Court : Kerala
Reported in : (1992)IILLJ330Ker
Padmanabhan, J. Kerala Industrial Establishments (National and Festival Holidays) Act (for brevity, the Act) came into force on December 29, 1988, providing for seven paid holidays, comprised of three national and four festival holidays. National holidays are Republic Day (26th of January), May Day (1st of May), and Independence Day (15th of August). Kerala Industrial Establishments (National and Festival Holidays) Amendment Act, 1990 (for short, Amendment Act) increased the national holidays from three to four with the addition of Gandhi Jayanthi, birth day of the Father of the Nation, falling on 2nd of October, Festival holidays were increased from four to nine. Constitutional validity of the Amendment Act is under challenge in these original petitions. At the time of arguments, all concerned made it clear that Gandhi Jayanthi may continue as a national holiday. Challenge was, therefore, confined to the addition of five festival holidays.2. The Act is applicable to industrial establi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : (1993)ILLJ605Ker
S. Padmanabhan, J.1. The second respondent is an employee under the petitioner. A co-worker by name Ravindran Nair filed a complaint against him. The second respondent was charge-sheeted by Exhibit P-l under four counts. A domestic enquiry followed Ravindran Nair, the de facto complainant, himself prosecuted the enquiry. The second respondent says that Ravindran Nair was assisted by a co-worker, Dayanandan, as the Presenting Officer, but the petitioner dentes this fact. The second respondent was also allowed to be assisted in the enquiry by a union leader. Ravindran Nair and another employee were examined as witnesses by the management. Ravindran Nair was not cross-examined, but the other witnesses were cross-examined. The second respondent examined himself and another witness. Exhibit P-2 is the enquiry proceedings and Exhibit P-3 is the enquiry report. All the four charges were found proved. The management accepted the report and issued Exhibit P-4, show-cause notice, why the second ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : [1993]199ITR151(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, the Tribunal was right in law and fact in finding that the assessee is entitled to deduction of interest of Rs. 1,33,000? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law and fact in holding that it cannot be called that the amount of Rs. 1,33,000 is an unascertained liability during the year ?' 2. The respondent, a public limited company, is an assessee under the Income-tax Act. It is a bulk consumer of electricity. The electricity supply tariff was revised with effect from July 1, 1975. The challenge against the said increase by the assessee was futile. The decision so rendered by the High Court was in August, 1976. We are concerned herein with the assessment year 1977-78 for which the accounting period ended on...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : [1993]199ITR439(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J. 1. These are connected cases. The Revenue is the petitioner in all the original petitions. The respondent is an assessee to income-tax. He was assessed in the status of an 'individual'. The matter relates to the assessment years 1980-81 and 1981-82. The assessee was carrying on a business in offset press under the label 'Victory Offset Printers'. By a deed dated April 2, 1979, the assessee and his wife declared a trust called Flemings Trust in respect of a sum of Rs. 5,001 held by them for the benefit of their minor son, K. M. Fleming. Even earlier, the minor son had been admitted to the benefits of a partnership called 'Victory Paper Stores'. The minor had to his credit a sum of Rs. 3,31,469 in the Victory Paper Stores. On the very day when the trust deed came into existence, the assessee had entered into an agreement as proprietor of the Victory Offset Printers with Mrs. Omana Mathew, representing Flemings Trust, for the sale of the printing business to the trust...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : [1993]199ITR110(Ker)
K.S. Paripooknan, J.1. This is a petition filed by the Revenue under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, to direct the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to refer the following two questions of law, formulated in paragraph 7 of the original petition for the decision of this court:'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in holding that the money received by the assessee was for and on behalf of the Indian Gospel Mission ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law and fact in holding that the money is not liable to be included in the assessee's hands?' 2. The respondent is an assessee to income-tax. The matter relates to the assessment year 1970-71 for which the accounting period ended on December 31, 1969. During the previous year relevant to the assessment year, the total income of the assessee was arrived at by including a receipt of Rs. 3,66,160. The said sum was a remittance from the U...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : (1994)119CTR(Ker)123; [1994]208ITR602(Ker); [1994]76TAXMAN204(Ker)
B. M. THULASIDAS J. - The petitioners are the accused in C. C. No. 66 of 1988 of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offences), Ernakulam. This petition filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is to quash the proceedings in the above case and the order, annexure 'K', passed on October 19, 1990.The above case arose on a complaint, annexure 'G', filed by the respondent, for offences under sections 276C(1) and 277 of the Income-tax Act and sections 120B, 196, 198, 199, 200, 465, 468, 471, 417 and 511 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioners had entered appearance before the court below and filed a petition under section 245(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking discharge, which the court below dismissed by annexure 'K' order. The case is pending trial.Petitioners Nos. 4 to 6 earlier filed Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 882 of 1988 under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings in the case which was withdrawn and dismi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1992Ker44
Viswanatha Iyer, J.1. The question referred is whether a landowner is entitled to the benefit of Section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (the Central Act) when the award of the Collector had been passed before April 30, 1982 and the matter was pending in reference in Court on that date. A Division Bench of this Court had in L.A.A. No. 119 of 1986 and related cases held that the amount under Section 23(1-A) was not payable in cases where the award of the Collector was passed before April 30, 1982, though subsequent proceedings by way of reference were pending on that date. The Division Bench before whom this case came up felt that various aspects relating to the statutory scheme of Section 23(1-A) had not been adequately considered in the said decision and that the matter required further scrutiny. The case was therefore referred for consideration by a Full Bench.2. 3.93.82 hectares of land situated in Anchamada village of Thiruvananthapuram District belonging to the responden...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : [1992]198ITR720(Ker)
ORDER--Cannot be cured by affidavit.HELD :When a statutory functionary makes an order based on certain grounds, its validity must be judged by the reasons so mentioned and cannot be supplemented by fresh reasons in the shape of an affidavit or otherwise. APPLICATION :Also to current assessment years.Income Tax Act 1961 s.143 Interest--WAIVER UNDER S. 273A--Disclosure of reasons for non-full waiver--Assessee disclosing share income from firm--Firm Subsequently filed revised return showing higher income--Interest on firm waived in full--Order not granting complete waiver to assessee a partner thereof--HELD :The contention of the assessee that when the return was filed by the petitioner, he could not have anticipated the revised return filed by the firm, the further fact that the other officer had completely waived the interest in the case of the firm as well as the other points raised in the revision have not been adverted to by the CIT who only partly waived the interest in case of asse...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1992Ker108
Varghese Kalliath, J.1. Our learned and noble Brother T.L. Viswanatha Iyer felt some doubt as to the semantics, the drift tenor and impact of Section 52 and its provisos of the Kerala Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Section 52 of the Act provides for payment of court-fee for appeals. For easy understanding of the relevancy of the question, we quote Section 52 of the Act:'52. Appeals:-- The fee payable in an appeal shall be the same as the fee that would (be) payable in the Court of first instance on the subject-matter of the appeal. Provided that, in levying fee on a memorandum of appeal against a final decree by a person whose appeal against the preliminary decree passed by that Court of the first instance or by the Court of appeal is pending, credit shall be given for the fee paid by such person in the appeal against preliminary decree. Provided further that on third of the fee payable in an appeal shall be paid at the stage of admission of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 1994(74)ELT807(Ker)
Paripoornan, J.1. At the instance of an assessee to Excise Duty, the Customs Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, South Regional Bench at Madras has referred the following question of law for the decision of this Court:'Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, hydrogen used along with oxygen as a fuel to melt the ends of quartz burners is a raw material within the meaning of Notification No. 201 dated 4-6-1979?' 2. The assessee is a public limited company. It manufactures electric bulbs and fluorescent lamps. The respondent is the Revenue. We are concerned with the period after 28-2-1982. The short question that falls for consideration is whether the benefit of Notification No. 201 /79, dated 4-6-1979, as amended, is available in respect of hydrogen used as a fuel to melt the ends of quartz burners. The plea of the assessee was that hydrogen gas is a raw material or component part in the process of manufacture of electric bulbs and fluorescent lamps. The Assistant ...
Tag this Judgment!