Kerala Court February 1982 Judgments
Swarnamahal, Jewellers Vs. Intelligence Officer, Agricultural Income-t ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-10-1982
Reported in: [1982]50STC49(Ker)
V. Khalid, J.1. This writ petition raises an interesting question regarding the scope of Section 45A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act (for short, the Act) vis-a-vis the powers of an Intelligence Officer under the said Act. This question fell to be considered by Bhaskaran, J., in O. P. Nos. 464 and 505 of 1976. The learned Judge by his judgment dated 26th May, 1978, held that the Intelligence Officer was competent to pass an order under Section 45A of the Act. After that judgment, explanation II has been added to Section 45A by Section 13 of the Act 19 of 1980 with effect from 16th September, 1980. The introduction of this explanation has rendered the question complex. A similar question arose in another form in O. P. Nos. 822, 2096 and 2264 of 1976 before Chandrasekhara Menon, J. The learned Judge held that the power of imposing penalty under Section 45A could be exercised only in the course of assessment and not otherwise, that Section 45A cannot be projected back to an assessment ...
Tag this Judgment!K.P. Abdul Kareem Hajee Vs. Income-tax Officer, A-ward and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-09-1982
Reported in: (1982)31CTR(Ker)278; [1983]141ITR120(Ker)
Kochu Thommen, J.1. The petitioner is Abdul Kareem Haji. For the assessment year 1970-71, the ITO made an assessment on Poyakkaraveettil Hamsa consequent upon a seizure of Rs. 84,000 by the Enforcement Directorate during a raid conducted at his premises. The amount seized was claimed by the petitioner as his. As a result of this claim, an alternative or protective assessment was made upon the petitioner, Abdul Kareem Hajee, in respect of the amounts seized. The respective orders of assessment relating to Hamsa and the petitioner are exs. P-2 and P-2A, both dated December 1, 1973. These two orders were set aside in appeal by the AAC by ex. P-3A dated January 31, 1975. On appeal taken by the Department against that order, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal by ex. P-4 dated July 31, 1977, affirmed the decision of the AAC relating to Hamsa. By ext. P-4A dated January 31, 1977, the Tribunal, however, allowed the Department's appeal in respect of the petitioner and affirmed the assessment ord...
Tag this Judgment!A.P. Sankara Wariyar Vs. the North Malabar Dist. Co-op. Supply and Mar ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-03-1982
Reported in: 1982(II)KLT440
U.L. Bhat, J.1. These two writ petitions are filed challenging an order dated 5-1-1980 in C. P. Nos. 480 of 1976 and 71 of 1978 passed by the Labour Court, Koz kode under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short the Act).2. The petitioner in O.P. No. 566 of 1980 was working as the Manager of the Tellicherry branch of the North Malabar District Co-operative Supply and Marketing Society Limited, Calicut (for short the 'Society') (Petitioner in O.P. No. 1117 of 1980 and the first respondent in O.P. No. 566 of 1980). The petitioner in O.P. No. 566 of 1980 and the petitioner in O.P. No. 1117 of 1980 will be referred to herein as the petitioner and the first respondent-Society respectively. While so, the first respondent reverted the petitioner as Inspector. The petitioner filed an arbitration case before the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies challenging the order of reversion and obtained an order of stay. On the strength of the stay order he continued in offi...
Tag this Judgment!CochIn Port S.C.S. Association Vs. Harrisons and Crosfield Limited
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-03-1982
Reported in: 1982(II)KLT141
M.P. Menon, J.1. What is challenged in this Original Petition, filed by a registered trade union, is Ext. P1 award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal at Madras, in a dispute relating to the non-employment of a clerk named Ivan D'Souza. The facts disclosed by the award, and the documents produced before the Tribunal and referred to at the hearing, are these.2. D'Souza had commenced service in the Steamer Department of Harrisons & Crosfield Ltd. from 1954. At the material time, it was his duty to supply provisions and to meet the claim of staff, crew, etc., when ships arrived at the Cochin Port. For this purpose, he was being entrusted with company's funds and the practice was for him to furnish bills and accounts after meeting the necessary expenses. On 17-12-73 D'Souza sent a telegram to the management resigning from its service, and this was confirmed by a letter of the same date, which contained the following 'post-cript': I would be sending you various bills for respectiv...
Tag this Judgment!Bhargavan Nair Vs. Kolappan Asari
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-01-1982
Reported in: (1982)ILLJ410Ker
M.P. Menon, J.1. The first respondent was a caretaker looking after the immovable properties of the petitioner, besides rendering other services to him, and was being paid at the rate of Rs. 100 a month. On a complaint being made that he was denied employment, an agricultural dispute relating to his non-employment was referred to the 2nd respondent Tribunal, under Section 22(4) of the Kerala Agricultural Workers Act. 1974 (Act 18/74). Ext. P3 is the Tribunal's award declaring hat the first respondent.is entitled to get employment under the counter-petitioner and arrears of wages, if any, found due to him.The 'counter-petitioner' referred to in the awaral is the land owner petitioner herein. And the prayer in the O.P. is to quash Ext. P3.2. The petitioner's case before the Tribunal was that the first respondent was not an agricultural worker as defined in the Act but only as agent doing many things on his behalf as 'karyastha'. The Tribunal dealt with this contention in the following te...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›