Kerala Court October 1977 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.
Gwalior Rayons Vs. Labour Court and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-25-1977
Reported in: (1978)IILLJ188Ker
Chandrasekhara Menon, J.1. Certain interesting questions in Industrial law have arisen for consideration in this writ petition.2. The management of a Joint Stock Company which has got its registered office in Madhya Pradesh, but which has got a Rayon Grade Pulp Plant and Paper Mill in Mavoor in Kazhikode District of Kerala State, challenges in this petition the legality and validity of the award of the Labour Court, Kozhikode in Industrial Dispute No. 12 of 1976 before that Court. The dispute which was between the petitioner and their workmen represented by the Gwalior Rayon Pulp Factory Employees' Union, Mavoor was referred to the Labour Court by the Government of Kerala as per their proceedings dated 9-10-1967. The dispute referred was as regards the termination of services of six employees of the company-1. Kannan Menon, 2. Kunhiraman, 3. Viswanathan Nair, 4. Ramachandran Nair, 5. Man Singh and 6. Kunhiraman Nambiar.3. The petitioner-company had acquired with the previous permission...
Rajarajeswari Weaving Mills Vs. Income-tax Officer, a Ward, Cannanore, ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-19-1977
Reported in: [1978]113ITR405(Ker)
GOPALAN NAMBIYAR C.J. - These two writ appeals raise a common question and may be disposed of together by a common judgment. W. A. No. 114 of 1977 relates to the assessment year 1971-72. Both the appeals arise out of orders passed by a learned judge dismissing the writ petitions in limine. It would be convenient to deal first with the facts in W.A.No. 113 of 1977. The assessee claimed deduction of certain amounts expended by him for the purchase of stock-in-trade, viz., yarn. Deduction was claimed on the basis of the general provisions of the Income-tax Act read in the light of section 40A(3) and rule 6DD(j) of the Act and the Rules. The section of the Income-tax Act with particular reference to which the claim for deduction has got to be based is section 28 of the Act. The deduction was disallowed on the ground that the requirements of section 40A(3) and rule 6DD(j) have not been satisfied. Section 40A(3) and rule 6DD(j) may conveniently be extracted.'40A(3) Where the assessee incurs ...
M. G. Kollankulam Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, KeralA.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-03-1977
Reported in: [1978]115ITR160(Ker)
BALAKRISHANA ERADI J. - The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench (hereinafter called 'the Tribunal'), has referred the following two question to this court under section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax, Act, 1957 (hereinafter called 'the Act') :'(i) For an asset to be included either under section 4(1)(a)(i) or, as the case may be, section 4(1)(a)(ii) of the Wealth-tax, 1957, in the net wealth of the assessee for the assessment year 1970-71, or assessment year 1971-72, whether that asset should also be an asset within the definition of that term 'asset' in the Wealth-tax Act, 11957, as it applied at the time that asset was transferred by the assessee (ii) Whether the expression assessment year commencing after the March 31, 1964 appearing in the proviso to section 4(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, as it applied to assessment years 1970-71 and 1971-72, refers to wealth-tax assessment years ?'The aforesaid questions have arisen in relation to the assessments to wealth-tax made against ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›