Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

P.J. Philip Vs. State of Kerala

P.J. Philip vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jan 13, 1993
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/724809

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
T.R.C. Nos. 58, 62 and 66 of 1992
Subject
Direct Taxation

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION ACT, 1951[C.A. No. 63/1951. Sections 29 & 31: [K.S. Radhakrishnan, Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan & M.N. Krishnan, JJ] Recovery of loan amount Held, Once industrial concern commits default in repayment of the loan or advance made by the Financial Corporation and under a liability, the rig...

Key legal issue
Direct Taxation
Acts & sections
Kerala Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1950

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

P.J. Philip

Advocate R.K. Venu Nair, Adv.

Respondent

State of Kerala

Advocate Vijayan Nair, Adv.

Legal References

Acts
Kerala Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1950
Reported In
(1993)110CTR(Ker)338; [1993]201ITR591(Ker)

Excerpt

- state financial corporation act, 1951[c.a. no. 63/1951. sections 29 & 31: [k.s. radhakrishnan, thottathil b. radhakrishnan & m.n. krishnan, jj] recovery of loan amount held, once industrial concern commits default in repayment of the loan or advance made by the financial corporation and under a liability, the right of the corporation to invoke section 29 of the act accrues and it is open to the corporation to realise the entire loan advanced to the industrial concern not only from the properties of the industrial concern but also from the properties pledged or mortgaged b y the sureties for the loan advanced by the corporation. section 29 is a complete code by itself. liability of principal-debtor and surety is always joint and co-extensive. [n. narasimhaiah v karnataka state financial corporation, air 2004 kar 46 dissented from]. - it is also true that the best judgment assessments were warranted for all the three years. but the best judgment assessment should be reasonable and based on material. the common order, passed by the tribunal, is cryptic or laconic and it does not disclose the basis on which the best judgment assessments have been sustained in an understandable form, the order of the tribunal is infirm and is not in accordance with law. assessment--cryptic order--assessment based on inspection report--said report not discussed by authorities--order not in accordance with law--matter remitted.heldit is true that the assessee has no accounts. it is also true that the best judgment assessments were warranted for all the three years. but the best judgment assessment should be reasonable and based on material. it should be fair. it is stated that an inspection of the properties was conducted. the contents of the inspection report are not seen discussed in any one of the orders passed by the statutory authorities. the common order, passed by the tribunal, is cryptic or laconic and it does not disclose the basis on which the best judgment assessments have been sustained in an understandable form, the order of the tribunal is infirm and is not in accordance with law.application :also to current assessment years.kerala agrl ita 1950 s.35kerala agrl ita 1950 s.18

Full Judgment

ASSESSMENT--Cryptic order--Assessment based on inspection report--Said report not discussed by authorities--Order not in accordance with law--Matter remitted.

HELD

It is true that the assessee has no accounts. It is also true that the best judgment assessments were warranted for all the three years. But the best judgment assessment should be reasonable and based on material. It should be fair. It is stated that an inspection of the properties was conducted. The contents of the inspection report are not seen discussed in any one of the orders passed by the statutory authorities. The common order, passed by the Tribunal, is cryptic or laconic and it does not disclose the basis on which the best judgment assessments have been sustained in an understandable form, the order of the Tribunal is infirm and is not in accordance with law.

APPLICATION :

Also to current assessment years.

Kerala Agrl ITA 1950 s.35

Kerala Agrl ITA 1950 s.18

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial