Kerala Court September 1991 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 Wealth-tax Vs. A.S. Guna Shenoy
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-16-1991
Reported in: (1991)100CTR(Ker)66; [1992]197ITR325(Ker)
K.P. Radhakrishna Menon, J.1. The Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Cochin, is the petitioner.2. These are petitions under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. These petitions were necessitated as the Appellate Tribunal rejected the applications under Section 27(2) seeking reference of the questions stated hereunder :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and having agreed with the views of the Judicial Member, the Accountant Member is right and within his jurisdiction in giving a direction that only such of the items of properties as are mentioned in paragraph 6 of his order could be assessed in the hands of the assessee ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, is not the direction by the Accountant Member in paragraph 6 of his order non est in law and could not the officer, while giving effect to the order legally, ignore the same ?' It can be seen from the order of the Tribunal that both the judicial Member and the Accountant Member ha...
Abdul Nazar Vs. Sales Tax Officer-ii and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-16-1991
Reported in: [1993]88STC512(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J. 1. The petitioner in O.P. No. 6734 of 1991 is the appellant in this writ appeal. The Revenue is the respondent. The petitioner is a hotelier. We are concerned with the assessment for the year 1987-88. It was made on best judgment basis. The controversy is regarding the turnover brought to tax under Section 5A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (in short, 'the Act'). The assessing authority passed exhibit P1 order of assessment, fixing the taxable turnover at Rs. 16,63,940. Of the above, a turnover of Rs. 13,53,531 was fixed as turnover taxable under Section 5A of the Act, and the tax thereon came to Rs. 90,642. Exhibit P1 was challenged as illegal and ultra vires the Constitution of India. The learned single Judge, on the basis of the decision of the Supreme Court in State of Tamil Nadu v. Kandaswami [1975] 36 STC 191 and the Bench decision of this Court in Hill Produce Corporation v. State of Kerala (1991) 1 KLT SN 50, Case No. 70 upheld the validity of Sec...
P.V. John Vs. Nalumakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-13-1991
Reported in: [1992]75CompCas254(Ker)
K.A. Nayar, J. 1. This writ appeal is against the judgment in O. P. No. 883 of 1989 by which the learned single judge held that the provision of Rule 67(1) of the Kerala Co operative Societies Rules, 1969, in so far as it requires the production of a certified copy of the resolution of the board of directors of the co-operative society along with the application for reference of the dispute for arbitration is only directory and, therefore, the Tribunal went wrong in dismissing the application on the ground of non-production of a certified copy of the resolution. The appellant who was an attender under the first respondent society was sought to be made liable by the society for misappropriation of certain amounts and hence the first respondent filed A. R. C. No. 100 of 1984 seeking relief against the appellant and respondents Nos. 2 and 3. Along with the application for reference of the dispute to the Joint Registrar, the first respondent society did not produce the certified copy of th...
K. L. Mathew Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-12-1991
Reported in: (1992)101CTR(Ker)139; [1992]197ITR283(Ker); [1992]63TAXMAN271(Ker)
K. S. PARIPOORNAN J. - The petitioner is an assessee to income-tax. This petition is filed under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The petitioner prays that the following three question of law, formulated in paragraph 20 of the original petition, may be directed to be referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal :'(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and also in the light of the facts repeated in the enclosure to the reference application, the Honble Tribunal is justified in coming to the previous year ended March 31, 1974, and incurred business loss and hence rejecting the claim for set off of business loss against capital gains ?(ii) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, was the Tribunal correct in concluding that the assessee had done no business during the previous year 1973-74 ?(iii) On the evidence placed by the assessee, was the Tribunal justified in rejecting the claim of the assessee for set off of the loss incurr...
P.J. Moore Vs. Valsa
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-11-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Ker176; I(1992)DMC55
Thomas, J.1. A widower, father of three children, married again, but the wife after twelve years of married life sought to have the marriage annulled on the ground that her consent was obtained by fraud. Learned single Judge declared the marriage null and void. The fraud alleged is this; Before the second marrigae, appellant (husband) had undergone vasectomy , but he did not disclose it to the respondent (wife). As she did not conceive for thirty months, she was anxious to know the reason. Appellant then divulged to her that he had undergone vasectomy before marrigae. But he pacified her that he would undergo recanalisation. However, he later changed his mind and declined to under recanalisation. His excuse for this volte-face is that such a course is repugnant to Pentecostal faith to which he has subscribed on becoming a member of Assemblies of Church of God.2. Though appellant contended that respondent was told about his vasectomy during marriage negotiation stage itself, learned sin...
Periakaramalai Tea and Produce Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-11-1991
Reported in: [1993]199ITR100(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J.1. This batch of four original petitions is filed by the same assessee to income-tax. The petitions are filed under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, 'the Act'), praying for a direction that the questions/question formulated in paragraph 4 of the original petitions may be directed to be referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (in short, 'the Tribunal'). In Original Petition No. 9262 of 1989, two questions have been formulated, whereas, in the other three original petitions, only one question is formulated. The second question in Original Petition No. 9262 of 1989 and the sole question in the other original petitions are the same. Therefore, it is sufficient to extract the two questions formulated in paragraph 4 of the Original Petition No. 9262 of 1989. They are as follows :' (i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in confirming the order of the Commissioner o...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Mrs. Najima Nizar
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-11-1991
Reported in: [1992]197ITR258(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J. 1. This batch of five referred cases involves consideration of the same question of law. It is at the instance of the Revenue that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench (in short, 'the Tribunal'), has referred the aforesaid five cases. The matter arises under the Wealth-tax Act, 19S7 (in short, 'the Act'). The same assessee is the respondent in all the five cases. Income-tax References Nos. 139 and 140 of 1984 relate to the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75, respectively. Income-tax References Nos. 14 to 16 of 1985 relate to the assessment years 1975-76,1976-77 and 1977-78, respectively. At the instance ' of the Revenue, the Tribunal has referred the following common question of law in all the five cases 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 assessee is entitled to exemption under Section 5(1)(iv) in respect of the value of the whole building and not mer...
T.N. Vasavan Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-11-1991
Reported in: [1992]197ITR163(Ker)
K.P. Radhakrishna Menon, J.1. The year of assessment is 1974-75. The reference is at the instance of the assessee. The question referred reads :'Whether, on the basis of materials available, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the capital gains arising from the compulsory acquisition of the land of the assessee's wife of an extent of 2.45 acres has to be treated separately and that there is no scope for the application of Section 54(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect thereof ?'2. Facts relevant and requisite can briefly be stated thus :3. Land measuring an extent of 2.45 acres (50 cents) comprised in Survey No. 945/1 of Poonithura Village originally belonged to the assessee. He gifted the same to his wife in the year 1960. He, thereafter, constructed a building on the said land in the year 1970. The Government of Kerala, in the year 1973, acquired the aforesaid land and the building and also the adjoining land of an extent of 5.79 acres belonging to the ...
Lt. K. Padmadas Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-10-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Ker158
Viswanatha Iyer, J.1. Petitioner in the original petition is the appellant. The original petition was one filed under Article 226 of the Constitution to quash the proceedings initiated by the third respondent, at the instance of the Nayarambalam Panchayat, the 4th respondent, for acquisition of O. 3520 nectars of land belonging to the appellant in Sy. No. 255/1 of Nayarambalam Village, Kochi Taluk. The writ petition was filed when the Board of Revenue passed the proceedings Ext. P11 on 30-4-1990 approving the draft declaration under Section 6 of the (Central) Land Acquisition Act, 1894, after holding that the objections to the acquisition raised by the petitioner were not maintainable and that the acquisition was for a bona fide public purpose.2. The facts as culled out from the original petition and the counter-affidavits filed on behalf of respondents I to 3, and respondent No. 4, may now be stated. The land in question belonged to the petitioner's father S. Krishnan. In the year 198...
P.V. Ammini Amma Vs. Bharathan and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-10-1991
Reported in: I(1992)ACC88; 1992ACJ630
K.P. Ramakrishnan, J.1. Harichandran, son of the appellant, sustained fatal injuries in a bus accident on 1.4.1980. The ill-fated bus was driven by the 1st respondent and owned by the 2nd respondent. 4th respondent is alleged to be registered owner of the bus who was impleaded in the proceedings later while the matter was pending before the Tribunal. 3rd respondent is the insurer. In the appeal, the appellant has claimed enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. She has also claimed enhancement of the rate of interest from 6 per cent to 12 per cent per annum.2. The facts which are not in dispute and relevant can be summarised thus: Deceased Harichandran was a passenger in the bus involved in the accident. The bus while being driven by the first respondent fell into a paddy field and the deceased as well various other passengers sustained injuries as a result of the accident. Deceased suffered serious brain injuries. He was immediately taken to the Government Hospital, Ka...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »