Kerala Court September 1976 Judgments
Jose T. Mooken Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-23-1976
Reported in: [1979]117ITR894(Ker)
Chandrasekhara Menon, J.1. One Shri M.O. Thomakutty was carrying on business as sole proprietor in the name and style of Mooken Devassy Ouseph & Sons during the accounting years relevant to the assessment years 1950-51 and 1951-52. During that time, he was working a salt factory taken on lease from the Government of Cochin. For these assessment years, Shri Thomakutty claimed as revenue expenditure amounts of Rs. 51,499.76 and Rs. 60,000, respectively. These amounts were said to have been expended for the maintenance, etc., of the salt factory concerned. The ITO disallowed these claims for deduction. The disallowance was based on certain information received from the State Government which, it would appear, had not been properly disclosed to the assessee. The matter ultimately came up in reference before this court. By judgment dated June 12, 1958, this court held the assessments to be invalid. In the meanwhile, Thomakutty had paid the tax due as per the assessments for these two years....
Tag this Judgment!President, Rubber Industrial Co-operative Society Ltd. Vs. State of Ke ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-11-1976
Reported in: (1977)ILLJ420Ker
K. Bhaskaran, J.1. On a reference under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act by the 1st respondent (the State of Kerala), the 2nd respondent (the Labour Court, Quilon) by Ext. PI award dated 23-3-1974 set aside the order of dismissal from service passed by the appellant (employer) in respect of the third respondent (employee) and directed him to be reinstated with back wages. The writ petition filed by the appellant for quashing Ext. PI award having been dismissed by a learned single Judge of this Court this appeal has been preferred.2. Sri K.J. Joseph counsel for the appellant submitted before us that Ext. PI award is bound to be set aside for the sole reason that 2nd respondent declined to accede to the request of the appellant that the question whether the enquiry alleged to have proceeded the dismissal was a proper and valid one was to be considered and decided as a preliminary issue. We may here extract paragraph 14 from Ext. PI award iBefore leaving this case, it is also nec...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›