Kerala Court October 1987 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Kalpaka Tourist Home (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (Central ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-15-1987
Reported in: (1988)71CTR(Ker)7; [1988]172ITR364(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J. 1. At the instance of the applicant-assessee, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law for the decision of this court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in disallowing the claim of depreciation of the applicant company in respect of its building on the ground that the applicant company was not the owner of the building ?'2. The respondent is the Revenue. We are concerned with the assessment year 1977-78 relevant to the accounting period ending by March 31, 1977. The assessee-company claimed depreciation on a building constructed for the purpose of running a hotel. The Income-tax Officer disallowed the claim on the ground that the company was not the real owner of the property. The assessee pleaded that the building was constructed with its own funds, that the initial investments by the shareholders, Sri M.A. Unneerikutty and his wife, were in the nature of advances on...
C.N. Sankaran Nambuduripad Vs. Vijayan and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-14-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Ker120
M.M. Pareed Pillay, J.1. The above appeal was heard on 19-9-1987 and it was dismissed on that day. Thereafter the appellant filed C.M.P. No. 24632 of 1987 to readmit the appeal for hearing on the ground that the appeal happened to be dismissed without hearing the appellant's counsel. The petition was allowed and the appeal has been reheard.2. Appellant is the 1st defendant in O.S. No. 330 of 1974 of the Sub Court, Trichur. The 1st respondent (plaintiff) filed the suit for realisation of Rs. 8,048/50 with future interest at 9% on the principal sum of Rs. 6,000/-. The learned Sub Judge decreed the suit for a sum of Rs. 6,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from 15-2-1972 up to the date of the judgment and interest thereafter at the rate of 6% per annum on the principal sum till realisation with costs. The Additional District Judge dismissed the appeal holding that the plaintiff is entitled to 9% interest from the date of Ext. A3 till the date of suit and 6% interest thereafte...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. A. Premakumari and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-14-1987
Reported in: [1989]66CompCas818(Ker)
Balakrishnan, J.1. These appeals have been filed against the judgments in O. P. (MV) No. 10 of 1982 and connected cases, the details of these M. F. As are given in the appendix.2. Some of the Government servants working in the Survey and Land Records Department of Tamil Nadu State along with their dependants and others set out for a tour to visit some important places in Kerala. Their tour programme was spread over a period of 11 days. They hired a bus bearing registration No. TMX 1755 belonging to Kartheepan Tourist Bus Service owned by the second respondent, Arumughan. One Rajan was the manager of the tour programme. There was only one driver to cover the entire distance. After about five days of travel, they reached Trivandrum on May 9, 1979, and in the morning on the same day, they left for Cochin. It would appear that there was some delay and they were behind schedule and some of the passengers were finding fault with the driver for that. This caused some misunderstanding and so t...
Kalyanam Tile Co., Manaly Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-14-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Ker220
ORDERK. Sreedharan, J. 1. Petitioner is a firm engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling tiles and bricks. The earth required as raw material for the manufacture of files and bricks is being purchased by it from various suppliers. Petitioner does not directly engage itself in the work of digging out or excavating earth for its manufacturing process. The second respondent issued Ext. P1 calling upon the petitioner to remit a sum of Rs. 1,971.25 as royalty for the clay used in its manufacturing process. Since the petitioner did not pay the amount demanded, proceedings under the Revenue Recovery Act were initiated. The 4th respondent issued Ext. P2 notice under Section 34 of the Revenue Recovery Act demanding the above amount. Petitioner challenged Exts. P1 and P2 before this Court in O.P. No. 3404 of 1978. That petition was disposed of by this Court by Ext. P3 judgment directing the petitioner to file a revision before the Government. In pursuance to that direction petitioner ...
R. Gao Electrodes Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-13-1987
Reported in: [1988]173ITR351(Ker)
M. Fathima Beevi, J.1. These references under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the two assessment years are at the instance of the assessee. The common question referred reads :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the shares held by the legal heirs of the deceased shareholder, late Sri. M. N. Ramakrishnan, in the company are not to be considered in computing the total shares of the company during the relevant accounting years in determining the total voting power of the company '2. The status of the assessee for the two assessment years 1976-77 and 1977-78 as ' a company in which the public are not substantially interested ' has to be determined with reference to Sub-clause (iii) of Clause (B)(b) of Section 2(18) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee claimed to be a non-controlled (widely held) company. According to the Revenue, the shares carrying more than fifty per cent. of the total voting power of th...
R. Vasudevan Pillai Vs. K. Malathy Amma
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-12-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Ker300
Sukumaran, J. 1. A widow is obstructed in diverse ways, in her attempts at getting what is her legitimate due. All that she wanted was a settlement of accounts and recovery of the money that it legitimately due to her on such settlement. The trial court dismissed the suit, taking the view that the suit as framed is not maintainable. That view was reversed by the appellate court. The appellate court remanded the matter to the trial court, as in its opinion, none of the relevant matters had been considered by the trial court, 'in its anxiety to find that the suit as framed is not maintainable.' A permission was granted even to amend the plaint seeking recovery of a specific amount from the defendant.2. The judgment of the appellate Court is in challenge in the appeal. 3. There is no reason now, when the area is well illumined by decisions, for the ghost of old forms and rigid views to haunt the courts of law. As to how exceptional circumstances would justify invocation of equity principl...
Rajeswari Export House Vs. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-12-1987
Reported in: [1988]171ITR519(Ker)
P.C. Balakrishna Menon, J.1. The senior standing counsel for the Government of India (Taxes) takes notice on behalf of the respondents.2. By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the first respondent, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, to ignore the judgment in I.T.R. No. 121 of 1981 and pass final orders in I.T.A. No. 133 of 1978-79 under Section 260(1) of the Income-tax Act in conformity with a subsequent decision of a Full Bench of this court in CIT v. Issac : [1987]168ITR793(Ker) . The decision in I.T.R. No. 121 of 1981 is inter partes on a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal,Cochin Bench, at the instance of the Revenue. The question was whether the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner had jurisdiction to impose penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act after Sub-section (2) of Section 274 was omitted by the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975, which came into force on April 1, 1976. This court, following an earl...
Govindan Kutty Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-12-1987
Reported in: (1988)IILLJ380Ker
Malimath, C.J.1. The appellant, who was a Chauffeur, was due to retire on attaining the age of 55 years he being governed by Rule 60(a) of Part I of the Kerala Service Rules, hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'. He made a representation to the State Government to continue him in service till he attains the age of 60 years; in relaxation of the Rules. This request was made on the ground that two of his juniors who were also Chauffeurs and were similarly situated having been given the benefit of extension he should also be given the same benefit. This request was acceded to and an order was made giving extension of service to the appellant till he attains the age of 60 years, by exercising the power of relaxation of the rules, by order dated 25th June 1984. It is thereafter that the State Government made the impugned order Ext. P 2 dated 22nd July 1987 cancelling the earlier order granting extension to the appellant. It is the said order that was challenged by the appellant in the O.P...
K.S. Balan and ors. Vs. State of Kerala and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-12-1987
Reported in: (1988)IILLJ111Ker
K. Sreedharan, J.1. Petitioners, three in number, are the employees of the second respondent company, the Travancore Titanium Products Ltd. They are persons drawing higher salary than the maximum prescribed under the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965, disentitling them from claiming bonus. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are not employees coming within the definition of that term under the Payment of Bonus Act. They were being paid ex-gratia and goodwill payments at different percentages of the total emoluments on the basis of resolutions passed by the Board of Directors of the company. During 1979, they received 12 per cent, of the total emoluments as ex-gratia payments. By exhibit P-3 dated 7th January, 1981, the Government informed the Managing Director of the second respondent company that the payments of 12V2 per cent of the total emoluments which is termed as ex-gratia or goodwill, is clearly an attempt on the part of the company to get aro...
K.S.T. Drivers Union Vs. K.S.R.T.C.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-12-1987
Reported in: 2(1988)ACC591
Malimath, C.J.1. An Accident having taken place resulting from the negligence of the conduct of the vehicle and the driver, a claim was made by the legal representatives of the person who died as a result of the accident for damages under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The Tribunal made an award for a sum of Rs. 35,000/- against the Corporation, the conductor and the driver who is the second petitioner in this case. Proceedings were initiated by the Corporation for recovering the loss caused to the Corporation. The Corporation ultimately proposed to recover one third of the amount directed to be paid by the Tribunal from the second petitioner by deducting a reasonable amount from the salary of the petitioner. It is the said action of the Corporation that is impugned in this Original Petition.2. The principal contention of the petitioners is that under Rule 15A of Part IA of the Motor Vehicles (Third Party Insurance) Rules a fund having been created, the Corporation has...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »