Kerala Court March 1963 Judgments
Annamalai Reddiar Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, KeralA.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-30-1963
Reported in: [1964]53ITR601(Ker)
M. S. MENON C.J. - This is a reference by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras Bench, under section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The assessment year with which we are concerned is 1954-55 and the accounting period, the Malayalam year 1128 (August 17, 1952, to August 16, 1953).The peak credit - on January 6, 1953 - in the anamath account of the assessee was Rs. 13,865. The Income-tax Officer rejected his explanation regarding the entries in that account and assessed the said sum as his income from other sources. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner agreed with the Income-tax Officer and confirmed the conclusion. The Appellate Tribunal treated the amount not as income from other sources but as income from the assessees business itself.The first and the second questions referred to us relate to the sum of Rs. 13,865 and read as follows :'(1) Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in coming to the conclusion that the sum of Rs. 13,865 being the peak credit in the anama...
Tag this Judgment!S. Govinda Menon Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-29-1963
Reported in: AIR1963Ker316; (1963)IILLJ290Ker
ORDERC.A. Vaidialingam, J. 1. In this writ petition, Mr. M. K. Nambiar, learned counsel for the petitioner, challenges as illegal and void, the order Ex. P-11, passed by the State Government on 8-3-1963 placing, under suspension, the petitioner, who was at the material time, the 1st Member of the Board of Revenue, in the State. The order shows that the petitioner has been placed under suspension under Rule 7 of the All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955, till the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner are completed. It is necessary to state the matters which are mentioned in the order, Ex. P-11, which will show, the circumstances under which the State Government decided to take action under Rule 7.2. It is mentioned that the Government have received several petitions containing serious allegations of official misconduct against the petitioner who is a member of the Indian Administrative Service and the First Member of the Board of Revenue and was also...
Tag this Judgment!Karimtharuvi Tea Estates Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, KeralA.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-29-1963
Reported in: [1964]54ITR237(Ker)
This is a reference by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras Bench, under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The assessment year with which we are concerned is 1958-59 and the accounting period is the 12 months ended December 31, 1957.The assessee, Karimtharuvi Tea Estates Limited, purchased the Penshurst Tea Estate from the Penshurst Tea Estates Limited. The purchase came into effect on January 1, 1957, in pursuance of an agreement dated December 17, 1956.The agreement forms annexure 'F' to the statement of the case. Clause 1 of the agreement provided for a price or consideration of Rs. 4,50,000 and clause 8 stipulated that :'.... all dues determined upto the time the sale takes effect, as legally due to labour, staff and superintendent in respect of service until then (including bonus for 1956 (1) in the case of labour as recommended by the A.P.T. before the end of February, 1957, and (2) in the case of staff and the superintendent three months basic salary) shall ...
Tag this Judgment!income-tax Officer, Quilon Vs. Miyya Pillai and Others.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-28-1963
Reported in: [1965]55ITR84(Ker)
The first of these cases arises out of an application by the Income-tax Officer, Quilon, claiming priority and thus claiming the entire amount in court deposit towards arrears of income-tax. The decree-holders who attached some properties and got them sold was one of the respondents, the other being the legal representatives of the judgment-debtor. The lower court dismissed the claim of the revenue and hence and civil revision petition.C. M. P. No. 1166 of 1963 is by the United Commercial Bank Ltd., Quilon, who obtained another decree on a mortgage against the same judgment-debtor. The bank claimed ratable distribution of the amount, which was also refused by the lower court; but the bank was hear in the petition filed by the Income-tax Officer. The bank filed the petition for leave to intervene and be heard in support of the order of the lower court against the revenue.The other civil revision petition is also by the bank against the order of the lower court refusing rateable distribu...
Tag this Judgment!State of Kerala Vs. Karimtharuvi Tea Estate Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-25-1963
Reported in: [1964]51ITR129(Ker)
This is a reference under section 60 (1) of the Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950, by the Kerala Agricultural Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Trivandrum. The accounting period with which we are concerned is the year ended December 31, 1956, and the assessment year is the financial year 1957-58.Two question have been referred to this court for decision. They are;'(i) Whether the amount realised by the sale of gravelia firewood is a revenue receipt liable to tax under the Kerala Agricultural Income-tax Act (ii) Whether any surcharge can be levied on the agricultural income-tax payable for the assessment year 1957-58 ?'The gravelia trees were grown and maintained for the sole purpose of providing shade to the tea bushes in the tea estates of the assessee. That such shade is essential for the proper cultivation of tea cannot be disputed; and the trees should hence be considered to be as much a part of the capital assets of the company as the tea bushes themselves or the equipment in its fac...
Tag this Judgment!Kanhirakolla Chamukuttan Nair Vs. the State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-22-1963
Reported in: 1965CriLJ387
ORDERP. Govinda Menon, J.1. This revision petition arises out of a complaint Wed by the Principal Munsiff, Palghat, under Sections 195 and 476, Cr.P.C. The revision petitioner is a Vakil's clerk at Palghat Against him and another person, the learned Munsiff filed a complaint before the District Magistrate, Palghat, for an offence of fabrication of false evidence in connection with a petition, I.A. No. 2842 of 1960. On receipt of the complaint, the learned District Magistrate found that the facts of the case really disclosed offences triable exclusively by the Sessions Court, and treating the case as a preliminary enquiry case, transferred the same to the Sub-Magistrate, Palghat. The Sub-Magistrate on finding that a prima facie case was made out committed the accused to stand their trial before the Court of Session, Palghat.2. The case was tried by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Palghat, who convicted the first accused for offences under Sections 467 and 471, I.P.C. and the petitioner fo...
Tag this Judgment!R.P. Ramakrishna Ayyar Vs. V. Sreedharanvarman Thampan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-19-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Ker127
ORDERC.A. Vaidialingam, J. 1. In this writ petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution, Mr. T. N. Subramonia Iyer, learned counsel for the petitioner-tenant,challenges the order of the Rent Court, Ext. P-1 as well as the order of the appellate authority, namely, Ext. P-2. 2. The petitioner, who is the tenant of the holding in question, filed an application before the Kent Court, Palghat at Chittoor, under Section 16of the Malabar Tenancy Act for fixation of fail rent. The Rent Court accepted in part the grievance of the petitioner and fixed the fair rent as mentioned in the order, Ext. P-1. 3. Not satisfied with the fixation of fair rent under Ext. P-1, the petitioner took up the matter in appeal before the appellate Authority, namely, the learned Subordinate Judge of Palghat, under Section 17 of the Malabar Tenancy Act asking for relief by way of further reduction of the fair rent fixed by the Rent Court. The petitioner's appeal was C. M. A. No. 47 of 1960. The contesting responde...
Tag this Judgment!V. Gopinathan Vs. the State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-18-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Ker227; (1963)IILLJ211Ker
C.A. Vaidialingam, J.1. In this writ petition Mr. P. Subramonian Potti, learned counsel for the petitioner, challenges the order Ext. P-5, passed by the State Government dated 3-5-1961. Under Ext. 5, the State Government has dismissed the petitioner from service, on the basis of certain disciplinary proceedings taken as against him.2. The legal contention that has been taken, apart from the contention taken on facts regarding the sustainability of the findings on the evidence, is as follows:On the dates when the petitioner is alleged to have taken part in political activities, the rules that were in force were the Government Servants' Conduct Rules, 1950 promulgated by the Travancore-Cochin Government on 22-2-1950. Those rules not having been framed under Article 309 of the Constitution, arc not 'law'. Only if they have been framed under Article 309, the question may have to be considered as to whether the restrictions imposed on Government servants by those rules are reasonable restri...
Tag this Judgment!M. Mohammed Sherif and Vs. Official Liquidator, the Seetharam Spinning ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-14-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Ker135
Mathew, J.1. The appellants in the Court below are the appellants. This appeal arises from a claim preferred by the appellants in the winding up by Court of the Seetharam Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd,, Trichur (in liquidation). The claim was for Rs. 42,209/- and interest amounting to Es. 2,699-8-0. The Seetharam Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd., hereinafter called the Mills, had entered into a contract with Messrs, Mohammed Sheriff and K. A. Palaniswamy and Co., Tiruppur for the purchase of 152 bales of certified Uganda-cotton at Rs. 1,200/- per candy, f.o.r. Trichur. The terms of the contract can be gathered from the correspondence between the parties. Ext. P-2 is a letter sent by the Mills to Messrs. Mohammed Sheriff and K. A. Palaniswamy and Co. and that is dated 2nd May 1953. In their reply dated the 4th May 1953 to the Mills M/s. Mohammed Sherif and K. A. Palaniswamy and Co., have stated that Messrs. Sri Krishna Ginning Factory, Sattur, will be despatching the 152 bales of cotton...
Tag this Judgment!Subramania Iyer Vs. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Agricultural ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-14-1963
Reported in: [1964]53ITR589(Ker)
M. S. MENON C.J. - The petitioner in O.P. No 191 of 1962 is the appellant before us. The controversy relates to the assessment of the undivided Hindu family to which the appellant belongs, to super-tax under the Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950.The assessment year is 1959-60. The assessment order dated 29th November 1961, fixed the net assessable income of the undivided Hindu family at Rs. 1,50,429.Section 3(4) of the Agriculture Income-tax Act, 1950, provides :'In the case of an undivided Hindu family consisting of brothers only or of a brother or brothers and the son or sons of a brother or brothers and whose agricultural income exceeds six thousands rupees, the tax shall be assessed at the average rate applicable to the share of income due to a brother or to six thousand rupees, whichever is higher.Explanation. - For the purposes of this sub-section -(a) the expressions share of income due to a brother means the portion of the total agricultural income of the family which would hav...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »