{"id":63215,"date":"1978-07-24T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1978-07-23T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharmadeepti-alwaye-kerala-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-24-july-1978"},"modified":"2017-12-04T00:30:48","modified_gmt":"2017-12-03T19:00:48","slug":"dharmadeepti-alwaye-kerala-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-24-july-1978","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharmadeepti-alwaye-kerala-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-24-july-1978","title":{"rendered":"Dharmadeepti, Alwaye, Kerala vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax, … on 24 July, 1978"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Dharmadeepti, Alwaye, Kerala vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax, … on 24 July, 1978<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1978 AIR 1417, \t\t 1978 SCR (3)1038<\/div>\n
Author: R Pathak<\/div>\n
Bench: Pathak, R.S.<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nDHARMADEEPTI, ALWAYE, KERALA\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nTHE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KERALA\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT24\/07\/1978\n\nBENCH:\nPATHAK, R.S.\nBENCH:\nPATHAK, R.S.\nCHANDRACHUD, Y.V. ((CJ)\nDESAI, D.A.\n\nCITATION:\n 1978 AIR 1417\t\t  1978 SCR  (3)1038\n 1978 SCC  (3) 499\n CITATOR INFO :\n R\t    1980 SC 387\t (7,16,54)\n\n\nACT:\nIncome Tax Act 1961-Sections 2(15) and 11(1)(a)-Main objects\nto  be\tpursued\t by the company which  has  been  granted  a\nlicence\t under s. 25 of the Companies Act were (i)  to\tgive\ncharity and (ii) to promote education and (iii) to establish\nor  aid in the establishment of\t associations  institutions,\nfunds,\ttrusts with the object of promoting  charity  and\/or\neducation  and\tthe objects incidental or ancillary  to\t the\nattainment  of\tthe  said  objects  was\t \"to  run   Chitties\n(Kuries)-Whether  the  said objects  identifiable  with\t the\nfirst two heads 'relief of the poor' and \"education\" in\t the\ndefinition  of 'charitable purpose' in Section 2(15) of\t the\nIncome\tTax Act and whether the income derived from  running\nChitties (Kuries) is exempt under Section 1 1 (1) (a) of the\nAct.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\nThe  appellant\tAssociation  carries  on  the  business\t  of\nconducting 'Kuries' which was one of the ancillary object in\nfurtherance  of\t its  main  objects.   Clause  3(a)  of\t the\nMemorandum of Association declares the main objects to be  :\n(1)  to give charity (ii) to promote education and (iii)  to\nestablish  or  aid  in the  establishment  of  associations,\ninstitutions,  funds,  trusts with the object  of  promoting\ncharity\t and\/or education.  In respect of the income  during\nthe  calendar  year  1968 from\tthat  business\ti.e.  during\nassessment  year  1969-70  the claim by\t the  appellant\t for\nexemption  under S. 11 (1 )(a) of the Income Tax  Act,\t1961\nwas  rejected  by  the Income Tax  Officer.   The  Appellate\nAssistant Commissioner reversed the order in appeal and held\nthat   'education'  constituted\t the  main  object  of\t the\nappellant, and therefore, the income from the Kurie business\neven  though  a profit making activity being in\t aid  of  or\nincidental  to\tthe main object was entitled  to  exemption.\nThe  appeal of the Revenue before the Income  Tax  Appellate\nTribunal  failed  and  therefore  at  the  instance  of\t the\nrespondent,  the  question whether on the facts and  in\t the\ncircumstances  of  the\tcase, the assessee  is\tentitled  to\nexemption  under s. 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961  for\t the\nassessment year 1969-70 ?\" Was referred to the High Court of\nKerala which answered it against the appellant.\t The present\nappeal was then lodged in this Court.\nAllowing the appeal, the Court\nHELD  : (1) The words \"not involving the carrying on of\t any\nactivity  for profit\" govern the words \"the  advancement  of\nany  other  object of general public utility\"  and  not\t the\nwords \"relief of the poor, education and medical relief\"  in\nsection 2(15).\tThe heads \"relief of the poor, education and\nmedical\t  relief\"  remained  unqualified  by   any   express\nstatutory  restriction,\t and income arising  from  a  profit\nmaking\tactivity linked with those heads  enjoyed  exemption\nwithout\t express  limitation  until  section  13(1)(bb)\t was\ninserted  in the Act by the Taxation Laws  (Amendment)\tAct,\n1975 with effect from April 1, 1977. [1042 B-D]\nThe  specific  heads  'relief to  the  poor,  education\t and\nmedical\t relief'  in s. 2(15) define well  known  charitable\npurposes.  But the residual general head \"the advancement of\nany  other  object  of general public utility\"\tis  of\twide\ncomprehension,\tand Parliament when framing the\t Income\t Tax\nAct,  1961  considered it appropriate to cut down  the\twide\nscope of these words by qualifying them with the restrictive\nwords  \"not  involving the carrying on of any  activity\t for\nprofit\", thereby emphasising that the residual general\thead\nwas  to\t be  confined  to  objects  which  were\t essentially\ncharitable in nature. [1041 E, 1042A]\nMorice\tv.  Bishop  of\tBurham,\t [1805]\t 10  Ves  522,\t532;\nWilliam's Trust v. I.R., 27 T.C. 409 referred to.\n(2)  In the instant case:\n1039\n(a)According  to  sub-clause  (a)  of  clause  (3)  of\t the\nMemorandum  of Association, the main objects for  which\t the\nappellant  was formed are \"to give charity\" and \"to  promote\neducation\".   The third sub-clause merely confers  power  to\nestablish  associations and other bodies with the object  of\npromoting  the\ttwo  main objects.   Having  regard  to\t the\nlanguage used and the context in which the two main  objects\nare  set  forth,  it would be  reasonable  to  identify\t the\nexpression \"to give charity\" and \"to promote education\" with\nthe first two heads \"relief of the poor\" and \"education\"  in\nthe  definition of \"charitable purpose\" in section 2(15)  of\nthe  Income Tax Act.  If the Memorandum of  Association\t had\nreferred  to  \"charity\"\t as  the  sole\tobject\twithout\t any\nlimitations,  including those prescribed by the context,  it\nmay  have been possible to extend it to all the\t four  heads\nmentioned  in  section\t2(15) 'as  was\tdone  in  Chaturbhuj\nVallabhdas  v. Commissioner of Income-tax, (14 I.T.R.  144).\nBut  the words are \" to give charity\"; and then \"to  promote\neducation\"  is also specified.\tObviously, the\tformer\tmust\nbear  a limited meaning and therefore, the most\t appropriate\nseems to be \"relief of the poor\".  That being so, neither of\nthe  main objects can be classed under the residual  general\nhead \"the advancement of any other object of general  public\nutility.\" [1041 B-D]\n(b)The\t'Power\tto  run the kurie business  stems  from\t the\nprovision \"to run chitties (kuries)\" mentioned in sub-clause\n(b)  of clause (3) of the Memorandum.  From the\t description\nprefacing  the enumeration of the objects, it is plain\tthat\nthe objects are really in the nature of powers incidental or\nancillary to the attainment of the main objects mentioned in\nsub-clause  (a)\t of clause (3).\t The income from  the  kurie\nbusiness  is intended to be applied only to  the  charitable\npurposes of giving to charity or the promotion of education.\nThat  is  the basis on which the licence was  granted  under\nsection\t 25  of\t the Companies Act  to\tthe  appellant.\t  No\nquestion  arises  of  applying the  income  from  the  kurie\nbusiness  to the other objects for which the  appellant\t has\nbeen  established, that is to say, the objects set forth  in\nsub-clause   (c)  of  clause  (3)  of  the   Memorandum\t  of\nAssociation. [1042 D-E]\n(c)The business of conducting kuries is held under  trust.\nThe  income  from  that\t business  is  income  derived\tfrom\nproperty  held\tunder trust for\t charitable  purposes.\t The\nappellant,  therefore,\tis  entitled to\t exemption  on\tthe,\nincome from the kurie business for the assessment year 1969-\n70 under section 11(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. [1042\nG]\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 82 of 1975.
\nFrom  the Judgment and Order dated 12-6-1974 of\t the  Kerala
\nHigh Court in.\tIncome Tax Reference No. 77\/72.
\nY.   S.\t Chitale,  V. J. Francis and Mukul  Mudgal  for\t the
\nAppellant.\n<\/p>\n
B.   B. Ahuja and A. Subhashini for the Respondent.
\nThe Judgment of the Court was delivered by
\nPATHAK, J.  This appeal, by certificate under section 261 of
\nthe  Income-Tax Act, 1961, is directed against the  judgment
\nof the High Court of Kerala disposing of a reference made to
\nit by the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal under section 256(1)
\nof the Act.\n<\/p>\n
The appellant is an association constituted under a  licence
\ngranted\t under\tsection\t 25 of the Companies  Act,  1956  on
\nJanuary 5, 1967.  The relevant provisions of its  Memorandum
\nof Association are :\n<\/p>\n
\t      “3.  (a) : The main objects to be\t pursued  by
\n\t      the Company on its incorporation are\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (i)   To give charity.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      1040<\/span><\/p>\n
\t      (ii)  To promote education.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (iii)To establish or aid in the establishment
\n\t      of  associations, institutions, funds,  trusts
\n\t      with  the object of promoting  charity  and\/or
\n\t      education provided that the Company shall\t not
\n\t      support  its funds or endeavour to impose\t on,
\n\t      or  procure to be observed by, its members  or
\n\t      others any regulation or restriction which  if
\n\t      an  object  of the company, would\t make  it  a
\n\t      trade union.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (b)   The\t objects incidental or ancillary  to
\n\t      the attainment of the above main objects are :\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (i)To receive donations, subscriptions,  or
\n\t      gifts  for the furtherance ‘of the purpose  of
\n\t      the  Company, and to do all such other  things
\n\t      as  may  be  considered to  be  incidental  or
\n\t      conducive to the attainment of its objects  or
\n\t      any of them, by the Directors.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (ii) ....\t   ....\t   ....\t   ....\t   ....\n\t      (iii) ....    ....    ....    ....    ....\n\t      (iv)To run Chitties (Kuries).\n\t      (V) .....\t  .....\t  ....\t   ....\t   ....\n\t      (vi) .....   .....    ....    ....     ....\n\t      (vii) .....    .....   ....     ... .   .....\n<\/pre>\n
\t      (c)The other objects for which the  Company
\n\t      is established are :\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (i)To establish, promote, and carry on  any
\n\t      other  business which may seem to the  company
\n\t      profitable  or advantageous and  to  establish
\n\t      offices  and other places of business in\tthis
\n\t      State  or anywhere in India, as the  Directors
\n\t      deem necessary.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
The appellant carries on the business of conducting  Kuries,
\nand  in respect of the income during the calendar year\t1968
\nfrom  that  business,  it  was\tassessed  to  tax  for\t the
\nassessment  year 1969-70.  The Income-Tax Officer,  rejected
\nthe claim that the Kurie business was incidental to the main
\nobjects\t of  charity  and  education  and  that\t the  income
\nproceeding  from it was exempt under section 1 1 (1) (a)  of
\nthe  Income-Tax Act.  The Appellate  Assistant\tCommissioner
\nreversed  the order of the Income-Tax Officer and held\tthat
\neducation constituted the main object of the appellant\tand,
\ntherefore, the income from the Kurie business, even though a
\nprofit making activity, being in aid of or incidental to the
\nmain  object  was  entitled to exemption.   The\t Income\t Tax
\nAppellate Tribunal, on further appeal, upheld the view taken
\nby the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. At the instance of
\nthe  Commissioner of Income Tax, the Tribunal  referred\t the
\nfollowing  question  to\t the High Court of  Kerala  for\t its
\nopinion :-\n<\/p>\n
\t      “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances
\n\t      of  the  case,  the assessee  is\tentitled  to
\n\t      exemption\t under section 11 of the  Income-Tax
\n\t      Act, 1961 for the assessment year 1969-70?”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
1041<\/span><\/p>\n
The High Court answered the question in the negative and  in
\nfavour\tof the Income-Tax Department by its  judgment  dated
\nJune 12, 1974.\n<\/p>\n
According to sub-clause (a) of clause (3) of the  Memorandum
\nof Association, the main objects for which the appellant was
\nformed\tare  “to give charity” and “to\tpromote\t education”.
\nThe  third  subclause  merely  confers\tpower  to  establish
\nassociations  and other bodies with the object of  promoting
\nthe  two main objects.\tHaving regard to the  language\tused
\nand the context in which the two main objects are set forth,
\nit  would be reasonable to identify the expression “to\tgive
\ncharity” and “to promote education” with the first two heads
\n“relief\t of the poor” and “education” in the  definition  of
\n“charitable purpose” in section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act.
\nIf  the Memorandum of Association had referred to  “charity”
\nas the sole object without any limitations, including  those
\nprescribed  by\tthe context, it may have  been\tpossible  to
\nextend it to all the four heads mentioned in section  2(15),
\nas  was\t done in Chaturbhuj Vallabhdas\tv.  Commissioner  of
\nIncome-Tax(1).\t But  the words are “to give  charity”;\t and
\nthen  “to promote education” is also specified.\t  Obviously,
\nthe  former must, bear a limited meaning.  To our mind,\t the
\nmost  appropriate  seems to be “relief of the  poor”.\tThat
\nbeing  so, neither of the main objects can be classed  under
\nthe  residual  general head “the advancement  of  any  other
\nobject\tof  general public utility”.  Now, those  words\t are
\nfollowed by the words “not involving the carrying on of\t any
\nactivity for profit”.  Do these restrictive words govern the
\nresidual  general bead only or also the\t preceding  specific
\nheads “relief of the poor, education, and medical relief”  ?
\nThe  specific  heads  “relief of  the  poor,  education\t and
\nmedical relief” define well known charitable purposes.\t But
\nthe  residual  general head “the advancement  of  any  other
\nobject of general public, utility” is of wide comprehension.
\nThis head was defined in the same terms in the definition of
\n“charitable  purpose” in section 4(3) of the Indian  Income-
\nTax  Act, 1922.\t The same words were used in English law  to
\ndescribe one of the heads of charitable purpose in Morice v.
\nBishop\tof  Durham(2).\t Under the  English  law  they\twere
\nregarded  as  words  of\t sufficiently  extensive  import  to
\nwarrant\t the observation by the House of Lords in  William’s
\nTrust v. I.R.(3) that all objects of general public  utility
\nwere not necessarily charitable, and that while some may  be
\nso  others  may\t not.  The law in  India  under\t the  Indian
\nIncome-Tax Act, 1922 was not in congruency with the  English
\nlaw  of charity inasmuch as by including those words in\t its
\nstatutory definition the Indian law extended the  expression
\n“charitable  purpose” to an area beyond that covered by\t the
\nEnglish\t law.\tIn other words, while the words\t “any  other
\nobject\tof general public utility” in the  Indian  enactment
\nincluded  the  purposes recognised  as\tcharitable  purposes
\nunder the English law, they ex-\n<\/p>\n
(1)  14 I.T..R. 144.\n<\/p>\n
(2)  (1805) 10 Ves 522, 532.\n<\/p>\n
(3)  27 T.C. 409.\n<\/p>\n
1042<\/span><\/p>\n
tended also to objects which were not accepted as charitable
\ntinder\tthe  English  law.   Apparently,  when\tframing\t the
\nIncome-Tax  Act, 1961, Parliament considered it\t appropriate
\nto cut down the wide scope of these words by qualifying them
\nwith the restrictive words ”  not involving the\t carrying on
\nof  any\t activity for profit”.\tThis was done  to  emphasise
\nthat the residual general head was to be confined to objects
\nwhich  were  essentially  charitable  in  nature.   It\t is,
\ntherefore, clear that the words “not involving the  carrying
\non  of\tany  activity  for profit”  govern  the\t words\t“the
\nadvancement  of any other object of general public  utility”
\nand not the words “relief of the poor, education and medical
\nrelief”\t in section 2(15).  The heads “relief of  the  poor,
\neducation  and medical relief” remained unqualified  by\t any
\nexpress\t statutory  restriction, and income arising  from  a
\nprofit\tmaking\tactivity  linked with  those  heads  enjoyed
\nexemption  without express limitation until section  13\t (1)
\n(bb)   was  inserted  in  the  Act  by\tthe  Taxation\tLaws
\n(Amendment) Act, 1975 with effect from April 1, 1977.
\nNow,  the  power to ran the kurie business stems  from,\t the
\nprovision “to run chitties (kuries)” mentioned in sub-clause\n<\/p>\n
(b)  of clause (3) of the Memorandum.  From the\t description
\nprefacing  the enumeration of the objects, it is plain\tthat
\nthe objects are really in the nature of powers incidental or
\nancillary to the attainment of the main objects mentioned in
\nsub-clause (a) of clause (3).  Accordingly, we hold that the
\nincome\tfrom  the kurie business is intended to\t be  applied
\nonly to the charitable purposes of giving to charity or\t the
\npromotion  of  education.  That is the basis  on  which\t the
\nlicence was granted under section 25 of the Companies Act to
\nthe  appellant.\t No question arises of applying\t the  income
\nfrom  the kurie business to the other objects for which\t the
\nappellant  has been established, that is to say, the  object
\nset forth in sub-clause (c) of clause (3) of the  Memorandum
\nof  Association.  In the circumstances, it is not  necessary
\nto  con-Sider  the effect of the inclusion  of\tthose  other
\nobjects\t in  the Memorandum and whether\t the  appellant\t can
\nembark on the realisation of those objects without complying
\nwith  the statutory formalities mentioned under seetion\t 149
\nof the Companies Act.\n<\/p>\n
It is not disputed that the business of conducting kuries is
\nheld  under trust.  We are, therefore, of opinion  that\t the
\nincome\tfrom  that business is income drived  from  property
\nheld   under   trust  for  charitable  purposes.    In\t the
\ncircumstances, the appellant is @ntitled to exemption on the
\nincome from the eurie business for the assessment year 1969-
\n70 under section 1 1 (1) (a) of the Income-Tax Act.  We\t are
\nunable to agree with the opinion expressed by the High Court
\nwhich, it seems, omitted to consider the significance of the
\nfact that the business of conducting kuries is covered by  a
\npower conferred expressly only for the purpose of attainment
\nof  the\t main  objects\tof  giving  charity  and   promoting
\neducation.\n<\/p>\n
10 43
\nThe  appeal is allowed, the judgment dated June 12, 1974  of
\nthe High Court is set aside and the question referred by the
\nIncome-Tax   Appellate\t Tribunal   is\t answered   in\t the
\naffirmative,  in  favour of the appellant  and\tagainst\t the
\nCommissioner  of Income-Tax.  The appellant is\tentitled  to
\nhis costs of this appeal.\n<\/p>\n
Appeal allowed.\n<\/p>\n
1044<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Dharmadeepti, Alwaye, Kerala vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax, … on 24 July, 1978 Equivalent citations: 1978 AIR 1417, 1978 SCR (3)1038 Author: R Pathak Bench: Pathak, R.S. PETITIONER: DHARMADEEPTI, ALWAYE, KERALA Vs. RESPONDENT: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KERALA DATE OF JUDGMENT24\/07\/1978 BENCH: PATHAK, R.S. BENCH: PATHAK, R.S. CHANDRACHUD, Y.V. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-63215","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nDharmadeepti, Alwaye, Kerala vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 24 July, 1978 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharmadeepti-alwaye-kerala-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-24-july-1978\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Dharmadeepti, Alwaye, Kerala vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 24 July, 1978 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharmadeepti-alwaye-kerala-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-24-july-1978\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1978-07-23T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-12-03T19:00:48+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"13 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dharmadeepti-alwaye-kerala-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-24-july-1978#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dharmadeepti-alwaye-kerala-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-24-july-1978\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Dharmadeepti, Alwaye, Kerala vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax, … on 24 July, 1978\",\"datePublished\":\"1978-07-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-03T19:00:48+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dharmadeepti-alwaye-kerala-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-24-july-1978\"},\"wordCount\":1568,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dharmadeepti-alwaye-kerala-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-24-july-1978#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dharmadeepti-alwaye-kerala-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-24-july-1978\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dharmadeepti-alwaye-kerala-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-24-july-1978\",\"name\":\"Dharmadeepti, Alwaye, Kerala vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 24 July, 1978 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1978-07-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-03T19:00:48+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dharmadeepti-alwaye-kerala-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-24-july-1978#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dharmadeepti-alwaye-kerala-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-24-july-1978\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dharmadeepti-alwaye-kerala-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-24-july-1978#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Dharmadeepti, Alwaye, Kerala vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax, … on 24 July, 1978\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Dharmadeepti, Alwaye, Kerala vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 24 July, 1978 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharmadeepti-alwaye-kerala-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-24-july-1978","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Dharmadeepti, Alwaye, Kerala vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 24 July, 1978 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharmadeepti-alwaye-kerala-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-24-july-1978","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1978-07-23T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-12-03T19:00:48+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"13 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharmadeepti-alwaye-kerala-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-24-july-1978#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharmadeepti-alwaye-kerala-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-24-july-1978"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Dharmadeepti, Alwaye, Kerala vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax, … on 24 July, 1978","datePublished":"1978-07-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-03T19:00:48+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharmadeepti-alwaye-kerala-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-24-july-1978"},"wordCount":1568,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharmadeepti-alwaye-kerala-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-24-july-1978#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharmadeepti-alwaye-kerala-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-24-july-1978","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharmadeepti-alwaye-kerala-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-24-july-1978","name":"Dharmadeepti, Alwaye, Kerala vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 24 July, 1978 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1978-07-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-03T19:00:48+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharmadeepti-alwaye-kerala-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-24-july-1978#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharmadeepti-alwaye-kerala-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-24-july-1978"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharmadeepti-alwaye-kerala-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-24-july-1978#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Dharmadeepti, Alwaye, Kerala vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax, … on 24 July, 1978"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/63215","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=63215"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/63215\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=63215"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=63215"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=63215"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}