Court : Kerala
Reported in : [1979]120ITR670(Ker)
Gopalan Nambiyar, C.J.1. These references are under Section 60 of the Agrl. I.T. Act, made by the Kerala Agricultural Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Kozhikode, at the instance of the assessee. The assessment years are 1969-70 and 1970-71. For the earlier year the assessee filed a return of agricultural income declaring his share at Rs. 1,611 from Messrs. Koravampady Estate. For the year 1970-71 he declared his share of the loss from the same estate at Rs. 1,685 46. During both the years in question, he was the managing partner of the estate, entitled to draw a salary of Rs. 6,000 per annum for his services as the managing partner of the firm, besides his share of the income under agreements dated 26th July, 1966, and 10th February, 1970. Clause 6 of the earlier agreement and Clause 7 of the later one provided for the payment of remuneration to the managing partner. The returns were rejected by the Agrl. ITO. In assessing to tax, the assessing officer took into account...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 1980CriLJ906
ORDERV. Khalid, J.1. This is an application filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the second accused in Crime No. 757 of 1978 of the Central Police Station, Ernakulam, to quash the order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam, directing the petitioner to appear in his court on 15-3-1979 to be placed in the custody of the police for a period of four days from 15-3-1979 noon till 19-3-1979 noon.2. The circumstances under which this petition has been filed are as follows: Crime No. 757 of 1978 was registered by the police against the petitioner and another person for offences punishable under Sections 419, 420 and 471, read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. The accusation against the accused is that they forged certain documents and cheated the Andhra Bank to the tune of Rs. 500/- and took delivery of certain steel items meant for some other consignee. It was further alleged that the steel items were sub-sequently sold by the accused persons to some other de...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : [1988]169ITR395(Ker)
V.P. Gopalan Nambiyar, C.J.1. These references are at the instance of the Revenue under Section 60 of the Kerala Agricultural Income-taxAct, 1950. The questions of law referred for our determination are the same, the figures alone being different. The questions referred are : 2. I.T.R. No. 109 of 1977.:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in allowing the claims of the assessee towards legal expenses, travelling expenses for appeal and expenses relating to strike amounting to Rs. 200, Rs. 37'30 and Rs. 4,044.24, respectively, the presumption being that Section 5(j) of the Kerala Agrl. Income-tax Act, 1950, corresponds to Section 10(2)(xv) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922?'3. I.T.R. No. 125 of 1977 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the expenses incurred in connection with taxation matters are an allowable deduction in computing the agricultural income under Section 5 of the Kerala Agrl. Income-tax Act, 1950 ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1980Ker108; 1980CENCUS149D; 1979(4)ELT651(Ker)
Gopalan Nambiyar, C.J. 1. We cannot agree with the learned judge who allowed the respondent's writ petition and quashed Ext. P4 order and directed the Collector of Central Excise, Madras to consider and dispose of Ext. P3 appeal on the merits. By Ext. P2 order dated 15-12-73 the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Kottayam, confirmed the demand for a sum of Rs. 57,190.34 raised against the respondent for having removed tread rubber without payment of the duty due. Against this order of the Assistant Collector, the statute provides an appeal to the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, Madras, which had to be filed within three months of the date of the order of the 1st authority. Ext. P3 appeal seems to have been wrongly addressed to the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, Cochin instead of to that authority at Madras, Presumably, for that reason, there is no controversy that the appeal was received by the Appellate Authority out of time, that is, after the three months' period ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 1979CENCUS331D; 1979(4)ELT397(Ker)
V.P. Gopalan Nambiyar, C.J. 1. The appellant, The Madras Rubber Factory Ltd., Madras, is a company registered under the Companies Act with its registered office in Madras. It is engaged in the manufacture of automobile tubes, tread rubber both with and without cushion, and other rubber products sold under the name and style of 'Mansfield'. Its factory is located at Vadavathoor inKottayam District in this State. It started its manufacture of rubber products from the financial year 1969-70. Its products are supplied to itsdepots at various places throughout the country. In so doing, it has incurred expenses of storage, transportation, insurance, etc. In the matter of costing rubber, the practice seems to have been to strike the average price called the 'billing price' after taking into account all these heads of expenses, and to transfer to the depots the stock at the said billing price. The depots in their turn sell to the dealers or consumers. 2. The question agitated in this petition ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1980Ker190
ORDERM.P. Menon, J.1. This is a claim by a company in liquidation for the balance of the kuri prize money drawn by the 1st respondent. The prize money was paid on 23-4-70 when the 1st respondent, along with the second, executed a promissory note for the amount in favour of the company, and also an agreement whereunder the 2nd respondent, as surety, guaranteed repayment. The 1st respondent also executed a receipt for the amount. The claim is based on the promissory note, the original consideration and the contract of guarantee.2. The first respondent has been examined; he admits the liability, his only case being that he is entitled to be discharged under Section 3 of the Kerala Debt Relief Act, 1977. Ext. A1 report filed by the local Inspector attached to the Liquidator's Office supports this case. The annual income of the 1st respondent is estimated to be only Rs. 250: The claim is also for an amount below Rs. 3,000, The first respondent is thus admittedly entitled to discharge.3. The...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1980Ker1
Gopalan Nambiyar, C.J. 1. Theappellant was an objector who objected to the grant of a licence for starting of a rice mill in Chalissery, for which the 4th respondent was an applicant. Ext. P1 is a copy of the objection filed by the appellant. On that the District Medical Officer of Health reported by Ext P3 that the inmates of the area of the proposed mill had raised strong objection and that the Officer was also of the view that the starting of another rice mill in that area would be an additional nuisance to the public in the locality, and that in the circumstances approval of the site may be deferred. The 4th respondent apparently carried up the matter further to the 3rd respondent. From Ext. P3, we see that the Director of Health Services reported that there is no objection in sanctioning the installation of the rice mill using 10 H.P. Electric Motor. He accordingly requested that revised orders may be issued in the matter. The District Medical Officer of Health in the circumstance...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1980Ker109
Subramonian Poti, J. 1. A question of some importance arises for decision in this case. It concerns the consequence of the repeal by Section 7 of the Kerala Joint Hindu Family System (Abolition) Act, 1975 of the Acts mentioned in the Schedule. One of the Acts so repealed is the Travancore Nair Act 2 of 1100. That Act provides among other things, for dissolution of a marriage solemnised under the Act. It specifies grounds for dissolution of marriage and also prescribes the procedure by which the right to seek dissolution is to be exercised. The court to which proceedings would lie is also specified. The Hindu Marriage Act 1955 provides in Section 13, for dissolution of Hindu Marriages. The grounds for dissolution are specified in this Act and the procedure for seeking dissolution is also specified in the Act. The grounds for dissolution under the Hindu Marriages Act are not identical with the grounds for divorce in the Nair Act 1100.2. Notwithstanding the commencement of the Hindu Marri...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 1980CriLJ521
P. Narayana Pillai, J.1. Appeal from acquittal.2. Prosecution was under the provisions of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act for sale of adulterated buffalo-milk. There were three accused persons in the case. The trial court acquitted the second and third accused but convicted the first accused under Section 16(1)(a)(i) read with Section 7(1) of the Act and sentenced him to simple imprisonment for six months and a fine of Rs. 1000/-. In the appeal filed by the first accused the lower appellate court acquitted him. This appeal is from that acquittal.3. Both the courts below found that the first accused sold buffalo-milk to P. W. 1, the Food Inspector, .The acquittal of the first accused by the lower appellate court would appear to be on the sole ground that there was no satisfactory evidence to show that Rule 18 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, which provides (i) that copy of memorandum and specimen impression of the seal should be separately sent to the Public Analyst...
Tag this Judgment!