Kerala Court March 1974 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Elixir Plastic Vs. Superintendent of Central Excise and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-15-1974
Reported in: 1978(2)ELT474(Ker)
P. Subramaniam Poti, J.1. The petitioner is a firm manufacturing polythelene film, sheets and bags. These products fall within Item 15A of Schedule I of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. These were subject to excise duty at 30 per cent ad valorem. According to the petitioner such duty was paid also for the period from 1.5.70 to 16.7.70, but actually such duty was not payable after 1-5-70. According to him, Ext P2 notification exempted payment of excise duty on polythelene sheeting, films and sheets, manufactured from artificial or synthetic Resins and Plastics materials, which are materials falling under Sub-section (1) of item 15A. If upon such material the appropriate duty of excise or additional duty under Section 2A of the Indian Tariff Act, 1934, had been paid exemption from so much of duty of excise leviable thereon as is equivalent to the duty of excise or additional duty already paid is admissible. The petitioner claims that on this account, namely on account of wrong pay...
Hajee K. Assainar Vs. the Malabar Steamship Company Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-13-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Ker114
K. Bhaskaran, J.1. The only point that calls for determination in this second appeal relates to the nature and extent of the liability of a carrier for short delivery in terms of weight in a case in which the number of bags and weight noted in the Bills of Lading are qualified by the notation (rubber stamp seal), 'Weight declared by the shippers, but not checked.'2. The plaintiff was the consignee in respect of 2000 bags of sugar purchased by him through his commission agent, P. W. 2, from a Sugar Factory at Kakkinada and shipped from Vizagapatam in 'S.S. Janani' belonging to the defendant Steam Ship Company, under Exts. P-1, P-1(a), P-1(b) and P-2, Bills of Lading, which showed the weight of each bag to be 101 Kgs. The plaintiff's forwarding and, clearing agent, P. W. 1, at the time of delivery at Cochin found that there was shortage of contents in 40 bags, and on survey being done at his instance, it was revealed that the shortage came to 1002 Kgs., and a shortage certificate to that...
D. Anantha Prabhu Vs. the District Collector, Ernakulam and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-05-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Ker117
ORDERGeorge Vadakkel, J.1. The petitioner, who is the Secretary of the Cochin Branch of the Rashtreeya Sevak Sangh (for short, Sevak Sangh) moves for a mandamus to direct respondents Nos. t and 2, the District Collector, Ernakulam, and the City Commissioner of Police, Ernakulam, respectively, to sanction the use of Mike, Loud Speakers or such other Amplifier appliances by the petitioner and the organization he represents. He also prays for a certiorari quashing Ext. P2 proceedings of the 1st respondent. By Ext. P2 proceedings dated 15-2-1974 the 1st respondent accorded sanction to use the Durbar Hall Ground in this city for' conducting the annual day celebrations of the Sevak Sangh subject to three conditions, the first of which is that 'mike, loud speaker etc. should not be used at any time.' The petitioner's complaint is against the imposition of this condition, and he seeks the aid of this Court to use mike, loud speakers etc. at the annual day celebrations of the Sevak Sangh to be ...
Good Shepherd Rubber Company Vs. Inspector of Central Excise and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-04-1974
Reported in: 1978(2)ELT66(Ker)
P. Subramaniam Poti, J.1. The petitioner challenges the levry of Excise duty demanded by Exts. P3 (A), P3 (B), P3 (C) and P3 (D) notices and also seeks to quash Extn. P7 order passed by the Collector of Customs and Central Excise, in an appeal filed by the petitioner against the levy of duty. Though-several contentions arise in this petition, it may not be necessary to go into all these, in view of the fact that the levy would be bad in case it is found to be a short levy coming within Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules since there has been no notice calling upon the party to show cause why the short levy should not be made. Ext. P3 series indicate that the assessee had paid the duty on the goods correctly except to the extent indicated in the notices and the assessee is called upon to pay the duty short levied within 10 days. Admittedly there has been no notice prior to the issue of Fxt. P3 series notices. It this imposition of duty is on account of short levy, then, of course, Rule ...
K.L. Johar and Co. Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-01-1974
Reported in: [1975]35STC52(Ker)
P. Govindan Nair, C.J.1. The only question arising in this tax revision case is whether the petitioner is entitled to have the excise duty paid to the State Government from 1st January, 1966, to 31st March, 1966, being deducted under Rule 9(i) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Rules, 1963, in determining the turnover of the assessee for the year 1965-66. Rule 9(i), before that rule was amended by Notification S. R. O. No. 639/63 dated 8th July, 1963, read as follows :9. Determination of taxable turnover.-In determining the taxable turnover, the amounts specified in the following clauses shall, subject to the conditions specified therein, be deducted from the total turnover of the dealer....(i) the excise duty, if any, paid by the dealer to the Central Government in respect of the goods sold by him.After the amendment by the notification dated 8th July, 1963, the clause was in these terms :(i) the excise duty, if any, paid by the dealer to the Government of Kerala or the Central Governmen...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›