Kerala Court February 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. C. Tharian and Sons
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-11-1987
Reported in: (1987)63CTR(Ker)146; [1987]166ITR607(Ker)
T. Kochu Thommen, J.1. The following questions have been, at the instance of the Revenue, referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to weighted deduction under Clauses (i) and (ii) of Section 35B(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that ' services rendered by the agent, Nut Meat Trading Company, are not in connection with the distribution of the goods' and is not the above finding wrong and unreasonable and based on conjectures and surmises ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law and fact in holding that ' there are services rendered by the selling agent which come under Sub-clauses (i) and (ii) of Section 35B(1)(b). It is these services which are remunerated only by the agent's commission' and are not the above findings w...
Food Inspector Vs. K.P. Alavikutty
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-11-1987
Reported in: 1987CriLJ1298
ORDERS. Padmanabhan, J.1. On 20-2-1984 I he Food Inspector, Tirur, went to the shop of the accused for taking action under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. The shop was found open and the accused was there. Among other food articles exposed for sale there was rice flour also. The Food Inspector demanded sale of sample from the rice flour. The accused refused on the ground that it was a holiday for the shop and the shop was opened only for some other purpose. Using his power the Food Inspector took sample of the rice flour. Accused refused to co-operate with him and refused:(1) to accept Form 6 notice;(2) to accept price of the sample;(3) to issue receipt;(4) to put his signature in the sample; and(5) lo sign the mahazar.After observing the formalities one sample was sent for analysis. The report was that the sample is not adulterated. Therefore the Food Inspector filed a complaint before the Judicial I Class Magistrate, Tirur against the accused for having committed offences pu...
State of Kerala Vs. K.P. Gopal
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-09-1987
Reported in: [1987]166ITR111(Ker)
Kochu Thommen, J.1. The following two questions have been, at the instance of the Revenue, referred to us by the Kerala Agricultural Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Ernakulam :'(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in law in holding that the assessee can effect a valid partition as karta of a Hindu undivided family even when there is no other coparcener in the family and that Section 9(2) of the Agricultural Income-tax Act has no application to the facts of the case ? (ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in law in directing exclusion of the income from 24.37 acres of properties allotted to the three minor daughters in computing the agricultural income of the assessee ?' 2. The assessment years in question are 1975-76 and 1976-77. On August 23, 1974, that is, during the accounting year relevant to the assessment year 1975-76, exhibit P-4 was executed by the assessee...
C.N.M. Avisha Beevi Vs. Edathil Parambil Kalidasan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-06-1987
Reported in: [1989]66CompCas681(Ker)
Sivaraman Nair, J. 1. The owner of a goods vehicle which was involved in an accident on July 15, 1978, and as a result of which the cleaner of the vehicle was crushed to death, is the appellant. He assails the judgment of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Calicut, in MAC No. 110 of 1981. The Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs. 31,500 as compensation due, to the parents of the deceased cleaner, against the claim of Rs. 75,000 made by them. The liability of the insurer was limited to an amount of Rs. 21,000 which was the amount of compensation payable in respect of death of a person based on the monthly salary which the deceased-cleaner was drawing at the time of the death. The Tribunal directed that the balance amount of Rs. 10,500 shall be paid by the owner of the vehicle. The appellant submits that this direction is unsustainable.2. Counsel for the appellant raised only two points: the first was that the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal was not entitled to award any amount in excess o...
V. Subair Vs. P.K. Sudhakaran
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-06-1987
Reported in: 1987CriLJ736
ORDERChettur Sankaran Nair, J.1. The Courts below, concurrently found the petitioner guilty of the offence punishable Under Section 501, I.P.C. and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 300/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months, The petitioner is the Editor, Printer and Publisher of a daily, 'Al Ameen'. The issue of the newspaper dt. 25-8-78 carried a reportfrom Chokly (Ext. Pl(a)), that a young lady of the locality consulted a local medical practitioner for an ailment of her child, and that the physician wanted to examine her. Despite her protestations that she was in no need for medical attention, and had no money to pay for the same, she was persuaded to submit to a clinical examination. It turned to be such, that the woman had to flee from the physician to save her honour. The report goes on to say, that the medical practitioner, who was rendering free treatment on Saturdays had a weakness for comely woman and that as a result of his attentions, a woman patient was...
N. Rajan Nair Vs. Income-tax Officer and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-04-1987
Reported in: (1987)63CTR(Ker)33; [1987]165ITR650(Ker)
T.L. Viswanatha Iyer, J. 1. The petitioner is stated to be a junior lawyer of about six years vintage in the Kozhikode Bar. He was assessed to tax under the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short), for the assessment year 1984-85. As a junior lawyer, he does not have much of income. He had actually returned an income of Rs. 12,500 from the profession, besides agricultural income of Rs. 1,000. The Income-tax Officer completed the assessment on September 26, 1986, determining his total income at Rs. 1,39,770 by making various additions. A copy of the order of assessment is exhibit P-l. Consequent thereon, a total amount of Rs. 71,817 was demanded as income-tax and surcharge besides Rs. 17,593 by way of interest under Section 139(8) and Rs. 24,950 as interest under Section 217(1)(b). The demand was thus for Rs. 1,14,360 in the aggregate. 2. The petitioner filed an appeal against this order before the second respondent, namely, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Kozhikode. A copy...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›