Kerala Court January 1986 Judgments
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Kerala State Road Transport Corporation ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-31-1986
Reported in: [1987]164ITR737(Ker)
P.C. Balakrishna Menon, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, has referred the following questions for the decision of this court under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the provident fund held by the assessee-trust could be considered as one to which the Provident Funds Act, 1925, applied by reason of the notification dated September 8, 1977, made by the Kerala State Government ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee-trust would be entitled to exemption from wealth-tax in respect of the properties held by it under Section 5(1)(xviib) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957? (3) If questions Nos. 2 and 3 are answered in the negative, whether, on the facts and in the circumstances, assessments are to be made under Section 21(1) of the Wealth-tax Act and not under Section 21(4) thereof ? (4) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justi...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. M. George and Brothers
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-31-1986
Reported in: (1987)59CTR(Ker)298; [1986]160ITR511(Ker)
Fathima Beevi, J.1. This reference under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act arises for the assessment year 1969-70. A penalty of Rs. 3,13,877 levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner was cancelled by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The following questions of law are referred as directed by this court at the instance of the Revenue :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that the assessee has agreed in writing to the addition of the concealed income of Rs. 2,33,687 and also to the levy of penalty, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in deleting the penalty ignoring the admission made by the assessee ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in finding that there is no concealment in respect of income from interest on gold and D.P.N. loans and is not this finding wrong and unreasonable and based on surmises on...
Tag this Judgment!Appolo Tubes Limited Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-30-1986
Reported in: [1986]61STC275(Ker)
M. Fathima Beevi, J1. The question of law raised in these two tax revision cases is whether the item 'G. I. pipes' will fall within the category of 'declared goods' as enumerated in Section 14(iv)(xi) of the Central Sales Tax Act. The petitioner is a dealer in G. I. pipes. The assessment relates to the assessment years 1980-81 and 1981-82. The assessee had claimed exemption from levying Additional tax and surcharge on the tax levied on the sales turnover of G.I. pipes. This claim was rejected by the assessing, authority. The appeals before the Additional Deputy Commissioner and the further appeals before the Tribunal had been decided against the petitioner.2. The case of the petitioner is that G.I. pipes are declared goods within the meaning of Sections 14 and 16 of the Central Sales Tax Act and also the Second Schedule of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, because, the G. I. pipes dealt in by the assessee are only steel tubes and it is contended that steel tubes popularly known a...
Tag this Judgment!income-tax Officer Vs. Official Liquidator
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-29-1986
Reported in: [1986]59CompCas514(Ker); [1986]158ITR791(Ker)
Bhat, J.1. The Income-tax Officer, Ernakulam, has filed this appeal against the order of the learned single judge in company jurisdiction dismissing Application No. 239 of 1979 in B.C.P. No. 4 of 1961 (ITO v. Official Liquidator : [1982]134ITR136(Ker) ), filed by him.2. Respondent is the official liquidator, the liquidator appointed in connection with the winding up of a company. The winding-up order was passed on October 30, 1961. The liquidator invited proof of claims and settled a list of creditors and filed the same in court on July 5, 1962. Subsequently, income-tax assessment was completed in respect of the company for the years 1955-56 to 1958-59. Demand notices were served on the liquidator on February 23, 1963. Additional demand was made for theyear 1955-56 by notice served on February 5, 1967. Thereafter, the Income-tax Officer filed Applications Nos. 3 of 1964 and 248 of 1968 for varying the list of creditors and that was allowed. The Department by letter dated January 29, 19...
Tag this Judgment!Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (Law), Board of Revenue (Taxes) Vs. R ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-29-1986
Reported in: [1988]71STC125(Ker)
P.C. Balakrishna Menon, J.1. This revision by the State is against the decision of the Kerala Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Trivandrum, directing the deletion of the sales turnover of machinery amounting to Rs. 9,51,689.69 from the taxable turnover of the assessee for the year 1975-76.2. The assessee is a public limited company engaged in the manufacture and sale of cycle tyres, tubes, rubber goods, etc., and is a dealer registered under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. The total turnover of the assessee for the year 1975-76 took in also a sum of Rs. 10,36,764.35 being the sale proceeds of machinery sold during the accounting year. The assessee claimed that the aforesaid turnover by sale of machinery is not taxable as it does not fall within the business of the assessee and the assessee is not a dealer in machinery. Overruling this contention the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax (Assessment) brought this turnover also to tax. In appeal the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (Ap...
Tag this Judgment!A.V. Thomas and Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-28-1986
Reported in: [1986]159ITR431(Ker)
Kochu Thommen, J.1. The following question has been, at the instance of the assessee, referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench ' Whether Rs. 76,777 being the surtax liability is to be allowed as a deduction in computing the total income of the assessee for the assessment year 1976-77 '2. The assessee's claim for deduction under Section 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, of the amount paid as surtax under the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Surtax Act'), was disallowed by the Income-tax Officer, but, on appeal, it was allowed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. On further appeal by the Revenue, the Tribunal, following its earlier decision, held that such amount could not be deducted in the computation of profits and gains. According to the Revenue, the amount paid on account of surtax fell within the mischief of Section 40(a)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for such sum was paid on account of tax levied on the profits or ...
Tag this Judgment!K. Babu Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-27-1986
Reported in: (1986)IILLJ473Ker
M.P. Menon, J.1. The petitioner, a clerk/cashier of the Kottayam Branch of the Union Bank of India, was prosecuted for offences punishable under Sections 409, 467 and 477A of the Indian Penal Code, for alleged forgery of a cheque and unauthorised withdrawal of amounts from the account of one of the bank's constituents. The criminal court acquitted him on the ground 'that the prosecution had failed to bring home the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt'. Notwithstanding the acquittal the management of the Bank decided to proceed against the petitioner departmentally, by issuing Ext. P 1 charge-sheet and appointing an enquiry officer. The petitioner 'objected to the holding of the enquiry' on various grounds, but the Bank management was not prepared to relent. This writ petition was thereupon filed in December, 1982 challenging the authority of the management to take disciplinary action against its employees in respect of acts of omission or commission of which they are already a...
Tag this Judgment!Devu Vs. the Excise Circle Inspector and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-24-1986
Reported in: 1986CriLJ1478
ORDERK. Sreedharan, J.1. Accused in C.C. 161/79 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Tirur is the petitioner in this revision petition. She was charged with offence punishable under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act. The learned Magistrate after trial found her guilty of the said offence and convicted her thereunder. Thereupon she was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for 6 months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-. In default of payment of fine she was directed to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. The said conviction and sentence were challenged in Crl. Appeal No. 46/80 before the Sessions Court, Manjeri. The learned Sessions Judge by judgment dt. 15-3-1982 confirmed the conviction, but altered the sentence to one of fine. The accused was directed to pay a fine of Rs. 2500/- and in default of payment of fine to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of three months. Hence this revision petition.2. The learned Counsel appearing for the revision pet...
Tag this Judgment!Chandrasekharan Adithiripad Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-24-1986
Reported in: 1987CriLJ1715
S. Padmanabhan, J.1. In S.C. 51/83,-the Sessions Judge, Kozhikode tried the appellant (first accused) along with his son the second accused for offences punishable under Sections 323 and 302 read with S. 34 of the Penal Code. Second accused was acquitted. No appeal has been filed by the State from the acquittal. Appellant was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. The only question for consideration in appeal' is whether the appellant is proved beyond doubt to have committed the offence of murder. The main contention put forward before us at the time of arguments was that the appellant was acting in the exercise of the right of private defence.2. The incident was at 9.45 p.m. on 7-6-1982'near the residence of the appellant. PW. 1 and the deceased were walking towards their houses on the north of the scene of occurrence. During night, deceased Achuthan Nair was returning home. He had no light with him. When he sa...
Tag this Judgment!Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Sulaiman
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-23-1986
Reported in: [1986]61STC331(Ker)
P.C. Balakrishna Menon, J.1. All these tax revision cases at the instance of the Deputy Commissioner, Sales Tax (Law), raise a common question whether the assessee is liable to tax under Section 6A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, in respect of the purchase turnover of raw-bones converted into bone-meal for sale as fertiliser. The cases relate to 1975-76, 1976-77, 1977-78 and 1978-79. The assessments for the years 1975-76, 1976-77 and 1977-78 were completed on best judgment by the Sales Tax Officer and separate orders for these years were issued fixing the taxable turnover and the sales tax due thereon. The Sales tax Officer later initiated proceedings under Section 19 of the Act on the ground that the purchaser turnover of (sic) to tax under Section 6A of the Act had escaped assessment. The assessing officer overruling the contentions of the assessee that the purchase turnover relating to raw-bones is not liable to tax, issued revised orders of assessment for these years. Th...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »