Kerala Court March 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. Indo Marine Agencies (Kerala) (P.) Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-24-1987
Reported in: [1988]169ITR146(Ker)
T. Kochu Thommen, J. 1. The following question has been, at the instance of the Revenue, referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that expenses incurred by the assessee by way of customs duty paid in the United States of America are entitled to weighted deduction under Section 35B of the Income-tax Act ?'2. The crucial point which does not appear to have been considered by the authorities below is, in our view, this :'Did the carriage of goods end prior to the payment of customs duty at New York or was such payment made in the course of the onward journey of the goods to their final destination ?'3. If the duty of customs was paid in New York subsequent to the termination of the carriage of goods at the instance of the assessee, as was the position in CIT v. Indo Marine Agencies (Kerala) (P.) Ltd. : [1986]158ITR604(Ker) , such duty was an allowable expenditure und...
Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (Revenue) Vs. Sreeni Printers
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-24-1987
Reported in: [1987]67STC279(Ker)
K.P. Radhakrishna Menon, J.1. The State is before us. The year of assessment is 1976-77.2. Facts lie in a narrow compass. The amount of Rs. 1,18,801.29 representing the turnover of photo blocks supplied by the assessee in the assessment year to various parties though included in the return, was claimed to be not liable to be assessed under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act because the contracts under which the supplies were made did not involve sale of any materials. The contracts were all in the nature of works contracts. The assessing authority did not accept this argument. The claim accordingly was disallowed. The appellate authority disposed of the appeal, the assessee had filed against the order of the assessing authority, with a direction to re-examine the claim afresh. The department challenged the said order of the appellate authority before the Appellate Tribunal. The Appellate Tribunal, relying on a decision of the Supreme Court in Assistant Sales Tax Officer v. B.C. Kame [197...
Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax Vs. Abdul Sathar Hajee Moosa S ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-22-1987
Reported in: (1988)67CTR(Ker)254; [1988]171ITR342(Ker)
K. S. PARIPOORNAN J. - The Agricultural Income-tax Tribunal has referred two question of law for our decision at the instance of the applicant who is an assessee to agricultural income-tax. The assessee is a trust. The matter relates to the assessment years 1967-68 and 1968-69. The assessments were completed on November 30, 1970. The appeals were filed by the applicant before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner on January 22, 1971. The appeals stood posted on many occasions. During the course of hearing, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner found certain glaring mistakes in the computation of income made by the assessee for the two years 1967-68 and 1968-69. Since the correction of the mistakes would result in enhancement of the income, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner issued notices to the applicant on January 31, 1977, March 24, 1977, and May 25, 1977, informing the applicant about his proposal to rectify the assessment for correcting the mistakes. The applicant objected to the ...
Carborundum Universal Ltd. and ors. Vs. Government of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-20-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Ker91
Bhaskaran Nambiar, J. 1. Thedemand made under the Kerala Electricity (Duty) Act, 1963 (for short, 'the Act'), is challenged in all these writ petitions. The questions raised are common and the facts stated are similar. We shall, therefore, refer to the necessary facts and the relevant exhibits in O.P. No. 9889 of 1986 for the purpose of this judgment. 2. The petitioner in O.P. No. 9889 of 1986 is Carborundum Universal Limited, a Company registered under the Indian Companies Act, having its registered office at Madras and several manufacturing units, a brown aluminium plant, a silicon carbide plant, electrocast refractory and white aluminium oxide plant in Kerala. Poised precariously, with sharp fall in the storage level of hydel reservoirs in this State and faced with an acute shortage in the supply of electrical energy, the State Government, in 1983 issued orders to regulate the supply of electricity to ensure equitable distribution. The Company was allowed to draw only 40% of their r...
Moideenkutty Haji and ors. Vs. Kunhikoya and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-20-1987
Reported in: AIR1987Ker184
Padmanabhan, J.1. These cases have been referred to a Full Bench to decide the question whether it is mandatory that a Magistrate, before issuing process to the accused on a complaint disclosing an offence which is exclusively triable by a Court of Session shall call upon the complainant to produce all his witnesses and examine them on oath. A Division Bench of this Court in Sulaiman v. Eachara Warrier, 1978 Ker LT 424 took the view that it is not mandatory since the duty to conduct an enquiry under Section 202(1), Criminal P.C. (for short 'the Code') itself is only discretionary. The correctness of that view is doubted and hence the question as well as the cases have been referred to the Full Bench.2. Crl. M.C. 974 of 1984 arose out of a complaint filed by the respondent before the Judicial Second Class Magistrate, Parappanangadi against the three petitioners. The complaint is in protest against a police report in a murder case in which only two of the petitioners were made accused. C...
K.K. Lakshmi and anr. Vs. State Bank of Travancore
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-20-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Ker311
Bhat, J.1. Appellants herein executed a mortgage deed in favour of the respondent herein as security for the loan advanced. Subject matter of the mortgage is 5.5 cents of land together with the house, in which appellants are residing. In due course decree was obtained to enforce the mortgage. In execution residential property was brought to sale. Judgment-debtors raised objection that residential plot is exempt from sale under Section 60(1)(c) of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short 'the Code'). The objection was upheld by the court below. Thereafter the respondent filed E.A. 256/83 seeking review of the earlier order. Review application was opposed by the judgment-debtors, but allowed by the court below.Hence this appeal.2. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that property mortgaged to the respondent and brought to sale in execution of the mortgage decree includes the house, in which appellants are residing and therefore it is exempt from sale under Section 60(1)(c) of the ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Periya Karamalai Tea and Produce Co. Lt ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-20-1987
Reported in: (1987)65CTR(Ker)136
T. Kochu Thommen, J.1. The following question has been, at the instance of the Revenue, referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench:' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in finding that the assessee is eligible under Section 40A(7)(b)(ii) for the deduction of the provision for gratuity of a sum: of Rs. 11,96,413 representing the annual incremental liability to gratuity according to the actuarial valuation for the years ended March 31, 1973, March 31, 1974, and March 3), 1975, in the assessment for the assessment year 1975-76 '2. For the assessment year 1975-76 relevant to the accounting year ending March 31, 1975, the assessee claimed deduction of Rs. 32,16,950 as provision for gratuity. The assessee admitted before the Income-tax Officer that the provision was made towards the liability which arose prior to March 31, 1974. Since the provision was thus not relevant to the liability which arose in the accounti...
Kochuthressia Vs. Devadas
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-19-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Ker282
ORDERM.P. Menon, J.1. The question before the Court below was whether the document dt. 1-4-1980 was a promissory note, admissible in evidence as a properly stamped instrument; and it took the view that the document was just an agreement, and not a promissory note. It is that view which is now being questioned in this revision. 2. . The document was executed by the respondents in favour of the plaintiff, and its contents disclosed the following : --(i) the defenants had received Rs. 20,000/-from the plaintiff in cash, as a loan; (ii) the defendants would regularly pay interest on the principal amount, every month, at 12%; (iii) the principal amount would itself be repaid on receipt of a month's notice; and (iv) if payment was not made as above,the liability could be enforced against thedefendants' properties. The recitals in the documents were also to the effect that the parties were construing the document as a promissory note.3. One of the contentions of the defendants was that the d...
Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sarojini Devi and ors ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-19-1987
Reported in: II(1988)ACC615; [1989]66CompCas281(Ker)
Sivaraman Nair, J.1. The appellant is the insurer of a goods vehicle KLA-2793 which fatally knocked down the husband of the first respondent on July 20, 1975 at about 10.45 p.m. The widow and children of the deceased filed O.P. (M. V.) No. 347 of 1979, before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Trivandrum, claiming that they were entitled to an amount of Rs. 67,200 as compensation, butlimiting their claim to Rs. 50,000. At the time of his death, the deceased was 51 years old and was drawing a sum of Rs. 857 as salary as Principal of the Devaswom Board College, Nariampara.2. The owner and driver of the vehicle contested the claim stating that the accident was not caused due to rashness and negligence of the driver. The widow of the deceased was examined in support of the claim. The respondents did not lead any evidence. They did not contest the effect of the accident or its fatal consequences. They did not dispute the status of the deceased or his income. The Tribunal, therefore, award...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Commonwealth Trust Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-19-1987
Reported in: [1988]169ITR134(Ker)
T. Kochu Thommen, J. 1. Pursuant to the direction of this court in O.P. No. 1277 of 1979, the following four questions have been referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and also in the absence of an approved gratuity fund created by it for the exclusive benefit of employees under an irrevocable trust, the assessee is entitled to claim deduction of the provision for the liability towards gratuity payable to the employees ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the circular referred to and relied on by the Tribunal is binding on the Income-tax Officer ? 3. If the answer to the above question is in the affirmative, whether a circular that is not in force and not acted upon at the time of completing the assessment is binding on the Income-tax Officer ? 4. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in deleting the disallowances of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »