Kerala Court July 1976 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Veeriah Reddiar
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-30-1976
Reported in: [1977]106ITR610(Ker)
Balakrishna Eradi, J.1. In this reference made under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the following question of law has been referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench (hereinafter called 'the Tribunal'):'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that the expenses incurred by the assessee in the supply of coffee, tea, cigarettes, etc., to customers is not in the nature of entertainment expenditure within the meaning of Section 37(2A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1970-71 ?'The Division Bench before whom this case originally came up for hearing felt that the question raised in the case is important enough to be considered by a Full Bench and the case was accordingly referred to a Full Bench. That is how the matter has come up before us.2. The assessee is a registered firm dealing in piece goods both on whol...
Tag this Judgment!income-tax Officer, B-ward Vs. Official Liquidator, Swaraj Motors (P.) ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-21-1976
Reported in: [1978]111ITR77(Ker)
Viswanatha Iyer, J.1. This application has been referred by the learned judge dealing with company matters for decision by a Division Bench in view of the fact that an important question of law regarding the scope of Section 178 of the Income-tax Act, vis-a-vis, Section 530 of the Companies Act arises for consideration in this application. The Company ' Swaraj Motors Private Ltd.' was ordered to be wound up by this court on October 31, 1969. During the course of liquidation the assets of the company were sold by the liquidator and that sale resulted in a ' capital gain', within the meaning of that expression in the Income-tax Act, of Rs. 1,27,460. For the assessment year 1973-74, this was treated as income and assessed to tax. The assessment order was passed on February 3, 1975, and the notice of demand to pay a tax of Rs. 97,037 was served on the liquidator on February 17, 1975. Though the liquidator took up the matter in appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, he did not succ...
Tag this Judgment!P.T. Abdussamad and ors. Vs. the State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-21-1976
Reported in: [1977]39STC399(Ker)
George Vadakkel, J.1. Inclusion of tapioca in the First Schedule to the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, by the Kerala General Sales Tax (Third Amendment) Act, 1974, was upheld by me as constitutional and competent in another batch of petitions, O.P. No. 237 of 1975 and connected cases P.V. Brothers Starch Industrials v. State of Kerala, page 397 supra. The learned counsel for the petitioners in these petitions contend that the amendment bringing in tapioca in the First Schedule aforesaid is hit by Article 301 of the Constitution. It is also submitted that entry No. 72 in the First Schedule relating to tapioca is discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. On that basis it is argued that these petitions which were filed prior to the Presidential Order dated 27th June, 1975, will have to remain suspended without being decided.2. In Makhan Singh v. State of Punjab A.I.R. 1964 S.C. 381, the Supreme Court pointed out:(9) Article 359, on the other hand, does not purpo...
Tag this Judgment!P. T. Abdussamad, High Land Traders, Calicut and Others Vs. the State ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-21-1976
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(Ker)348
George Vadakkel, J. - Inclusion of tapioca in the 1st schedule to the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 by the Kerala General Sales Tax (Third Amendment) Act, 1974 was upheld by me as constitutional and competent in another batch of petitioners, O.P. Nos. 237 of 1975 and connected cases. The learned counsel for the petitioners in these petitions contend that the amendment bringing in tapioca in the 1st schedule aforesaid is his by Article 301 of the Constitution is also submitted that entry No. 72 in the 1st schedule relating to tapioca is discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. On that basis it is argued that these petitions which were filed prior to Presidential Order dated 27-6-1975 will have to remain suspended without being decided.2. In Makhan Singh vs. State of Punjab (A.I.R. 1964 S.C. 381) the Supreme Court pointed out :-'(9) Article 359, on the other hand, does not purport expressly to suspend any of the fundamental rights. It authorities the President...
Tag this Judgment!The Registrar University of CochIn Vs. Vincent Panikulangara and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-20-1976
Reported in: AIR1976Ker146
Balakrishna Eradi, J.1. The appellant before us is the Registrar, University of Cochin. The first respondent herein Sri. Vincent Panikulangara had applied to the Cochin University for registration as a research student and as a candidate for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Social Sciences. That application was rejected on the ground that Sri. Vincent was not eligible to apply for registration as research student and as a candidate for Ph. D. Degree in the Faculty of Social Sciences. Ext. P-1 is a copy of the communication issued by the Registrar of the University of Cochin to Sri Vincent intimating him about the rejection of his application. Sri. Vincent thereupon came up to this Court and filed O. P. No. 928 of 1975 out of which this appeal has arisen, seeking to quash Ext. P-1 and praying for a writ of mandamus directing the Syndicate of the University of Cochin to consider the petitioner as a research student duly registered as a candidate for the Degree of Ph. ...
Tag this Judgment!C. J. Joseph Vs. State of KeralA.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-20-1976
Reported in: (1977)6CTR(Ker)44
Govindan Nair, C.J. - The short question raised in this revision is whether the conditions insisted upon by S. 10 of the Central Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1969 has been satisfied by the revision petitioner, the dealer who has been assessed to sales-tax. S. 10 of the Act is in these terms :'10. Exemption from liability to pay tax in certain cases - (1) Where any sale of good in the course of inter-State trade or commerce has been effected during the period between the 10th day of Nov., 1961 and the 9th day of June, 1969, and the dealer effecting such sale has not collected any tax under the principal Act on the ground that no such tax could have been levied or collected in respect of such sale or any portion of the turnover relating to such sale and no such tax could have been levied or collected if the amendments made in the principal Act by this Act had not been made, then, notwithstanding anything contained in S. 9 or the said amendments, the dealer shall not be liable to pay any ta...
Tag this Judgment!P.V. Brothers Starch Industrials and ors. Vs. the State of Kerala and ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-15-1976
Reported in: [1977]39STC397(Ker)
George Vadakkel, J.1. Tapioca was included in the First Schedule to the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, by the impugned legislation, the Kerala General Sales Tax (Third Amendment) Act, 1974, thereby making it a taxable commodity under the principal Act, point of levy being the last purchase in the State by a dealer liable to tax under Section 5 of the principal Act. However, a dealer, whose turnover of the purchase of tapioca is less than Rs. 35,000 and who sells such tapioca for domestic consumption and for use as food material, is exempted from tax under the Act. The petitioners contend that inclusion of tapioca in the First Schedule is a piece of colourable legislation, that the same is arbitrary and that it is not saved by Article 304 of the Constitution.2. The submission on the first point is that under Section 8(2A) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, also tapioca became taxable at 2 per cent. Explaining this point, it is further submitted that the real object of the inclusio...
Tag this Judgment!KuttirayIn and Co. and ors. Vs. the State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-09-1976
Reported in: [1976]38STC282(Ker)
George Vadakkel, J.1. The tax revision cases raise a common question of law, viz., when timber logs are converted into sizes, planks and scantlings, are the logs consumed in the manufacture of other goods so as to attract tax liability under Section 5A(l)(a) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963.Section 5A(l)(a) reads: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....shall, whatever be the quantum of the turnover relating to such purchase for a year, pay tax on the taxable turnover relating to such purchase for that year at the rates mentioned in Section 5.2. That timber logs purchased by the assessees are subjected to some treatment, labour and manipulation, namely, ...
Tag this Judgment!KuttirayIn and Co. and ors. Vs. the State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-09-1976
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(Ker)327
George Vadakkel, J. - The tax revision case raise a common question of law, viz., when timber logs are coverted into sizes, planks and scantlings, are the logs consumed in the manufacture of other goods so as to attract tax liability under Sec. 5A (1)(a) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963.2. Sec. 5A (1)(a) reads :-'5A. (1) Levy of purchase tax : Every dealer who in the course of his business purchases from a registered dealer on 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 Sec. 5, and either -(a) Consumes such goods in the manufacture of other goods for sale or otherwise; or(b) xx xx(c) xx xxshall, whatever be the quantum of the turnover relating to such purpose for a year, pay tax on the taxable turnover relating to such purchase for that year at the rates mentioned in Sec. 5'2. That timber logs purchased by the assessees are subjected to some treatment, labour and manipulation,...
Tag this Judgment!Vengalath Madathil Tavazhi Karnavan and anr. Vs. Thorekkat Kunhikrishn ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-08-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Ker123
Govindan Nair, C.J.1. This revision petition has come up before the Full Bench on an order of reference by a Division Bench of this Court. The question that arises for consideration has to be answered on the interpretation of Sections 6-A and 13-A of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963, for short the Act. Before we refer to these sections and the corresponding provisions in the previous enactments, we shall briefly state the facts.2. The revision petitioner obtained a decree for redemption of the mortgage, Ext. A-1 dated 4-3-1936, executed in favour of the father of the counter-petitioner in O. S. No. 428 of 1955. This decree was confirmed in appeal in A. S. No. 44 of 1962, and on further appeal to the High Court in S. A. No. 129 of 1963. In execution of the decree the civil revision petitioner recovered possession of the property on 17-7-1967. The counter-petitioner's father, Raman was holding the property on an oral lease from a period anterior to 1930. It was while he was so holding t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »