Kerala Court June 1973 Judgments
P.C. Cherivan Vs. Varkev George and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-29-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Ker76
ORDERK. Sadasivan, J.1. Second counter-petitioner In I. A. No. 1238 of 1971 in O. S. No. 16 of 1971 on the file of the Sub Court of Kottayam. is the revision petitioner. He is stated to be a prominent member of the Indian National Congress (Organization). In connection with the mid-term poll of the Kerala Legislative Assembly held in September. 1970. an electoral arrangement was brought about between the Congress (O). and the Kerala Congress by which the former agreed to pay two lakhs rupees to the latter towards its election funds. In pursuance of this arrangement, the revision petitioner issued two cheques to one Varkey George of the Kerala Congress (defendant in the suit) drawn on the Indian Bank Ltd. The cheques are dated 2-9-1970. The defendant took the cheques to the plaintiff-bank (The Padiniarekara Bank) on 4-9-1970. and the bank received the cheques for collection, and paid the defendant the entire Rs. 50,000/- covered by the cheques. When the plaintiff-bank (presented the che...
Tag this Judgment!Thirumbadi Rubber Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-29-1973
Reported in: [1977]110ITR639(Ker)
George Vadakkel, J.1. These four references are at the instance of the assessee and are in respect of four assessment years 1961-62 to 1964-65 (both inclusive). The questions are :' 1. Whether the sale proceeds of rubber trees sold for being cut and removed with roots for re-plantation for a single consideration can be separated into the value of the trees and the value of the latex that can possibly be extracted therefrom by slaughter-tapping and whether the latter is assessable as agricultural income in the hands of the owner who sold the trees ? 2. Whether the income attributed to the centrifugal process, etc., is assessable as agricultural income ? 3. Whether in the absence of a machinery to harmonise and reconcile the assessment and fixation of the quantum of assessable income and apportioned expenditure under the State and Central enactments, the agricultural income-tax department is Justified in not following or ignoring the basis and assessment of the Central income-tax authori...
Tag this Judgment!K.C. Jacob Vs. Agricultural Income-tax Officer
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-29-1973
Reported in: [1977]110ITR402(Ker)
George Vadakkel, J.1. This is a reference under the Kerala Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950. The assessment year is 1967-68. The assessee returned a net income of Rs. 43.79. The Agricultural Income-tax Officer rejected the return and issued a pre-assessment notice. The assessee objected mainly on the ground that the rubber trees, income from whichwas proposed to be taken into account had been leased out for ' slaughter tapping '. The lease arrangement was found against by the Agricultural Income-tax Officer as well as by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and also by the Tribunal. The Tribunal considered the question whether income derived from slaughter tapping is agricultural income, and held that when the assessee himself performs slaughter tapping, the income derived by him is agricultural income liable to tax. On the application of the assessee, the Tribunal has referred to this court the question : ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the income derive...
Tag this Judgment!P.M. Mohamed Ali Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-28-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Ker157
Viswanatha Iyer, J.1. Thepetitioner, an Advocate residing at Al-waye, applied in 1968 for telephone connection for his use. His application was registered in the waiting list of the Al-waye Telephone Exchange and an endorsement evidenced by Exhibit P-1, dated 29-1-1968 was issued to him. He continued to be in the waiting list even in 1971. It is alleged that some applications received after that date have been considered and telephone connection given to the applicants under cover of certain general executive instructions issued by the Telegraph Authority. As per these instructions the applicants have been classified into different categories and certain categories have been given priority. The copy of the instruction is produced in this case as Exhibit P-2. The main attack of the petitioner is that these executive instructions for categorisation of the applications are unauthorised and illegal. The continuance of this categorisation is a hindrance to the persons like the petitioner fo...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Narayana Investment Trust (P.) Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-28-1973
Reported in: [1975]98ITR353(Ker)
George Vadakkel, J.1. This is a reference at the instance of the revenue, and is under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The short facts are set out below. The Income-tax Officer, Companies Circle, Ernakulam, passed annexure 'A' order, dated March 11, 1965, in relation to the assessment of M/s. Narayana Investment Trust (P.) Ltd., Trivandrum, in respect of the assessment year 1960-61, whereby he applied to the assessee-company Section 23A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The additional super-tax payable by the assessee-company was computed at 37%, i.e., the rate applicable to a trading company. Subsequently, the Income-tax Officer arrived at the conclusion that the company is an investment company to which the rate applicable is 50% and not 37%. Therefore, he revised his earlier order as per annexure 'B' order, dated July 13, 1966, fixing additional super-tax at 50% on the net distributable profit. The assessee unsuccessfully challenged the latter order before the Appellat...
Tag this Judgment!The Managing Partner Deccan Travels Vs. the Malabar Motor Transport Co ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-26-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Ker81
ORDERV. Balakrishna Eradi, J.1. By a notification dated 4-4-1973 the Regional Transport Authority. Malappuram -- 2nd respondent --invited applications for the grant of a temporary stage carriage permit to operate service on the route Karulai-Calicut (Via) Nilambur Mampad. Edayanna, Manjeri and Feroke. The writ petitioner as well as the first respondent figured as rival applicants for the grant of the said permit. The Regional Transport Authori-tv considered the subject at its meeting held on 30-4-1973 and decided to grant the temporary permit to the writ petitioner Ext. P1 is a copy of the proceedings of the Regional Transport Authority incorporating the said decision. The, first respondent took UP the matter in appeal before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal. Ernakulam (3rd respondent). The Tribunal allowed the appeal, set aside the grant made by the Regional Transport Authority in favour of the writ petitioner and directed that the temporary permit should be issued to the first ...
Tag this Judgment!Yusuf Shabeer and ors. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-22-1973
Reported in: [1973]32STC359(Ker)
P. Govindan Nair, Ag. C.J.1. These writ appeals arise from the judgment of Subramonian Poti, J., dismissing a batch of original petitions. The decision is Malabar Fruit Products Company v. Sales Tax Officer, Palai and Ors. 1972 K.L.T. 246.2. The question that arose for decision was the validity of Section 5A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, for short the Act. This Section was inserted by an amendment effected to the Act by Section 3 of Act 14 of 1970, which came into operation on 1st April, 1970. Section 5A(1), the relevant provision which has to be construed, is in these terms:5A. Levy of purchase tax.-(1) Every dealer who in the course of his business purchases from a registered dealer or from any other person any goods, the sale or purchase of which is liable to tax under this Act, in circumstances in which no tax is payable Under Section 5 and either- (a) consumes such goods in the manufacture of other goods for sale or otherwise; or(b) disposes of such goods in any manne...
Tag this Judgment!Lekshmi Amma and ors. Vs. Anandan Nambiar and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-21-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Ker82
Gopalan Nambiyar, J.1. This Second Appeal is by Defendants 1 to 4 and 6 to 18 in O. S. No. 394 of 1963 Munsi-ff's Court. Badagara which was a suit for partition. The properties sought to be partitioned were sifted by one Chathappa Kurup under Ext. B-1 dated 17-1-1902 in favour of his wife Parukutty Amma and his children then, existing by her, namely Ananthan Nambiar (the plaintiff) Lekshmi Amma. Chindan Nambiar and Krishnan Nambiar. Ext. B-l contained a provision that the income from the properties was to be utilised also for the support of the children to be born to the donor by Parukuttv Amma. The plaintiff was rarepared to concede a share to Naravanan Nambiar, the 4th Respondent who was the subse-quently born child. Thus a 1/5th share for each of the five children was claimed on the ground that the division had to be on the stirpital principle in accordance with the proviso to Section 48 of the Madras Marumakkathavam Act 1933. Supplemental Defendants 6 to 19 were the descendants of ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. C.K. Sunderaraja Naidu
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-18-1973
Reported in: [1974]95ITR450(Ker)
Govindan Nair, Actg. C.J.1. The question referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, is in these terms :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the capital gains derived by the assessee on relinquishment of his share in Malabar Fisheries Co. is exempt under Section 47(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 'The year of assessment is 1963-64. The assessee was a partner in the firm, Messrs. Malabar Fisheries Company. There were three other partners. The assessment for the year against the assessee was completed on April 9, 1964, taking his share of income from the firm as his income. The firm was dissolved on March 31, 1963. On that dissolution three of the partners took over the assets of the firm and the assessee was paid in lieu of his share in the assets of the firm Rs. 3,81,082. The Income-tax Officer found that the amount paid to the assessee as his share in the assets of the firm was in e...
Tag this Judgment!Kuttapan and ors. Vs. Chellamma and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-15-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Ker91
ORDERV.P. Gopalan Nambiyar, J. 1. The Respondent in this writ petition filed an application under Section 75 (2) of the Land Reforms Act for the purpose of shifting the kudikida-ppu of the writ petitioner. On the day the application came on for hearing, the writ petitioner herein, (who was the Respondent in the application before the Land Tribunal) was absent The Tribunal nevertheless heard the petitioner before it. examined the objections which had been filed by the Respondent before it (the writ petitioner); and allowed the application for shifting. The writ petitioner thereupon filed I. A. No- 6 of 1972 to re-open the ex parte decision of the Tribunal on the ground that he had not been heard, and should be afforded an opportunity of substantiating his objections The application was dismissed by the Tribunal on the ground that it had no jurisdiction to set aside the order already passed, and that the said order was passed on the merits, after giving due consideration to all the point...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »