Kerala Court January 1990 Judgments
M.R. Lukose Vs. V. Govindan Nair (Kuttan) and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-31-1990
Reported in: AIR1990Ker327
Thomas, J. 1. This appeal is by a claimant whose claim petition was dismissed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal for default. Though the appellant filed an application for restoration of the petition, the Claims Tribunal dismissed that application. The appellant then moved an Original Petition in this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution challenging the said order by which the restoration application was dismissed. But the Original Petition was also dismissed with the observation that the appellant should have preferred an appeal as provided in Section 110D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (for short 'the Act') against theaward by which the claim was dismissed. Hence this appeal after getting the delay condoned by this Court.2. The order dated 5-6-86 which is under challenge reads thus :'On behalf of the petitioner's counsel an adjournment is prayed for without stating any reason. Adjournment refused. Petitioner called, absent. Hence petition dismissed.'On filing the claim pe...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kerala State Drugs and Pharmaceuticals ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-25-1990
Reported in: [1990]184ITR426(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J.1. These are connected cases. These petitions are filed by the Revenue under Section 261 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, praying for the issue of a certificate to appeal to the Supreme Court against the common judgment rendered by this court in I. T. R. Nos. 152 and 153 of 1985 dated June 21, 1989.2. The respondent is an assessee to income-tax. The respondent/assessee-company received substantial subsidy during the relevant accounting years. The assessing authority reduced, from the actual cost of the assets, the subsidy received from the Central Government for the purpose of computing depreciation, development rebate, etc. In appeal, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) reversed the said decision. He held that the subsidy received from the Central Government cannot be reckoned for the purpose of computing the depreciation and development rebate and in computing the actual cost price of the assets. The Appellate Tribunal concurred with the said order. At the instan...
Tag this Judgment!Mrs. Beena Alexander Kurian Vs. Alexander Kurian
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-25-1990
Reported in: 1990CriLJ2641
K.G. Balakrishnan, J.1. This is an appeal against acquittal. The appellant filed a complaint against the respondent husband alleging that he committed criminal breach of trust. The marriage between the appellant and respondent took place on 28-10-79. Prior to the marriage, there was a betrothal ceremony on 9-9-79 and on that day a sum of Rs. 75,000/-was entrusted with the respondent as 'streedhan' amount. The marriage between the appellant and the respondent ran into rough whether and on 9-6-80 the appellant left the marital home and started residing with her parents. Thereafter the appellant requested for the return of Rs. 75,000/-, the gold chain and ring given to the respondent. The respondent did not accede to the request and in spite of repeated demands the respondent failed to pay back the money. The appellant later filed a civil suit for the recovery of the money and the same is pending. On 10-4-87 the appellant filed this criminal complaint alleging that the respondent-husband ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kerala State Industrial Development Cor ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-24-1990
Reported in: [1990]184ITR85(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J.1. The Revenue is the petitioner in these petitions. Common questions arise for consideration in these cases. The Revenue prays for the issue of a certificate to appeal to the Supreme Court of India against the judgment of this court in I. T. R. No. 125 of 1984 dated June 19, 1989 (Kerala State Industrial Development Corpn. Ltd. v. CIT,-- : [1989]180ITR323(Ker) ) and against the common judgment in I. T. R. Nos. 205 to 208 of 1984 dated June 26, 1989 (CIT v. Kerala State Industrial Development Corpn. Ltd. (No. 2),-- : [1990]182ITR67(Ker) ). The respondent in these three petitions is a public limited company, Kerala State Industrial Development Corporation. The sole question that fell to be decided in these cases is the scope and content of Section 36(1)(viii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The question is whether the deduction referred to in the said section envisages 10% of the total income or 10% of the total assessed income before deduction of the amount so allowed....
Tag this Judgment!R.K. Kesavan Vs. Board of Revenue, Trivandrum and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-23-1990
Reported in: AIR1990Ker253
ORDERChettur Sankaran Nair, J. 1. Petitioner seeks to quash an order cancelling a licence issued to him under the Arms Act, and prays for return of the D.B.B.L. gun seized from him. On 22-11-1985, it is said that three policemen went to the house of petitioner, and demanded to see his licence. Instead of verifying the licence, it is alleged that the gun was seized. Upon this, petitioner made Ext. P 1 and P 2 complaints to the Additional District Magistrate, and Superintendent of Police, respectively. These were followed by Ext. P3 representation to the Minister for Revenue. By Ext. P 4, the District Magistrate issued a notice to petitioner to show cause why the licence issued to him should not be cancelled. Petitioner showed cause by Ext. P 5, stating that the gun was needed for self-protection. After considering Ext. P5, by order dated 16-7-1986 (not exhibited) the licence was cancelled. Petitioner appealed against that order, to no avail, and by Ext. P 9 the appeal was rejected.2. Pe...
Tag this Judgment!Joseph Chandy Vs. Income-tax Officer and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-23-1990
Reported in: [1990]183ITR213(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J.1. The petitioner in Original Petition No. 20 of 1988 is the appellant in this writ appeal. In the original petition, the prayer was to quash exhibits P-3 and P-6 orders, passed by respondents Nos. 1 and 2. The petitioner is a partner of a firm, Messrs. Eastern Spices Trading Company. The managing partner was one R. Murukesan. The firm was doing business in spices. We are concerned with the assessment year 1979-80. The firm returned a total income of Rs. 35,830 under the head 'Business'. The Income-tax Officer eventually passed an order of assessment for the year 1979-80, evidenced by exhibit P-2, under Section 144 of the Act. It is dated February 19, 1982. The assessment happened to be passed under Section 144 of the Act, since the managing partner as well as the petitioner herein did not co-operate in effecting the assessment. What is more, the Income-tax Officer was faced with the hurdle that even a notice could not be served either on the managing partner of on ...
Tag this Judgment!Annamma Cherian Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-23-1990
Reported in: 1990CriLJ1796
K.G. Balakrishnan, J. 1. The appellant was tried by the Special Judge for trial of offences under the Essential Commodities Act, Trichur and was found guilty of offence punishable under Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of E.C. Act read with Section 3(2)(c)(d) of the said Act and Clauses 29 and 50 of the Kerala Rationing Order 1966. The appellant appeals against the conviction and sentence.2. The appellant was tried along with two other persons. Originally the police filed final report against accused 1 and 2. The gist of allegation against these two accused was that the 1st accused unlawfully removed 611 Kgs. of rice from a. ration shop and sold this ration rice to the 2nd accused. The prosecution alleged that accused 1 and 2 committed offences punishable under Clauses 5 and 5A of the Kerala Rationing Order and Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of the E.C. Act read with Section 3(2)(c)(d) of the said Act. Trial commenced against accused 1 and 2 and 6 witnesses were examined on the side of the prosecution. At thi...
Tag this Judgment!Meenachil Rubber Marketing and Processing Co-operative Society Ltd. Vs ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-23-1990
Reported in: [1992]193ITR108(Ker); [1992]65TAXMAN121(Ker)
VARGHESE KALLIATH J. - At the instance of the assessee, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, has referred the following question for the decision of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the assessee is not entitled to the relief under section 80P(2)(a)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'The assessment year is 1979-80. The assessee is a co-operative society. It purchased raw latex from its members and processed the same by the centrifugal method and sold the commodity. The assessee contended that the income derived by it by the sale of the latex of the members of the society sold after the centrifugal method is exempt under section 80P(2)(a)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Income-tax Officer declined to accept this claim of the assessee. The Officer held that when the assessee purchased latex from its members and effected the sale after some processing, what was sold by the assessee is its...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. K. Ravindranathan Nair
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-22-1990
Reported in: (1990)90CTR(Ker)120; [1993]200ITR766(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following questions of law in the two connected referred cases, for the decision of this court :2. I. T. R. No. 527 of 1965 :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that contributions made to group gratuity insurance scheme in excess of the statutory limit is an allowable deduction ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the assessee is entitled to the claim for export markets development allowance under Section 35B of the Income tax Act ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in finding that the commission paid to the agents in India and administrative expenses incurred in India qualify for weighted deduction under Section 35B of the Income tax Act, 1961, and that the commission on forei...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. N. Krishna Iyer (Huf) (No. 2)
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-19-1990
Reported in: [1991]187ITR636(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J.1. The Revenue has filed this petition under Section 261 of the Income-tax /Act, praying for the issue of a certificate to appeal to the Supreme Court of India against the judgment rendered by this court in income-tax Reference No. 190 of 1985, dated March 29, 1989. The sole question that arose for consideration is the scope and impact of the Kerala Joint Hindu Family System (Abolition) Act, 1975. Following the earlier decisions of this court in WTO v. K. Madhavan Nambiar : [1988]169ITR810(Ker) , Shantilal C. Shah v. CIT : [1988]169ITR805(Ker) and P. G. Narayanaswamy v. CIT : [1988]169ITR813(Ker) , it was held that the Hindu joint family ceased to exist in this State by operation of law with effect from December 1, 1976. It is thereafter that the Revenue has sought the issue of a certificate to appeal to the Supreme Court of India against the aforesaid judgment.2. We heard counsel for the Revenue. Our attention was invited to the issue of a certificate to appeal to ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »