Kerala Court July 1975 Judgments
Shajahan and ors. Vs. Income-tax Officer and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-31-1975
Reported in: [1976]46CompCas506(Ker); [1976]104ITR265(Ker)
Chandrasekhara Menon, J.1. The same question arises in the three cases. What is under challenge in these cases are orders issued to the bankers of the petitioners, Federal Bank, Punalur, restraining the bank from removing, parting with, or otherwise dealing with the money in the savings bank account of the petitioners, by the Income-tax Officer (authorised officer under Section 132), A-Ward, Quilon, issued under Section 132(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. I will extract in full the order challenged in O.P. No. 2453/75 marked as exhibit P-1 in that case :' Prohibition under Section 132(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.By virtue of the powers conferred on me by Section 132(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, I. N. P. Padmanabhan, Income-tax Officer, A-Ward, Quilon, an authorised officer, order that you, the agent the Federal Bank Ltd., Punalur, shall not remove, part with or otherwise deal with the books of accounts, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing...
Tag this Judgment!Guruvayur Devaswom Committee Vs. Income-tax Officer, Trichur.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-30-1975
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(Ker)0206A
P. Subramonian Poti, J. - The Guruvayoor temple is a famous shrine belonging to the Hindu denomination, attracting pilgrims from all over India. The temple has income from extensive properties possessed by it and also income by way of grant from the Government. Besides this, amounts realised by way of fines, penalties imposed and recoveries made under the Guruvayoor Devaswom Act also go to augment the income of the temple. The Devaswom also receives substantial amounts of income by way of offerings and contributions from members of the denomination, from local authorities and other institutions. Till recently the Zamorin Raja of Calicut was in management of the temple properties and the endowments. But from 9-3-1971 the temple is being managed by the Guruvayoor Devaswom Managing Committee under the Guruvayoor Devaswom Act, 1971.2. It is said that the Devaswom was not in receipt of any category of income which obliged to it submit returns under the Income-taxg, 1961, and it was not ther...
Tag this Judgment!Madras Rubber Factory Ltd. Vs. the Assistant Collector of Central Ex. ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-24-1975
Reported in: 1977(1)ELT85(Ker)
1. The matter arising in these two petitions are connected. O.P. 1290 of 1973 is the main petition and therefore I will first refer to the facts of that petition. The petitioner is the Madras Rubber Factory Limited, a company registered under the Companies Act. It is engaged in the business of manufacturing automobile tubes, tread rubber with cushion etc. These goods are sold under the trade name 'Mansfield'. The petitioner is having a factory at Kottayam in which factory the manufacture of automotive tubes and other rubber products was commenced from 1970.2. The petitioner company has sales and technical organisation independent of the manufacturing units. There is no ex-factory price for the products manufactured by the petitioner and normally no contract is entered into for the sale of the products for delivery at the factory gate. On the other hand the goods are sent over to the sales depots of the petitioner company situated in various places in India and irrespective of the dista...
Tag this Judgment!Ourupuvil Mathew Ouseph Vs. the District Collector, Ernakulam and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-17-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Ker118
ORDERP. Subramonian Poti, J. 1. The complaint of the petitioner in the Original Petition is that in spite of an application for reference made by him under Section 20 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1961, the District Collector, Ernakulam has taken the stand that petitioner is not competent to claim reference. That is not because there has been any order on that application. But the stand of the District Collector is evident from Ext. P. 4, a reply to the suit notice issued to the petitioner. Therein it is mentioned that the compensation was received by the party without protest on 30-4-1966 and no reference application was filed before the Special Tahsildar as alleged. In the original petition mention is made of the filing of the reference application dt. 30-4-1968 and it is said it was sent by registered post. The acknowledgment of this is also produced along with the Original Petition, markedExt. P-2. In the light of the circumstance that the Special Tahsildar Land Acquisition, who has...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Rahiman Chowghat Vs. the Commissioner of Income-tax, Kerala, Ern ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-17-1975
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(Ker)160
P. Subramonian Poti, J. - An interesting question concerning the constructions of S. 220 (7) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, arises for decision. Sub-sec. (7) of S. 220 of the Act reads :Where an assessee has been assessed in respect of income arising outside Indian in a county the laws of which prohibit or restrict the remittance of money to India the Income-tax Officer shall not treat the assessee as in default in respect of the tax which is due in respect of that amount of his income which, by reason of such prohibition or restriction, cannot be brought into India, and shall continue to treat the assessee as not in default in respect of such part of the tax until the prohibition or restriction is removed.Explanation : For the purposes of this section, income shall be deemed to have been brought into India if it has been utilised or could have been utilised for the purposes of any expenditures actually incurred by the assessee outside India or if the income, whether capitalised or not, ...
