Kerala Court February 1989 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 Gift-tax Vs. U.S.M. Fernandez
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-13-1989
Reported in: [1989]178ITR577(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J. 1. These are connected cases. Identical questions arise for consideration in both the cases. At the instance of the Revenue (Commissioner of Gift-tax, Trivandrum), the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following four questions of law, in both the cases, under Section 26(1) of the Gift-tax Act, 1958, for the decision of this court:'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was correct in law and fact in finding that the assessee is entitled to exemption under Section 5(1)(vii) and Section 5(1)(xii) of the Gift-tax Act ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law and fact in finding that though the daughter, Kumari Arora Fernandez, had income of her own, the fact of such income would not exclude her from the class of relative dependent upon the asses-see for maintenance and support ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribu...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. T. Govindankutty Menon
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-13-1989
Reported in: [1989]178ITR509(Ker)
Paripoornan, J. 1. The Revenue has filed this original petition under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The respondent herein is an assessee to income-tax. The matter relates to the levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act for the assessment year 1975-76. In this original petition, the Revenue prays for the issue of a direction to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to refer certain questions of law formulated in para 10 of the original petition which, according to it, arise out of the appellate order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated March 6, 1986.2. We heard counsel for the Revenue, Mr. P.K.R. Menon, as also counsel for the respondent-assessee. The assessee was a partner in a firm which was doing Abkari business. The first assessment year for the firm was 1975-76. On going through the records of the firm, it turned out that the assessee has advanced a loan of Rs. 4,39,890 to the firm. The respondent/assessee was asked to explain. He stated...
Spencer and Co. Ltd. Vs. Regional Director, E.S.i.C.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-13-1989
Reported in: (1991)ILLJ541Ker
Varghese Kalliath, J. 1. This appeal arises from Insurance Case No. 232/82. Petitioner in the case who is the appellant herein is Spencer and Company, Fort Cochin Branch, Ernakulam. Respondent herein who was the respondent before the Employees' Insurance Court is the Regional Director, E.S.I. Corporation, Trichur. By the judgment impugned in this appeal, the Employees' Insurance Court, Alleppey found that the appellant - Spencer and Company Ltd. Fort Cochin Branch is an establishment wherein the provisions of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948, for short the Act, read with the notification isued by the Government of Kerala under Section 1(5) of the Act are appalicable. The appellant contends that the provisions of the Act read along with the notification issued by the Government of Kerala under Section 1(5) of the Act are not applicable to the appellant. Hence the appeal. The short facts are these :-2. Spencer & Company is a company registered under the Companies Act. Its Head Off...
State of Kerala Vs. Joseph Anchilose
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-10-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Ker101
Sivaraman Nair, J.1. This appeal under Section 39 of the Arbitration Act (for short the Act) arises from an order of the Subordinate Judge, Trivandrum allowing O. P, (Arb) No. 173 of 1982. That was a petition filed under Section 14(2) of the Act. The present appellants had filed objections under Sections 16 and 32 of the Act to set aside or remit the award to the Arbitrator. Those objections were over-ruled. Hence this appeal.2. The respondent had entered into a contract with the second respondent on 23-9-1975 for construction of balance work of 1000M of sea-wall south of 450M at the mouth of Moorat River in Iringal Village of Kozhikode District. The probable amount for the work was Rs. 12,11,445/-. The period of the contract was 18 months after the contractor commenced work. The site was handed over on 10-11-1975 on which date the work was be deemed to have commenced. It should have been completed by 9-5-1977. The work consisted of procuring and conveying granite stones of different s...
Calicut Trading Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-10-1989
Reported in: [1989]178ITR430(Ker)
K.A. Nayar, J.1. The original petition is for a direction to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, to refer to this court the following questions of law:'(i) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in upholding the imposition of penalty for concealment of income ? (ii) Whether Explanation 2 to Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act applies to the facts of the case and (iii) Whether the penalty proceeding is not barred by limitation ?' 2. The petitioner is a partnership firm. For the year 1983-84, the petitioner submitted a return on April 28, 1984, disclosing a total income of Rs. 2,74,510. The Income-tax Officer wrote to the assessee pointing out certain cash credits and other credit balances not accounted for and, therefore, the assessee was asked to furnish evidence to prove the source of the said credits. The assessee then filed a return on December 22, 1984, which, according to the assessee, was to purchase peace. The assessment ord...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. K. Kesava Reddiar
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-10-1989
Reported in: (1989)76CTR(Ker)111; [1989]178ITR457(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following two questions of law for the decision of this court:'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and also in view of the fact that the original assessment has not been set aside and the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has only deleted the addition of Rs. 90,000 made, the Tribunal is justified in not considering the case on merits ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law and fact in holding that the question of restoration of the addition made to the gross profit does not arise at present and is not the 'order' of the Tribunal vitiated for not considering the issue on merits ?' 2. The respondent in this reference is an assessee to income-tax. We are concerned with the assessment year 1975-76.3. The assessee is a wholesale dealer in textiles. For the year 1975-76, the book results were rejected an...
K.S.E.B. Vs. Cheriyan Varghese and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-10-1989
Reported in: AIR1989Ker198
Balakrishna Menon, J. 1. Both these revision petitions are by the Kerafa State Electricity Board against the orders of the District Court passed under Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. The District Judge by these impugned orders determined the compensation payable to the respective claimants on applications made by them under Section 16(3) of the Telegraph Act read with Section 51 of the Electricity Act, 1910. In both the cases compensation was claimed for the trees cut as well as for diminution in value of the land for the reason of the drawal of overhead power lines across the land. The learned District Judge has allowed compensation under both the heads based on the revised valuation statements submitted by the respective claimants.2. The learned single Judge before whom these cases came up for hearing had some doubt as to whether compensation for injurious affection can also be awarded in addition to compeasation for the trees cut determined on the basis of capitalisati...
Nanappan Konthi and ors. Vs. District Collector, Kottayam and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-09-1989
Reported in: AIR1989Ker223
ORDERK. Sreedharan, J. 1. Petitioners challenge the proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', for acquisition of properties mentioned in Ext. P. 1 notification for expansion of Travancore Electro Chemicals Industries Limited, Chingavanam. The attack is on two counts. First one is that declaration issued Under Section 6 of the Act was after the expiry of one year from the date of publication of Ext. P1 notification Under Section 4(1) of the Act and hence it is invalid. The second ground is that the acquisition for expansion of the existing unit of a company is hit by Section 44-B of the Act and hence liable to be quashed. I shall proceed to deal with these contentions in detail. 2. Ext. P1 notification Under Section 4(1) of the Act was issued in the Gazette dt. 17-2-1987. It was published in Deepika daily on 17-2-1987 and in Malayala Manorama daily on 21-2-1987. Section 6 declaration was issued on 7-8-1988. Second proviso to Sectio...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. K.V. Abraham
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-09-1989
Reported in: (1990)87CTR(Ker)159; [1989]177ITR13(Ker)
Paripoornan, J.1. In this batch of five referred cases, the Revenue is the applicant. The common assessee is the respondent. The matter arises under the Wealth-tax Act (in short, 'the Act') for the assessment years 1967-68, 1968-69, 1969-70, 1970-71 and 1971-72. The following common question of law has been referred for the decision of this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in R. A. Nos. 856 to 860 of 1981 in W. T. A. Nos. 137 to 141/Coch. Of 1980 relating to the above assessment years 1967-68 to 1971-72. The question of law runs as follows :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to claim exemption in respect of the residential house belonging to the minor and included as belonging to the assessee ?'2. The Income-tax Officer, as also the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, included in the net wealth of the assessee the value of the residential building standing in the name of the assessee's minor son. This was so done under Section ...
Ram Bahadur Thakur (P) Ltd. Vs. Chief Inspector of Plantations
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-09-1989
Reported in: (1989)IILLJ20Ker
Sreedharan, J.1. Petitioner is a private limited company. Third respondent is a woman worker employed by the petitioner in Pambanar Tea Estate. The 3rd respondent availed of maternity leave in 1982 and she was delivered of a child on 29th September 1982. She claimed maternity benefit from the petitioner under the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. Since she had actually worked only for 157 days apart from four half days during 12 months immediately proceeding the date of the delivery, the petitioner took the stand that she was not entitled to maternity benefit Under Section 5(3) of the Act. Thus she was not paid any benefit. She complained to the 2nd respondent. The 2nd respondent by Ext. P1 order held that the four half days should also be treated as full days and so calculated she must be deemed to have worked for 161 days within the 12 months immediately preceding the date of her delivery. In this view, the petitioner was directed to pay the maternity...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »