Kerala Court November 1979 Judgments
Premier Tyres Ltd. Vs. Assistant Collector and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-30-1979
Reported in: 1980(6)ELT161(Ker)
ORDERT. Kochu Thommen, J.1. The petitioner is a manufacturer of, among other things, tubes and flaps. In respect of those goods manufactured and exported by them, the petitioner claimed drawback as per the provisions of the Customs Act, 1972 ('the Act') read with Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1971 ('the Rules') and Ext. PI public notice dated 5th June 1972 prescribing rates of drawbacks. The Assistant Collector of Customs by Exts. P3 and P4 held that the petitioner was not entitled to any drawback they manufactured tubes and flaps out of natural rubber which was not dutiable under the Act or the Rules. According the officer, no drawback was payble on nondutiable goods or dutiable goods on which duty had not been paid. The decision of the Assistant Collector was set aside in appeal by the Appellate Collector of Customs by Ext. P7. Ext P7 was taken up in suo motu revision by the Central Government which by Ext. P8 order held that natural rubber out of which the petiti...
Tag this Judgment!Padmanabhan Nair Vs. Thankappan and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-27-1979
Reported in: AIR1980Ker156
ORDERT. Kochu Thommen, J. 1. The petitioner is the landowner and the 1st respondent is the worker. The petitioner challenges Ext. P2 award of the Agricultural Tribunal, Allep-pey, in A. D. No. 30 of 1976 whereby the Tribunal held that the 1st respondent was entitled to be employed by the petitioner in terms of Section 7 (2) of the Kerala Agricultural Workers Act, 1974 ('the Act'). The award is challenged for two reasons. The petitioner's counsel Shri P. C. Balakrishna Menon contends that the award is invalid for the reason that it was made outside the period limited for making an award in terms of Section 22 (5). Counsel further contends that the award is vitiated by an error in so far as the Tribunal did not take into account the employer's contention that the worker was not entitled to be employed for the reason mentioned under Section 7 (5) (d). 2. Section 22 (5) reads: 'Where an agricultural dispute has been referred to an Agricultural Tribunal under Sub-section (4), the Tribunal s...
Tag this Judgment!State of Kerala and anr. Vs. Ayilammal Syamala Thamburatti and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-23-1979
Reported in: AIR1980Ker82
George Vadakkel, J.1. This appeal is preferred under Section 8A of the Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971, (hereinafter, the Act) from the decision of the Forest Tribunal, palghat, under Section 8 thereof in O. A. Nos. 503 to 506 of 1975 on its file. Besides providing for an appeal to this Court from such a decision, Section 8A also prescribes therefor a period of limitation of 60 days from the date of the decision: If the time requisite for obtaining the certified copy of the order produced along with this appeal is excluded, it is well within time; and otherwise it is out of time. The principal point that is mooted herein is this question of limitation, and the answer thereto depends on the applicability or otherwise of Section 12 of the Limitation Act, 1963 to this appeal.2. It is not disputed that the Act is a 'special or local law' falling within Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act, 1963. Nor can there be now any controversy as regards the applicability of S...
Tag this Judgment!P. Krishna Warrier Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-23-1979
Reported in: [1981]127ITR192(Ker)
Gopalan Nambiyar, C.J.1. These references relate to the assessment of Shri Krishna Warrier, the managing trustee of the Arya Vaidya Sala, Kottakkal. The main question involved is whether the income derived from the Arya Vaidya Sala is liable to be excluded under Section 11(1)(a) of the I.T. Act, 1961, read with Section 2(15), or Section 4(3) of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922. The questions arising in these references and the circumstances under which they have come up are as follows : ITR Nos. 95 of 1974 and 40 of 1976 relate to the assessment year 1964-65. For the year 1964-65, the assessee was assessed in the status of an association of persons. The other members of the association consisted of the trustees appointed under the will dated 30th October, 1939, of the late Vaidya Ratnam P. S. Warrier who died on 30th June, 1944. The will provided that the A schedule properties were tarwad properties and all the other properties, movable and immovable, and all outstanding transactions and the ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Smt. P.K. Noorjehan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-21-1979
Reported in: (1980)15CTR(Ker)138; [1980]123ITR3(Ker)
1. These two references are at the instance of the revenue and are compelled under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961, by this court. The assessee is a Muslim lady aged approximately about 20 years during the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1968-69. The two assessment years with which we are concerned are 1968-69 and 1969-70. The assessee's husband is a piece-goods merchant in Broadway, Ernakulam. The assessee by herself has no business, profession or vocation, which earns her any income nor has she any heads of income such as what is mentioned in Section 14 of the I.T. Act, except a small property income. She was not at any time an income-tax assessee. On notices issued by the ITO, returns were filed for the two years in question. On November 15, 1967, that is in the accounting year relevant to the assessment year 1968-69, a property having an extent of about 16 cents situated in Ernakulam was purchased by the assessee. Inclusive of stamp and registration charges the i...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner, Trichur Municipality Vs. C. Narayanan Nair and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-19-1979
Reported in: AIR1980Ker170
ORDERV. Khalid, J.1. These petitions raise a common question and are being disposed of by a common order. In all these petitions, the Commissioner, Trichur Municipality, is the petitioner. These petitions arise from Land Acquisition Proceedings, L. A. R. No. 137 of 1976. Lands were acquired for the purpose of construction of Bell Mouth and Shopping Centre for the Municipality in the Naduvilal Junction, Trichur. The original compensation awarded was enhanced by the court below. The Municipality has to pay this. The State has not filed any appeal. In these petitions the Commissioner of the Municipality requests that leave may be granted to him for filing appeals against the judgment and decree in L. A. R. No. 137 of 1976 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Trichur.2. I shall consider the facts in L. A. R. No. 137 of 1978 for the purpose of this judgment. This appeal was filed on 16th August, 1979 and the present application for leave under Section 151, C. P. C. on 3rd October, ...
