Kerala Court February 1992 Judgments
S.S.V. Kumar Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-19-1992
Reported in: [1993]199ITR416(Ker)
K.A. Nayar, J. 1. The petitioner was assessed to income-tax for the year 1988-89. Exhibit P-5 is the assessment order. Since the Income-tax Officer came to the conclusion that there was escapement of income, notice was issued under section 148 of the Act. Exhibit P-13 is the notice. The petitioner challenges the said notice in this writ petition. When exhibit P-13 was received, the petitioner wanted reasons, under which the notice was issued, to be given. I do not think that the reason need be given at this stage. It is not necessary to specify the item of income that had escaped from assessment or indicate the source of income that had escaped from assessment. It is enough if the attention of the assessee is drawn at the time of the reassessment. At this stage, it is not necessary on the part of the Income-tax Officer to specify the item that had escaped from assessment. The contention now before me is that the Income-tax Officer is acting only on a change of opinion. All this can be ...
Tag this Judgment!G.T.N. Textiles Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-18-1992
Reported in: (1992)103CTR(Ker)174; [1993]199ITR347(Ker)
K.P. Balanarayana Marar, J. 1. The petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari to quash exhibit P-3 order of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Cochin, to the extent to which it relates to the rejection of the application for waiver of interest levied under Section 220(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. This petition arose under the following circumstances : The petitioner is an assessee under the Income-tax Act, 1961. For the assessment year 1979-80, a return was filed claiming depreciation and investment allowance on plant and machinery. The interest was capitalised on plant and machinery. In the original assessment, the Income-tax Officer had disallowed the capitalisation of interest payable subsequent to the date on which the plant and machinery were put to use. On appeal, the Commissioner of Income-tax directed depreciation and investment allowance to be granted taking into account interest also. An Explanation was added to Section 43(1) of the Income-tax Act by the Finance Act of 1986, with ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax Vs. Raja Rajeswari Narikelly E ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-18-1992
Reported in: (1992)103CTR(Ker)195; [1993]199ITR383(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J. 1. At the instance of the Revenue, the Kerala Agricultural Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Kozhikode, has, by an order dated January 13, 1987, referred the following three questions of law 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 procedure of the assessee who maintains the accounts on the mercantile system of accounting and returning the differential value received in respect of coffee pooled during the previous year can be adopted for the purpose of assessment for the current year? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in directing deletion of the addition of Rs. 5,85,025.10 which was received in the accounting year 1977-78 towards the difference in value of 1976-77 season's coffee? and 3. Is the decision of the Tribunal opposed to the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in : [1966]59ITR25...
Tag this Judgment!Munnodiyil Peravakutty Vs. Kuniyedath Chalil Velayudhan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-14-1992
Reported in: AIR1992Ker290; I(1992)DMC530
Guttal, J. 1. Welfare of the child is the paramount consideration. This appealing phrase, easy to understand but less easy to apply, is invoked by the parents of the mother of the child, Anisha. The Additional District Judge, Kozhikode, in the O.P. No. 136 of 1989 filed by Anisha's father, Velayudhan, ordered that Anisha be given in his custody. The parents of the deceased mother of the child, impugn the order.2. In this appeal the appellants are referred to as 'maternal grand parents' and the respondent as the 'father'. The child's mother died by drowning in a well on the evening of 6th September, 1988 when the father was away. According to the father, she committed suicide as she was depressed by the fact that her husband, a sergeant in the Indian Army, was summoned to Sri Lanka to continue his duties in the I.P.K.F. The grandparents, on the other hand, urge that the father, by practice of cruelty drove her to commit suicide. The conduct of the father in relation to his wife is not u...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) Vs. B. Bhogilal and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-14-1992
Reported in: AIR1992Ker302
ORDERK.G. Balakrishnan, J.1. This is an application filed under Sections 152 and 153 of the Code of Civil Procedure for correction of the judgment. The Union of India represented by the General Manager, Southern Railway, Madras, the defendant in the suit, is the petitioner.2. The question posed up for consideration is whether on deposit of a portion of the decree amount made pursuant to the order passed by the appellate Court in an application for interim stay of execution of the decree, interest if any shall cease to run from the date of payment of such amount.3. The respondents filed the suit for damages. The suit was decreed for Rupees 48,703.00 with interest at 12% per annum from the date of the suit till the date of decree and thereafter at the rate of 6% till the date of realisation on the principal sum. Aggrieved by this the defendant filed appeal before this Court and this Court by judgment dated 18th July, 1990 partly allowed the appeal and modified the decree directing the ap...
Tag this Judgment!Indian Trawlers Association, Ernakulam and anr. Vs. the State of Keral ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-13-1992
Reported in: AIR1992Ker360
ORDERK.A. Nayar, J.1. It is agreed that the question arises for consideration in all these writ petitions are the same and that relates to the constitutional validity of Section 4 of the Kerala Fishermen's Welfare Fund Act, 1984 (for short 'the Act'). If Section 4 of the Act is declared unconstitutional, the other provisions of the Act, being integrally connected with Section 4, will not survive. Therefore, the sole question is whether the challenge against Section 4 of the Act can be upheld. Even though there are minor variations in facts in these petitions, it is agreed that for the purpose of disposal of these cases, the facts in O.P. 7787/88 alone need be referred to. That means, the disposal of O.P. 7787/88 will have the effect of disposal of all the cases in this batch of cases.2. The petitioner is engaged in fishing operations using mechanised boats of different tonnage. Petitioner is owner of mechanised fishing boats and in that capacity they are owner of nets of the boats as w...
Tag this Judgment!Alice Oommen and anr. (Legal Heirs of O. Thomas (Decd.)) Vs. Commissio ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-13-1992
Reported in: [1992]198ITR20(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following two questions of law for the decision of this court :' (a) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the full value of the consideration of Rs. 44,245 was not the fair market value for the application of Section 52(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? (b) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in confirming the assessment, especially in view of the fact that the Income-tax Officer had only invoked Section 52(1) of the Act, without recording any finding that the transfer was made with a view to avoid or reduce the capital gains tax ?' 2. The respondent herein is the Revenue. The original assessee died, pending the reference. His legal heirs have been impleaded as applicants Nos. 1 and 2 as per orders passed by this court in C. M. P. No. 4095 of 1991.3. The assessee was the director of a private limi...
Tag this Judgment!Sandeep P. Mehta Vs. Government of India and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-11-1992
Reported in: [1992]198ITR743(Ker)
Chettur Sankaran Nair, J.1. The petitioner, an assessee under the Estate Duty Act, 1953, seeks to quash exhibits P-22 and P-26. By the former, the Revenue declined to accept shares offered by the petitioner in settlement of his tax liability and, by the latter, it fixed Rs. 130 as the value of a share in the event of a decision to accept shares in lieu of tax liability.2. The petitioner is the accountable person in whose hands the estate of the deceased person is sought to be assessed to estate duty. The estate was valued at Rs. 13,16,025 and the duty payable was assessed at Rs. 2,35,520 under exhibit P-1. Thereafter, the petitioner made an application under Section 52 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, requesting that shares of Messrs. Sait Nagjee Purushotham and Co., held by him may be accepted and applied towards his liabilities under the Act.3. Section 52 provides for payment of duty by transfer of property if the Central Government agreed to such a course. The Central Board of Direct T...
Tag this Judgment!Narayanan Nair Vs. Mariyakutty and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-10-1992
Reported in: AIR1992Ker371
P.K. Shamsuddin, J.1. The decree holder in O.S. No. 146 of 1985 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Palakkad is the appellant.2. The appellant filed a suit for recovery of money from the 2nd respondent, herein. The suit was decreed. Execution Petition 65 of 1.985 was filed by the decree holder appellant seeking execution by attachment of a stage carriage bearing Registration No. KLG 9858. Initially an interim attachment was ordered. The first respondent filed E.A. 295 of 1987 under Order 21 Rule 48 slating that he is the owner of the vehicle sought to be attached. That contention was upheld by the Execution Court. An Appeal preferred by the appellant before the District Court was dismissed Hence this Execution Second Appeal. 3. It is not disputed that originally thevehicle belonged to the 2nd respondent. The claimant's case is that she purchased the vehicle on 15-2-1985 from the 2nd respondent and therefore, the 2nd respondent had no manner of right over the vehicle on the date of ...
Tag this Judgment!Baby Sarojam Vs. S. Vijayakrishnan Nair
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-07-1992
Reported in: AIR1992Ker277; I(1994)DMC79
Varghese Kalliath, J. 1. Niraja and Neeratha are two little kids aged 4 years and 3 years. Their father Vijayakrishnan Nair and their grandmother are fighting a fiercelegal battle for them. Vijayakrishnan Nair married Sreedevi on 5-7-1984. It was not an arranged marriage. They met and decided to live in marriage bond. The parents of Sreedevi were not very happy about the marriage. Sreedevi is now no more. She died on 30-1-1990. It was not a natural death. Sreedevi's parents believe that it is a homicide and Vijayakrishnan Nair is responsible for the death of Sreedevi. Vijayakrishnan Nair tells the Court that it was a suicide and the cause was not at all attributable to him, but the end result of an intense remorse, Sreedevi had on the guilty feeling of her own marital infidelity and deviations. These unhappy events made two innocent children, the spear-head of a hotly contested litigation. 2. The maternal grandmother of Niraja and Neeratha reached the Guardian Court (District Court) fo...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »