Kerala Court June 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.
G. Padmanabhan Nair and ors. Vs. G.M. Kerala State Road Transport Corp ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-20-1989
Reported in: II(1989)ACC565
U.L. Bhat, J.1. Anilkumar, a boy aged 13 years riding a cycle, was knocked down and run over by bus KLX 3742 belonging to the K.S.R.T.C., on the National Highway at Athiyannur at about 5.15 p.m. on 19-5-1980. He died instantaneously. His parents filed a claim petition before the Motor Accidents claims Tribunal, Trivandrum claiming a sum of Rs. 1 lakh as compensation from the driver and the Corporation on the allegation that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus. Subsequently, their other children were also impleaded as supplemental petitioners. The Corporation and the driver filed Separate statements denying any rashness or negligence on the part of the driver of the bus and alleging that the bus was driven slowly and cautiously and since no vehicle was coming from the opposite direction, driver of the bus decided to overtake two bullock-carts on the highway and the boy who was riding the cycle in between two bullock-carts suddenly tried to cross the ro...
Kerala State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. Vs. Commissioner ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-19-1989
Reported in: [1989]180ITR323(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J.1. The applicant, Kerala State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd., Trivandrum, is an assessee to income-tax. The respondent is the Revenue. We'are concerned with the assessment year 1976-77. The assessee is a wholly State-owned company. For the assessment year 1976-77, the Income-tax Officer allowed a sum of Rs. 3,04,156 as a deduction under Section 36(1)(viii) of the Income-tax Act. The total income computed by him before the allowance of this deduction and the deduction under Section 80G of the Act was Rs, 30,41,567. The Income-tax Officer held that the assessee is entitled to 10% of the total income of Rs. 30,41,567 by way of deduction under Section 36(1)(viii) of the Act, before the allowance of relief under Chapter-VIA. The Commissioner of Income-tax took the view that the order of assessment so passed by the Income-tax Officer dated August 22, 1979, is prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. According to the Commissioner, Section 36(1)(viii) of the I...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. P.S.N. Motors (P.) Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-19-1989
Reported in: (1989)79CTR(Ker)189; [1989]180ITR345(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J. 1. At the instance of the Revenue, 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 Tribunal was right in holding that no tax on capital gains can be levied in respect of the transfer of route permits which were acquired by the asses-see for the first time ?'2. The respondent-assessee is a private limited company. It is a transport operator. We are concerned with the assessment year 1974-75 for which the previous year ended on June 30, 1973. During the relevant accounting period, the assessee sold 12 buses along with pucca route permits. As on July 1, 1972, the written down value of 9 buses was only Rs. 1,52,021. The assessee claimed that out of the consideration received for the sale of 9 buses, Rs. 2,50,000 was the value of the route permits, that this was analogous to goodwill, that there was no cost of acquisition with regard to the route ...
Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (Law), Board of Revenue (Taxes) Vs. S ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-19-1989
Reported in: [1990]79STC343(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J.1. The Revenue is the revision petitioner. The respondent (firm) is an assessee under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (in short, 'the Act'). We are concerned with the assessment year 1985-86. The assessee-firm is doing business in arrack and toddy. The assessee's business premises were inspected by the Intelligence Officer of the department on November 6, 1985. The stock was verified. It disclosed shortage of 2,068.500 litres in arrack. There was difference of 1,225 litres in the stock of vinegar. Certain documents were also seized during inspection. They included one used bill book and seven slips. The slips disclosed unaccounted purchase of 60,230 litres of arrack during the period April 1, 1985 to October 31, 1985. The inspection report also showed that no records (accounts ?) were produced for verification. One stock register alone was produced, which was initialled by the officer. Proceedings were initiated for non-maintenance of true and correct account...
V.K. Thampi Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-19-1989
Reported in: 1991LC272(Kerala); 1989(24)LC445(Kerala); 1990(48)ELT13(Ker)
K.A. Nayar, J.1. The petition is for a direction to the second respondent to state the case and to refer to this Court the questions of law raised by the petitioner in paragraph 17 of the petition as follows :-1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, is not the exparte order under appeal liable to be set aside and the appellant given a fresh opportunity to file his written representation to the show cause notice, as the failure to submit the written representation in time was not due to any fault on the part of the appellant, but, if at all, was the result of the fault committed by his counsel?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, is not the order under appeal bad for non-compliance with Rule 233-A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 by which a duty is cast on the respondent to afford the person proceeded against a reasonable opportunity of being heard, over and above the opportunity of making a representation in writing?3. Whether, in the f...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Muledath Mohammed
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-13-1989
Reported in: [1990]186ITR498a(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J. 1. At the instance of the Revenue, the Income-taxAppellate 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, was the Tribunal right in law in holding that no tax on capital gains was leviable on the sale of the land in question ?' 2. The Tribunal held that the assessee cannot be assessed on the capital gains which accrued or which arose out of the transfer of agricultural lands. Reliance was placed on the decision of the Bombay High Court in Manubhai A. Sheth v. N. D. Nirgudkar, Second ITO : [1981]128ITR87(Bom) . It, is, thereafter, at the instance of the Revenue that the question of law, formulated hereinabove, has been formulated for the decision of this court.3. We heard counsel. At the time of hearing, it, is agreed that this court had dissented from the decision of the Bombay High Court in Manubhai A. Sheth's case : [1981]128ITR87(Bom) and has held that the income a...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. A.S. Iqbal (Legal Heir of Late A.B. Sye ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-13-1989
Reported in: [1990]186ITR499(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J. 1. At the instance of the Revenue, 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, was the Tribunal right in law in holding that no tax on capital gains was leviable on the sale of the land in question ?'2. The respondents are assessees to income-tax. We are concerned with the assessment year 1974-75. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal upheld the plea of the assessees that no capital gains tax is leviable on the sale of agricultural land. Thereafter, at the instance of the Revenue, the question of law formulated hereinabove, has been referred for the decision of this court.3. We heard counsel. The Appellate Tribunal relied on the decision of the Bombay High Court in Manubhai A. Sheth v. N. D. Nirgudkar, Second ITO : [1981]128ITR87(Bom) , to hold that the assessee is not liable to capital gains tax on the sale of the agricultural land. A Bench of ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Grand Cashew Corporation
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-13-1989
Reported in: [1990]182ITR194(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J. 1. At the instance of the Revenue, 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 Tribunal was right in holding that the commission paid by the assessee was expenditure incurred for obtaining information regarding markets outside India for the products of the assessee and that, consequently, the assessee is entitled to weighted deduction of the amount under Section 35B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The respondent is an assessee to income-tax. It is an exporter of cashew. We are concerned with the assessment year 1977-78. The assessee claimed deduction of commission payment of Rs. 64,774 under Section 35B of the Income-tax Act. It was stated to be commission paid to Messrs. Eastern Export Traders, Bombay. The Income-tax Officer held that this payment was made in India and does not come under any of the clauses of Section 35B(1)(b) of the A...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. C. Narayanan Nair
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-12-1989
Reported in: [1989]180ITR303(Ker)
K.A. Nayar, J.1. The main question in this income-tax referred case is whether the unauthorised advantage taken by the employee without the authority of the employer in the form of using the motor car given exclusively for the business of the employer for his private purposes also could be considered as a perquisite in the hands of the employee. The case relates to the assessment year 1978-79. The assessee was the manager of S. Koder and was drawing a salary exceeding Rs. 18,000. During the relevant accounting period, the employer had provided a motor car for use by the assessee in connection with the business of the employer. The assessee produced a certificate from the employer to the effect that the cars and vans belonging to the employer firm were used during the accounting period only for the purpose of the business of the firm and that the manager and other employees of the firm were not permitted to use the same for their personal purposes. The Income-tax Officer found that the ...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. N. Lakshmikutty Amma
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-09-1989
Reported in: [1989]180ITR289(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, 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 assessee having only a life interest in the building is entitled to the exemption under Section 5(1)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ?'2. The respondent is an assessee to wealth-tax. We are concerned with the assessment years 1974-75 to 1978-79. One Gopala Pillai, the assessee's husband, executed a will. The assessee obtained a life interest over a two-storeyed building situated in Quilon. The ownership of the property vested with the three sons after the death of the testator, Gopala Pillai. The Wealth-tax Officer brought to tax the life interest of the assessee over this property. The assessee claimed exemption under Section 5(1)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act in respect of this property, The claim was rejected by the assessing authority. In appeal, the said decisi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »