Kerala Court January 1993 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.
T.A. Abdul Nazar Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-19-1993
Reported in: 1994CriLJ2786
M. Jagannadha Rao, C.J.1. The petitioner is Shri. T.A. Abdul Nazar Madhani, Chairman of the Islamic Seva Sangh (hereinafter called the 'ISS'). The Writ Petition is filed questioning the notification, Ext. P2, issued by the Central Government dated 10-12-1992 under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (hereinafter called the 'Act'), and also the further notification Ext. P4 dated 12-12-1992 issued by the State of Kerala delegating its powers to the all District Collector, Commissioner of Police, Superintendents of Police and District Magistrate Under section 19 of the Act to takae action Under sections 7 and 8 of the said Act. During the course of the arguments, however, the attack was confined to Ext. P2 notification issued by the Union of India, and no arguments were advanced in regard to Ext. P4 notification.2. The petitioner is the Chairman of the ISS. He also claims to be the Principal of the Anvarul Islam Charitable Society at Sasthan-cotta. According to him, the ISS is ...
Bharath Sea Foods Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-18-1993
Reported in: [1993]203ITR264(Ker)
K.K. Usha, J.1. This is an application under Section 261 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court from the judgment in Income-tax Reference No. 287 of 1982 (CIT v. Bharath Sea Foods : [1992]195ITR60(Ker) ). At the instance of the Revenue, the following question came up for consideration in Income-tax Reference No. 287 of 1982 (see : [1992]195ITR60(Ker) ) :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in view of the application of the Explanation to Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and also in view of the finding of conscious concealment, the Tribunal was right in law in reducing the quantum of concealed income ?'The question was answered in the negative and in favour of the Revenue.2. In the course of the assessment proceedings, it was found that the assessee had concealed particulars of his income to the extent of Rs. 1,00,864 and proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, were initiated. The above amou...
Dr. M. Hassainar Haji Vs. the Tahsildar, Taliparamba and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-15-1993
Reported in: AIR1994Ker139
ORDERJagannadha Rao, C.J.1. This Writ Appeal is preferred by the writ petitioner in O.P. No. 6212 of 1990 against the judgment rendered therein on 19-7-1990. By that judgment, the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition. The appellant-writ petitioner isthe owner of a cinema theatre namely 'Vinod Talkies' in Kenichira Panchayath, Wayanad District for the last 20 years and has a temporary licence duly renewed from time to time. The appellant-petitioner has questioned the permission granted to the third respondent by the Panchayat Board, Kenichira on 28-2-1989 for construction of a temporary cinema theatre, and for quashing the order, Ext. P2 dated 2-7-1950, of the District Collector, Wayanad dismissing the Revision Petition filed by the appellant.2. It appears that the Special Executive Officer, Poothady Panchayat came to the conclusion that the distance between the appellant's temporary cinema theatre and the proposed theatre of the third respondent was beyond 800 metres. Howev...
Kalpaka Rubber Plantations (P.) Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-15-1993
Reported in: (1993)111CTR(Ker)100; [1993]202ITR450(Ker)
Varghese Kalliath, J.1. This tax revision case arises under the Agricultural Income-tax Act. The assessment year in question is 1986-87 and the accounting period ended on March 31, 1986.2. The question relates to the exigibility to tax under the Act in respect of sale of uneconomic rubber trees under three agreements of different dates and in respect of different areas. The assessing authority as well as the appellate authority found on an interpretation of the agreement that the agreement would take in the right to slaughter-tap the rubber trees included under the agreement. On that basis, a portion of the sale consideration was taken as agricultural income and that assessment was challenged before the appellate authority. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner confirmed the assessment and dismissed the appeal. The petitioner filed an appeal before the Agricultural Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal also, after considering the various aspects of the matter, confirmed the order ...
Annamma Iype Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-15-1993
Reported in: (1993)ILLJ975Ker
Pareed Pillay, J.1. Koompanpara and Kaloor Group 'B' Estate belonged to petitioner's husband. It was a covered establishment under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act (for short 'the Act'). Contributions for the employees in the Estate were regularly remitted to the respondent. Case of the petitioner is that rubber trees in the Estate became old, that they were given for slaughter tapping, that after her husband's death the Estate having an extent of 22.85 acres devolved on her and children, that she and her children by agreement allowed slaughter tapping for Rs. 67,000/- on October 8, 1986 and that the employees for whom contributions were paid under the Act left the Estate on receiving compensation.2. Inspector deputed by the respondent inspected the property and reported that he verified the returns for the month of October, 1986, that he found the Estate closed for the purpose of replanting and that slaughter tapping was going on through a contractor who...
C.A. Gopalan Vs. Inspector-general of Police, Crimes and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-15-1993
Reported in: 1993CriLJ1543
ORDERK.T. Thomas, J.1. Petitioner is the father of one Dr. Ajith Kumar who was burned to death in a dastardly manner while he was sleeping in his own bed room. This gruesome murder took place around 3 a.m. in the night on 23-3-1991. Police registered a crime case and investigation was later taken over by the crime branch wing of the police. This Original Petition is filed by the petitioner seeking this Court's assistance to have the investigation entrusted to Central Bureau of Investigation (for short the CBI).2. I have not so far issued a direction in any case for the C.B.I. take up investigation, since I did not come across any case where such an extraordinary course was necessary. But I am persuaded to make a departure in this case as I am inclined to think that this is a case which has to be investigated by a special agency like C.B. 1. Facts and circumstances of this case do warrant adoption of such a course.3. Dr. Ajith Kumar and his brother Shaji Kumar were reported to be very b...
B. Indira Rani Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-14-1993
Reported in: [1993]202ITR917(Ker)
T.L. Viswanatha Iyer, J. 1. The petitioner is the daughter of one R. Bharathan. Both of them were in arrears of huge amounts by way of tax to the Income-tax Department. Immovable properties belonging to the petitioner were attached for recovery of the amounts due from the petitioner.She paid off the entire arrears and filed the application, exhibit P-6, before the Commissioner of Income-tax, Thiruvananthapuram, requesting that the attachment of her properties may be lifted. But the Commissioner sent a reply, exhibit P-7, dated March 30, 1992, declining the request and informing the petitioner that the attachment cannot be lifted. The petitioner has thereupon filed this writ petition for the issue of a writ of mandamus to the respondents, viz., the Commissioner of Income-tax and the Tax Recovery Officer, to declare/proclaim that the attachment of her immovable properties stands withdrawn, and for other incidental reliefs.2. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, it...
T.C. Chacko Vs. Annamma and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-13-1993
Reported in: AIR1994Ker107
Varghese Kalliath, J.1. These two appeals come up before us on a reference by a learned single Judge of this Court. Both these appeals arise from one suit -- O.S. No. 144/81. It was filed by the wife against her husband. S.A. No. 827/85 is by the husband and S.A. No. 777/86 is by the wife.2. The wife instituted the suit against the husband for recovery of the amount of stridhanam and ornaments received by the husband on the occasion of her marriage. She also claimed maintenance from the husband.3. The trial court found that the wife is entitled to a decree for recovery of an amount of Rs. 3,000/- and jewels of 10 sovereign. The claim for maintenance was disallowed. Both husband and wife preferred appeals before the lower appellate court. Defendant/husband challenged the decree allowing recovery of Rs. 3,000/- and the jewels. Plaintiff/wife challenged that part of the decree refusing to award maintenance.4. The court below considered the appeals together and passed a common judgment, Th...
G.T.N. Textiles Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-13-1993
Reported in: [1996]217ITR653(Ker)
Varghese Kalliath, J. 1. This is an appeal against the judgment of a learned single judge of this court in Original Petition No. 1714 of 1992 (see : [1993]199ITR347(Ker) ). The learned single judge dismissed the original, petition. Hence, the petitioner has come up in appeal.2. The petitioner-appellant sought for a writ of certiorari to quash exhibit P-3 to the extent of the rejection of the application for waiver of interest levied under Section 220(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The appellant also prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent-Commissioner of Income-tax--to reconsider the appellant's application for waiver of interest levied under Section 220(2) of the Act. The learned single judge found that exhibit P-3 order is perfectly valid. Exhibit P-3 is an order passed by the Income-tax Commissioner in a revision petition filed by the petitioner under Section 264 of the Act.3. The learned single judge found that exhibit P...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. United Electrical Industries Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-13-1993
Reported in: [1993]201ITR546(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, has referred a question of law in I. T. R. No. 37 of 1986 and another question of law in I. T. R. No. 93 of 1988. They are as follows :I. T. R. No. 37 of 1986 : ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on an interpretation of Section 40A(7) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in not restricting the assessee's claim for deduction of gratuity to 8 1/3 per cent. of the wage bill of the current year ?' I. T. R. No. 93 of 1988 : ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the reassessment is valid '2. The respondent is the same assessee in both the cases. The respondent is an assessee to income-tax. We are concerned with the assessment year 1974-75. The accounting year is the calendar year 1973. The assessee had provided in its books an amount of Rs. 5,17,363 as liability for gratuity. The Income-tax Offi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »