Kerala Court October 1975 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.
Workmen of CochIn Chamber of Commerce Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-19-1975
Reported in: (1976)IILLJ108Ker
Subramonian Poti, J.1. In these two cases similar questions arise for decision. The petitioners in these cases were employed by the Cochin Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Cochin as sworn measures. They were charged with negligence and dereliction of duty and after enquiry they were dismissed from service. Their cases were taken up by their unions, one of them by the Cochin Commercial Employees' Association, Cochin-1 and the other by the Mercantile Employees' Association, Calicut. The Government ultimately, by Ext. P3 order in both these cases informed the parties that they do not propose to refer the matter for adjudication. The ground stated was:As the management has taken action in accordance with the canons of natural justice, prima facie the action of the management is not mala fide.This was the sole ground. The State Government was under a duty to communicate the reasons for not making a reference under Section 10(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and evidently it was such...
Chellapan Vs. Additional Collector of Customs
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-15-1975
Reported in: 1978(2)ELT547(Ker)
Govindan Nair, C.J.1. The short question arising in this appeal turns on the interpretation of Section 153 of the Customs Act, 1962 which is in these terms :-'153. Any order or decision passed or any summons OF notice issued under this Act, shall be served-(a) by tendering the order, decision, summons or notice registered post to the persons for whom it is intended or to his agent; or(b) if the order, decision, is on the notice board of the customs house'The learned Judge dealt with the contention in the following manner in the judgment under appeal.'What is contended for by the petitioner is that before the Department could have taken recourse to Sub-Clause (b) of Section 153 they should have tried to serve the order in both manners contemplated by sub-clause (a). Shri N.N. Divakaran Pillai, the petitioner's counsel contends that if it was not possible to serve the petitioner by sending the order by registered post, he should have been served by tendering it directly. I do not agree w...
The Malabar Steamship Co. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Collector of Customs and ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-15-1975
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(Ker)110
P. Subramaninan Poti, J. - The question that arises in these two petitions is the same and therefore it is sufficient to refer in detail to the facts of the case in O.P. No. 883 of 1973.2. Messrs. Malabar Steamship Company Limited, is a shipping Company owing shipping vessels generally used for coastal runs. 'M. V. Janaki' is one such vessel. She is permitted to carry cargo to and from Colombo, a foreign port. On 5-3-1971 M. V. Janaki sailed from the port of Calcutta with cargo to Colombo, to Cochin and Bombay. The ship arrived at Cochin on 21-3-1971 after discharging cargo at Colombo. The vessel was thus a foreign going vessel from 5-3-1971 when the ship was at Calcutta port there were 37,764 litres of light diesel oil bunkers on board (32,400 long tons). On 3-3-1971 she took ex-bond bunkers of 29,058 litres (24,936 long tons.) At the time the customs authorities at Cochin took inventory of the ship stores it was found that there was a balance of 27,119 litres (24 long tons) of light ...
income-tax Officer, Ernakulam Vs. the Mambad Timber and Estates Privat ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-08-1975
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(Ker)0166C
Narendran, J. - The Income-tax Officer, Central Circle, Ernakulam, the applicant in Company Petition No. 1 of 1972, is the appellant in the appeal against the order of the company court. The short question that arises for consideration is whether the company court has jurisdiction to pass an order under section 559 of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short the Act) declaring dissolution of a company void after two years of the date of its dissolution or whether the application under section 559 need be filed within the said period of two years. A further question that arises for consideration is that in view of rule 285 of the Companies Court rules, 1959 (for short the Rules), an application for dissolution under section 559 of the Act made without giving notice to the Central Government and the Registrar of Companies can be taken as made, before proper notice was actually given to the Central Government and the Registrar of Companies.2. The first respondent, the Mambad Timber and Estates ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Union Engineering Works
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-01-1975
Reported in: [1976]105ITR311(Ker)
Kochu Thommen, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, has, at the instance of the department, referred to us the following question : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amount of Rs. 13,455.75 received by the assessee is a receipt arising fromits business within the meaning of Section 10(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The assessee-firm carries on the business of manufacturing and selling tea-chest fittings and battery covers. The reference case relates to the assessment year 1968-69. For the accounting year relevant to the said assessment year, the assessee had shown a sum of Rs. 13,455.75 in its profit and loss account as 'profit on devaluation'. The question that arises in this case -is whether the claim of the assessee that this amount represented a casual and non-recurring receipt coming within the scope of Section 10(3) of the Income-tax Act, as it stood at the relevant time, can be accepted. 3. The assessee imported 57,694 tonnes ...
income-tax Officer and anr. Vs. M. Shajahan and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-01-1975
Reported in: [1976]46CompCas524(Ker); [1976]104ITR347(Ker)
Govindan Nair, C.J.1. These are appeals taken by the revenue from the judgment in O.Ps. Nos. 2453, 2460 and 2467 of 1975* which were allowed by the judgment under appeals in these cases. By that judgment an order which has been produced in O.P. No. 2453 of 1975 (W.A. No. 291 of 1975) as exhibit P-l purporting to have been passed by the authorised officer under Sub-section (3) of Section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for short, ' the Act ', has been set aside by the learned judge. The question that arises in these appeals, though they relate to three different assessees, is the same; the ambit and scope of the powers of the 'authority entitled to pass an order under Sub-section (3) of Section 132 of the Act.2. Before we proceed further we shall extract the relevant parts of Section 132 which are Sub-sections (1), (2), (3), (5) and (7);' (1) Where the Director of Inspection or the Commissioner, in consequence of information in his possession, has reason to believe that--(a) any person...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›