Kerala Court December 1975 Judgments
Workmen of Premier Tyres Limited Vs. Premier Tyres Limited
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-19-1975
Reported in: (1976)IILLJ251Ker
G. Viswanatha Iyer, J.1. The appellant, Premier Tyres Employees Union representing the workmen of Premier Tyres Ltd., raised an industrial dispute over the termination of service of one typist-clerk of the company. The order of termination of this employee reads as follows:Of late, it has been observed that you have been behaving in an abnormal manner in the office during working hours. It has also been observed on quite a number of times that you have been questioning the instructions of your superiors with regard to your work. It has become a habit with you to quarrel with your co-workers and officers. Your behaviour generally has been insolent and you have been warned several times against this kind of behaviour.Today particularly, while you were engaged in work and when some papers were handed over to you for typing, you suddenly lost your temper and rushed upto Mr. T.M.G. Nedungadi and shouted at him. When you were asked by him to keep quiet, you started shouting at the pitch of y...
Tag this Judgment!Deputy Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax and Sales Tax (Law), Bo ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-17-1975
Reported in: [1976]37STC179(Ker)
T. Kochu Thommen, J.1. The short question which arises for consideration in this tax revision case is whether 'water-coolers' come within the scope of entry No. 9 of the First Schedule to the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. According to the revenue, water-coolers fall within the scope of the said entry which deals with refrigerators and air-conditioning plants. The assessee, however, contends that they are not refrigerators or air-conditioning plants, but electrical goods falling under entry No. 26 of the same schedule. The relevant entries in the Act are as follows:Entry Refrigerators and air-conditioning At the point of first 10 No. 9. plants and component sale in the State by (later)parts thereof. a dealer who is liable 12to tax under Section 5.Entry All electrical goods, instruments, Do. 7.No. 26. apparatus, appliances and allsuch articles, the use of whichcannot be had except with the application of electrical energy,including fan and lighting bulbs,electrical earthenwares and...
Tag this Judgment!The Deputy Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax and Sales-tax, (Law ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-17-1975
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(Ker)0155B
Kochu Thommen, J. - The short question which arises for consideration in this tax Revision Case is whether 'water coolers' come within the scope of Entry No. 9 of the 1st Schedule to the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. According to the Revenue, water coolers fall within the scope of said Entry which deals with refrigerators and air conditioning plants. The assessee, however, contends that they are not refrigerators, or air conditioning plants, but electrical goods falling under Entry No. 26 of the same Schedule. The relevant Entries in the Act are as follows :'Entry No. 9.Refrigerators and air-conditioning plants and component parts thereof.at the point of the first sale in the State by a dealer who is liable to tax under S.5.10% (later 12%) 'Entry No. 26.All electrical goods, instruments, apparatus, appliances and all such articles, the use of which cannot be had except with the application of electrical energy including fan and lighting bulbs, electrical earthen wares and porcela...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. K. Gopinathan Nair
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-12-1975
Reported in: [1976]103ITR23(Ker)
Govindan Nair, C.J. 1. This is a reference under Section 27(1) of theWealth-tax Act, 1957, for short, ' the Act ', and the question referred isin these terms :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the provision made by the assessee towards liability on account of gratuity payable to the workers is an allowable deduction while computing the assessee's net wealth '2. The year of assessment with which we are concerned is 1971-72. Theassessee had claimed a sum of Rs. 8,60,690 as liability towards gratuitypayable to its workmen as a deduction under Section 2(m) of the Act.Section 2(m) runs thus :' ' Net wealth ' means the amount by which the aggregate value computed in accordance with the provisions of this Act of all the assets, wherever located, belonging to the assessee on the valuation date, including assets required to be included in his net wealth as on that date under this Act, is in excess of the aggregate value of...
Tag this Judgment!Rajasekharan Nair Vs. State of Kerala and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-11-1975
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(Ker)308
V. Balakrishna Eradi, J. - The writ petitioner is the owner of a Cinema theatre in Parur by name Radha Picture place. He has brought this writ petition challenging the order Ext. P3 passed by the Municipal Commissioner Parur (2nd respondent) holding that the amount of Addl. Tax on Entertainments in respect of admission tickets for the 'Bench Class' in the petitioners theatre is 10 paise as per the Rules and that inasmuch as the petitioner has been making payments of the additional tax only at the rate of 5 paise, the short remittance of 5 paise per ticket has to be realised from the proprietor of the theatre. There is also a direction contained in Ext. P3 that further sealing of tickets will be allowed only on payment of the Additional Tax on Entertainment at the rate of 10 paise for the admission ticket of 50 paise in respect of 'Bench Class' in respect of the petitioners theatre and that separate orders will be issued for the levy of short-remittance of tax made in the past. The peti...
Tag this Judgment!A.A. Kochandi and ors. Vs. Agricultural Income-tax Officer and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-09-1975
Reported in: [1977]110ITR406(Ker)
George Vadakkel, J.1. Though the assessee, father of petitioners Nos, 1 and 2 and husband of the 3rd petitioner, filed the return on September 24, 1971, in respect of his agricultural income for the year 1971-72, the assessment was not completed till he died on November 4, 1972. After his death a pre-assessment notice was issued to petitioners Nos. 1 and 2 by post. This was not served-on them and was returned. Notice was, therefore, forwarded to the 3rd respondent, village officer of the village, in which the cardamom estate of the deceased is situated. According to the 1st respondent, Additional Agricultural Income-tax Officer, the village officer did not find the above persons (petitioners Nos. 1 and 2) and so he served them by affixture on March 3, 1973. No other circumstances relating to the said service by affixture are available in this case. The first respondent appears to have completed the assessment thereafter ; according to him, he sent the assessment order and demand notice...
Tag this Judgment!Sree Krishna Traders Vs. Sales Tax Officer
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-02-1975
Reported in: [1976]38STC32(Ker)
K.K. Narendran, J.1. The petitioner in this original petition is an assessee to sales tax under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, for short the Act. The grievance of the petitioner is against exhibits P-1 and P-3. Exhibit P-1 is a notice issued under the proviso to Section 17(3) of the Act for making a best of judgment assessment. Exhibit P-3 is the final assessment for the year 1972-73. The main question that arises for consideration is whether the benefit of a notification exempting purchase of firewood and clay by the manufacturers of tiles within the State under Section 10 of the Act issued after the assessment year but before the actual assessment, can be claimed by the assessee in the assessment for that year. A decision of this question depends upon the fact as to when the liability to sales tax in respect of a transaction arises. The petitioner has also a contention that the petitioner's accounts cannot be rejected on the ground that the quantity of gum used was insuffici...
Tag this Judgment!Sree Krishna Traders Vs. Sales Tax Officer.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-02-1975
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(Ker)0195B
K. K. Narendran, J. - The petitioner in this original petition is an assessee sales-tax under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, for short the Act. The grievance of the petitioner is against Exts. P-1 and P-3. Ext. P-1 is a notice issued under the proviso to S. 17(3) of the Act for making a best of judgment assessment, Ext. P-3 is the final assessment for the year 1972-73. The main question that arises for consideration is whether the benefit of a Notification exempting purchase of firewood and clay by the manufacturers of tiles within the State under S. 10 of the Act issued after the assessment year before the actual assessment can be claimed by the assessee in the assessment for that year. A decision of this question depends upon the fact as to when the liabilities to sales-tax in respect of a transaction arises. The petitioner has also a contention that the petitioners accounts cannot be rejected on the ground that the quantity of gum used was insufficient.2. The petitioner is ...
Tag this Judgment!R. Madhavan Nair Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-01-1975
Reported in: [1976]105ITR813(Ker)
Balakrishna Eradi, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, has referred to this court under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the following question : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the Income-tax Officer had jurisdiction to act under Section 147(b) also although the Act makes a specific provision under Section 155(5) for the withdrawal of the development rebate ?' 2. For the assessment year 1964-65 the assessee, who was an individual carrying on business under the name and style of 'Cochin Company', was assessed to tax by an order passed by the Income-tax Officer, Company Circle, Ernakulam, dated July 27, 1967. In making that assessment the Income-tax Officer had allowed to the assessee a deduction of Rs. 2,619 by way of development rebate in respect of certain machinery which the assessee had installed in his business premises on June 30, 1962. The ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›