Tag this Judgment!Kousalya Devi Vs. Praveen Bankers
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-17-1979
Reported in: AIR1980Ker148
ORDERG. Viswanatha Iyer, J.1. The defendant-judgment-debtor in a decree for money is the revision petitioner. She is employed as a Programme Announcer in the All India Radio, Kozhikode, an establishment of the Central Government. The decree-holder applied to attach her salary to realise the amount. She gets a total emolument of Rs. 1046.50 as shown here-under :--Pay Rs. 700.00 Dearness Allowance Rs. 294.00 House Rent Allowance Rs. 52.50 Total Rs. 1046.50 The lower court has ordered to attach Rs. 200/- per month from her salary. This is challenged in this revision petition.2. According to the petitioner's counsel the amount received by the petitioner by way of Dearness Allowance and House Rent Allowance are not attachable. It is further submitted that out of her emoluments the petitioner pays Rs. 60/-per month towards Provident Fund subscription and that also has to be excluded in reckoning the portion of the salary that can be attached. The question is whether this is right.3. The prov...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Mamman Varghese and Others.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-14-1979
Reported in: (1983)15CTR(Ker)135; [1983]139ITR351(Ker)
GOPALAN NAMBIYAR C.J. - At the instance of the Revenue, the I.T. Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, has referred the following question of law for our determination, viz. :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that rule 1D of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957, for determination of the market value of unquoted equity shares is not always mandatory ?'The assessee in these four income-tax references are different individuals holding certain shares in a private limited company, viz., the Malayala Manorama Co. Ltd. They have filed returns showing their total wealth for the assessment year 1972-73. The valuation date under the W.T. Act, 1957, was March 31, 1972. The shares of the company had a face value of Rs. 10. In the return, the shares were valued at Rs. 4,025. This was arrived at by following the break-up value method on the basis of the balance-sheet of the company for the relevant year. This was accepted by the WTO who ...
Tag this Judgment!The Travancore Elecro-chemical Industries Limited Vs. Assistant Collec ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-08-1979
Reported in: 1980CENCUS192D; 1981(8)ELT221(Ker)
P. Subramonion Poti, J.1. In view of the difficult but interesting questions that arise for determination in this Original Petition this case has been referred by a Division Bench for decision by the Full Bench. Section 4 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 as it stood at the relevant time provided that where any article is chargeable with duty at a rate dependent on the value of such article such value shall be deemed to be the wholesale cash price for which an article of the like kind and quality is sold or is capable of being sold at the time of the removal of the article chargeable with duty. It may happen, as it has happened in the case before us, that sale in wholesale of substantial part of the goods produced may be effected to a customer at a price much less than the price at which the goods are sold to other customers in the usual course of business. That may be for reasons such as that such customer is a standing customer, who takes the bulk of the production or that a ...
Tag this Judgment!State of Kerala and ors. Vs. Universal Marine Agencies and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-07-1979
Reported in: AIR1980Ker158
Gopalan Nambiyar, C.J. 1. This appeal is by the State of Kerala and the Director of Fisheries, Trivandrum, against the judgment of a learned Judge of this Court, allowing the respondent's writ petition and restraining the appellants and the Deputy Director, the Assistant Director, the Sub-Inspector of Fisheries and the District Collector, Trichur, from taking steps for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 24,974.94, mentioned in Ext. P5 notice, under the provisions of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, 1968 or the Indian Revenue Recovery Act 1890. The learned Judge's judgment is reported (vide 1977 Ker LT 949). An Ice-plant, Storage and Freezing plant at Azheekode was leased to the writ petitioner under Ext. PI agreement dated 5-5-1970 for a period of one year. The rent was Rs. 30,001/-. Rs. 15,000/- had been paid on 7-5-1970 and the balance was payable on or before 23-11-1970. It was actually paid on 30-1-1971. Electric charges had to be paid by the lessee. As the charges were not so paid, the ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »