Kerala Court September 1980 Judgments
State of Kerala and anr. Vs. Malayalam Plantations Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-29-1980
Reported in: AIR1981Ker1
Chandrasekhara Menon, J.1. These appeals have come before us on three separate orders of references by a Division Bench of this Court passed on the same date/- 30-10-1979. Reference Order in M. F. A. Nos. 209, 211, 212, 233 and 234 of 1979, reads as follows :--'In these appeals by the State one of the main questions we are called upon to decide is that covered by the decision of a Full Bench of this Court in State of Kerala v. Amalgamated Malabar Estates (P) Ltd., I.L.R. (1979) 2 Ker 525 : (AIR 1980 Ker 137). Whether eucalyptus plantation falls outside the purview of the term 'private forest' as defined in the Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act 26 of 1971 is the question that so arises. Relying on the Full Bench decision the learned Additional Advocate General contends for the position that the orders of the Forest Tribunal have to be reversed. But counsel Sri P. K. Kurien appearing for the respondents in these cases canvasses the correctness of the decision of the Ful...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. K.N.G. Brothers
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-29-1980
Reported in: (1981)23CTR(Ker)50; [1982]134ITR323(Ker)
Balakrishna Eradi, C.J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench (hereinafter called ' the Tribunal'), has stated a case and referred the following two questions to this court under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961--for short, 'the Act'--pursuant to the order passed by this court in O.P. No. 2673 of 1976 dated June 15, 1978 :' (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that veethapalisa or the excess of receipts over the instalments paid by the assessee in its chitty account amounting to Rs. 5,147 and credited to its profit and loss account is not assessable to income-tax for the assessment year 1973-74 ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law and had any materials before it for holding that there is no nexus between the chitty account and the business of the assessee, and is not the decision of the Tribunal on such ba...
Tag this Judgment!Kuriakose Vs. P.K. Narayanan Nair
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-25-1980
Reported in: AIR1981Ker18
ORDERG. Balagangadharan Nair, J.1. The principal question that falls to be decided is whether the lower appellate court was wrong in dismissing the appeal out of which the revision arises, as not maintainable. On Jan. 5, 1977 the respondent-decree-holder filed an execution petition for recovery of the amount due to him. The petitioner who is the judgment-debtor raised objections to the execution claiming the benefits of Ordinance 1 of 1977 and later made an application E. A. 660 of 1977 for relief under Act 17 of 1977, which had, in the meanwhile replaced Ordinance 1 of 1977. After enquiry the execution court by its order dated Oct. 10, 1977 overruled the objections of the petitioner and dismissed E. A. 660 of 1977 and allowed the respondent to proceed with the execution. From this order the petitioner preferred an appeal in the Additional District Court, Parur. The learned Additional District Judge dismissed the appeal as not maintainable on the ground that the order was 'not a decree...
Tag this Judgment!M.S. Ramaraj Vs. Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-23-1980
Reported in: (1981)23CTR(Ker)429; [1981]131ITR429(Ker)
Balakrishna Eradi, C.J. 1. The Kerala Agricultural Income-tax Tribunal (hereinafter called ' the Tribunal ') has by these three connected references referred to this court under Section 60(1) of the Kerala Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950--for short, 'the Act'--the following two common questions of law as arising out of the order passed by the Tribunal in A I.T.A. Nos. 326 to 328 of 1975 dated November 30, 1976. '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the initiation of proceedings under Section 35 of the Act by the successor officer when the lease arrangement was considered and accepted by the predecessor officer who made the original assessment for the year 1971-72 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the assessments of the applicant for income derived from the leasehold land, when there was already an assessment on one of the lessees for the year 1970-71...
Tag this Judgment!Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (Law), Board of Revenue (Taxes) Vs. t ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-22-1980
Reported in: [1981]48STC382(Ker)
V. Balakrishna Eradi, C.J.1. The Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (Law), Board of Revenue (Taxes), Ernakulam, is the revision petitioner in all these cases, which arise out of assessments to sales tax made against the respondent-company for the years 1969-70 to 1974-75 (inclusive). These cases may be conveniently divided into two groups on the basis of certain distinctive features relating to the course of action adopted by the assessing authority and the first and second appellate authorities in relation to the assessments for those years. The first group consists of T. R. C. Nos. 135 of 1979, 136 of 1979 and 141 of 1979, which respectively relate to the assessment years 1969-70, 1971-72 and 1970-71. The second group consists of T. R. C. Nos. 160 of 1979, 166 of 1979 and 169 of 1979, which relate to the assessment years 1972-73, 1974-75 and 1973-74 respectively.2. The assessee-The United Coffee Supply Co. Ltd., Palghat-is a dealer in raw coffee beans, roasted coffee beans, pure coffee...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Mrs. Elizabeth Varghese
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-17-1980
Reported in: [1981]132ITR605(Ker)
Balakrishna Eradi, C.J.1. By these three connected references made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench (hereinafter called the Tribunal), under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act') the following common question of law has been referred to this court as arising out of the order dated December 9, 1977, passed by the Tribunal in I.T.As. Nos. 939 to 941/Coch/76-77, dismissing the appeals filed by the department and upholding the view taken by the AAC that the respondent-assessee is entitled to the benefit of Section 23(1)(b) of the Act in respect of 14 rooms contained in a building treating them as 14 separate residential units :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the building in question can be said to consist of 14 residential units and hence the assessee is entitled to deduction permissible under the second proviso to Section 23(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of each unit '2. The assessment years with which we ar...
Tag this Judgment!M. Appa and anr. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-16-1980
Reported in: AIR1981Ker49
ORDERGeorge Vadakkel, J.1. By Ext. P1 order produced along with the writ petition, the Land Tribunal, Kanhangad disposed of two Original Applications, O. A. Nos. 496 and 506 of 1971. O. A. No. 496 of 1971 was filed by one Appa and the other Original Application was filed by Appa's father Chirukandan. Both these applications were directed against the same landlord who is the 4th respondent in the Original Petition. The said applications were for purchase of right, title and interest of the landlord invoking Section 72B of the Kerala Land Reforms Act 1963. The Land Tribunal dismissed O. A. No. 496 of 1971 but allowed O. A. No. 506 of 1971. The landlord preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority (Land Reforms) Cannanore against the decision allowing O. A. No. 506 of 1971. It is the case of the petitioner that Chirukandan, the applicant in O. A. No, 506 of 1971 who was the respondent before the Appellate Authority, died pending the said appeal. The appellate authority's order proce...
Tag this Judgment!P.M. Paily Pillai Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-16-1980
Reported in: (1981)22CTR(Ker)99; [1981]129ITR197(Ker)
Balakrishna Eradi, C.J. 1. Three questions of law extracted below have been referred to this court by the Kerala Agrl. I.T. Appellate Tribunal, Trivandrum (hereinafter called 'the Tribunal'), under Section 60(1) of the Kerala Agrl. I.T. Act (for short 'the Act') as arising out of the common order passed by it in three connected appeals--AITA Nos. 218 to 220 of 1975--relating to the assessment of agricultural income-tax made against the respondent-assessee for the years 1970-71, 1971-72 and 1972-73 :' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that Section 9(2) of the Agrl. Income-tax Act is applicable to the facts of the case 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that difference in price obtained by the applicant from the sale of the estate in the name of the minor at Nilambur is not an accretion and that the income from the estate subsequently purchased at Vellayur v...
Tag this Judgment!Ouseph Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-16-1980
Reported in: 1980CriLJ1214
ORDERGeorge Vadakkel, J.1. The Judicial Magistrate of the Second Class I, Trichur, by his judgment found that the petitioner herein is guilty of the offence punishable under Section 55 (g) of the Abkari Act, 1077. This was on the basis of his finding that the petitioner herein was. found engaged in illicit manufacture of arrack. A patrol party on duty detected the offence and the petitioner herein was charged with the offence aforesaid under Section 55 (g) of the Act. On the evidence adduced the learned Judicial Magistrate of the Second Class found that the accused is guilty thereunder and convicted him for the same. The accused-petitioner was sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-and in default of payment of fine to suffer simple imprisonment for two months-The findings of fact as aforesaid as also the conviction and sentence were confirmed on appeal by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Trichur. The accused petitioner herein preferred a rev...
Tag this Judgment!Krishnan Vs. Dorarajan Chettiar
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-12-1980
Reported in: AIR1980Ker234
ORDERP. Janaki Amma, J.1. The revision petitioners are the respondents in E. A. No. 223 of 1979 in O. S. No. 299 of 1972, of the Munsiff's Court, Chittur. In execution of the decree in the above suit, as per E. P. No. 98 of 1979, an item of paddy field along with the crops standing thereon, was attached by RW-1, Amin, as per orders of the Court. After attachment the Amin entrusted the crops to the present petitioners and one Manikkan on their executing a bond dated 16-3-1979. Under the terms of the bond the executants undertook to look after the crops and to deliver over the property without any damage to the crops as and when required by the Court. In default of doing so, they undertook to deposit an amount of Rs. 3,450/- or such amounts as the Court would direct them to deposit towards the value of the crops. E. A. No. 223 of 1979 was filed by the decree-holder on 24-3-1979 alleging that the present petitioners and the judgment-debtor together harvested the crops and removed the same...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »