Domestic Violence Act came into force. The woman then filed a petition for compensation under the Act before the magistrate. Her husband sought the transfer of this petition to the family court on the ground that certain claims were overlapping and demanded the quashing of the domestic violence petition. Rejecting the man’s claim, the Kerala High Court ruled that proceedings could not be quashed just because identical reliefs were prayed for before another court. It held that even if monetary claims were allowed under the Act, such payment had to be balanced against any payment ordered by any other court, so the man should not worry about having to pay double (M.A. Mony vs M.P. Leelamma and another).
SOLON