Tag this Judgment!Raja Rajeswari Weaving Mills, Cannanore Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-16-1975
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(Ker)145
Kochu Thommen, J. - These four Original Petitions arise from similar circumstances and raise a common question of law. In all the Original Petitions, with the exception of O.P. No. 3095 of 1973, the main prayer is for a declaration that sub-s. (3) of S. 40A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is unconstitutional and violative of Arts. 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. The petitioner in O.P. 3095 of 1973 had merely asked for an appropriate order restraining the respondents from collecting the balance tax for the assessment year 1970-71 till the disposal of Writ Petition No. 1197 of 1973.2. We shall first deal with O.P. No. 1087 of 1973. The petitioner is a firm carrying on business in textiles and is an assessee under the Income-tax Act, 1961. The petitioner filed the return for the assessment year 1970-71 in which it showed a total income of Rs. 43,080/-. The Income-tax Officer completed the assessment on a total income of Rs. 88,980/- and disallowed a sum of Rs. 46,060/- under S. 40A(3) of...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Kerala and anr. Vs. K.S. Krishna Kumari and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-14-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Ker54
P. Govindan Nair, C.J. 1. The appeals arise from a common judgment disposing of O. P. Nos. 4873, 5006, 5004 5188 and 6449 of 1974.* The Original Petitions raise the same question that has been dealt with in the judgment which gave rise to the appeals,2. The points raised in arguments advanced in the Writ Appeals and the Original Petitions by counsel were also common. We shall therefore dispose of the Writ Appeals and the Original Petitions by this common judgment.3. The facts of the Original Petitions disposed of by the common judgment which is under appeal in the Writ Appeals have been stated in paragraphs 1 to 6 of the judgment. We shall extract those paragraphs:'The petitioners in these Original Petitions applied for admission to the first M. B. B. S. course for the year 1974-75. But they did not get admission- The petitioners who belong to communities which are socially and educationally backward, question the constitutionality of the restriction imposed in G. O. P. 208/66/Edn. dat...
Tag this Judgment!P.K. Gopinathan Nairand ors. Vs. the Executive Officer and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-14-1975
Reported in: 1976CriLJ171
V. Khalid, J.1. There are eight petitioners in this petition. The petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, The petitioners seek to quash the prosecutions pending against them before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate. Chengannur, as C. Cs. Nos. 42 to 48 and 57 of 1975. The second petitioner, who is the accused in C C. No. 47 of 1975, has sworn to an affidavit on behalf of all the petitioners.2. The first respondent is the Executive Officer of Anikkad Panchayat and the second respondent is the Food Inspector, Thiruvella Circle. The first respondent issued a notice, to each of the petitioners separately, calling upon them to take licences under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, Act 37 of 1954. for short the Act, since they are authorised distributors of rationed ' articles like wheat, rice, etc. The petitioners submitted a written representation before the Panchayat requesting that Executive Officer be directed not to insist upon the petitioners in t...
Tag this Judgment!T.V. Ali Vs. the State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-08-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Ker42
Gopalan Nambiyar J.1. The appellant was the Headmaster of the Government Lower Primary School, Kokkur. Certain charges were levelled against kirn for tampering with the entries in regard to the dates of birth of three pupils to whom transfer certificates were issued. It was found that the appellant was guilty of the charge of having tampered with the entries in the certificates and he was censored by the 3rd Respondent viz. the District Educational Officer, Malapuram, by Ext. PG order. In exercise of their power of review, under Rule 34 of the Kerala Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 1960, the Government by Ext. PS order Stated as follows:'Government have reviewed the case in exercise of the powers vested with them under Rule 34 (c) of the K. C. S. (C. C, and A) Rules. They find that the charges against Sri. T. V. Ali one of the serious nature and that the punishment awarded to him by the District Educational Officer is inadequate when the nature and gravity of ...
Tag this Judgment!Friends Union Oil Mills and ors. Vs. Income-tax Officer and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-08-1975
Reported in: [1977]106ITR571(Ker)
Khalid, J. 1. This petition raises questions of law, which at the first flush appear to be tenable, but which on closer scrutiny fail as being devoid of merits. This petition is at the instance of the accused, seven in number, in C.C. No. 439 of 1974 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Trichur. A complaint was filed by the Income-tax Officer, F-Ward, Trichur, before the said court under Section 277 of the Income-tax Act of 1961 and Sections 193 and 196 of the Indian Penal Code. The first accused is a firm and accused Nos. 2 to 7 are its partners. In paragraph 2 of the complaint it is stated as follows:'The complaint is filed at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Kerala-II, Ernakulam, and a copy of the authorisation under Section 279 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is herewith filed.'2. The petitioners filed an application before the court below under Section 245(2) and 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act 2 of 1974), for short the Code, for their dischar...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »