Kerala Court May 1994 Judgments
D.L. Walton Vs. CochIn Stock Exchange Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-31-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Ker106
P.K. Balasubramanyam, J.1. These appeals by the various defendants in O.S. No. 175 of 1993 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court of Ernakulam challenge the order of injunction granted by the trial court restraining defendants 1 to 5 from starting, functioning or organising dealings or from functioning in securities in any manner from building Nos. 36/1602 to 36/1605 in Elamkulam Village, Kanayannur Taluk, Ernakulam District till the disposal of the suit. Defendant No. 1 in the suit is a company incorporated under the Companies Act and defendants 2 to 5 are its Directors: The various appeals are filed by the Directors challenging the order of the court below. No appeal as such has been filed by the first defendant company. As noticed these appeals directed against the interim injunction granted by the trial court came up before the vacation court on 13-4-1993. The plaintiff in the suit, the Cochin Stock Exchange Limited had filed caveats before this Court and opposed the applicat...
Tag this Judgment!V.V. Samuel and anr. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-25-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Ker126
T.V. Ramakrishnan, J.1. A somewhat important question arises for consideration in this Original Petition and it can be stated thus : Can the power conferred on the Registrar under Sub-sections (5) & (6) of Section 12 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 (for short 'the Act') be properly exercised for the purpose of amending the bye-laws in such a manner as to ensure effective control of the administration of the Society in the hands of Government officials as against elected members of the Society by incorporating a provision for appointment of Government officials as Ex-Officio members of the Managing Committee more than half in number on the ground that the Government has got a vital interest in the Society to be safeguarded and is interested in the better management of the Society The question has to be considered in the background that the general body of the Society has actually passed a resolution practically unanimously to amend the relevant bye-laws by providing for t...
Tag this Judgment!The Federal Bank Ltd. Vs. the State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-24-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Ker62
ORDER1. Heard Sri N. P. Samuel for the petitioner and Sri S. Vijayan Nair, Government Pleader for the respondents. The facts stated below are based on their submissions as also those disclosed by the files produced by the Government Pleader.2. The writ petition arises out of an assessment to tax under the Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975 (the Act) and the challenge is to the orders Exts. P2, P3 and P6 as explained below. Petitioner, which is a Scheduled Bank, constructed a multi-storeyed building for its Head Office at Aluva. The construction was completed on September 13, 1987. The Aluva Municipality within whose area the building is situate, fixed the annual value of the building under Section 100 of the Kerala Municipalities Act, 14 of 1961 at Rupees 1075632/-.3. The building was assessable to tax under the Act and therefore the petitioner filed return in the prescribed form for purposes of assessment under the Act on March 21, 1988. Against column 7 of the return, 'Capital Value of th...
Tag this Judgment!G. Krishnan Vs. Assistant Controller of Estate Duty and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-24-1994
Reported in: [1994]210ITR665(Ker)
T. L. Viswanatha Iyer, J.1. The petitioner's father, one Govinda Menon died on October 18, 1981, leaving behind immovable properties of a value which made the estate liable for payment of duty under the Estate Duty Act, 1953 (the Act). The Assistant Controller of Estate Duty, Earnakulam, completed the assessment of the petitioner on July 29, 1983, determining the principle value of the estate liable for duty at Rs. 6,40,580. Demand was made for Rs. 82,174 as the balance of estate duty payable after crediting the provisional duty of Rs. 25,000 paid by the petitioner. The petitioner paid a further sum of Rs. 10,272 and sought the facility of paying the balance amount in instalments under Section 70(2) of the Act, which was allowed by the proceedings, exhibit P-1, and the petitioner was permitted to pay the amount in eight half-yearly instalments from February 6, 1984, inclusive of interest. The petitioner simultaneously challenged the assessment in appeal which was partly allowed by the ...
Tag this Judgment!Salay Mohamad Ibrahim Sait Vs. Income-tax Officer and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-24-1994
Reported in: (1994)120CTR(Ker)313; [1994]210ITR700(Ker)
T.L. viswanatha Iyer, J. 1. The petitioners in these two writ petitions are brothers. They were the directors of a company Messrs. Indo Marine Agencies (K) P. Ltd. They jointly owned 149.604 cents of land in Survey Nos. 72 and 1583 of Mattancherry village, which they had mortgaged, along with others, to the Canara Bank, Mattancherry Branch, by deposit of title deeds, to secure the advances made and to be made by the bank to the aforesaid company. More than Rs. 60 lakhs was due to the bank under the mortgage, at a time when the petitioners entered into an agreement to sell the property to ten persons, under different assignment deeds, for a total consideration of Rs. 10,33,966. The bank agreed to release the mortgage on the property, if an amount of Rs. 9 lakhs was paid towards the outstandings. The amount was accordingly deposited by the petitioners on June 21, 1985, through the purchasers, or with funds made available by them, and the bank released their mortgage right on the property...
Tag this Judgment!P.K. Yusuf and anr. Vs. Income-tax Officer and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-24-1994
Reported in: (1995)123CTR(Ker)614; [1994]210ITR731(Ker)
T.L. Viswanatha Iyer, J. 1. The two petitioners, father and son, are the owners of two continuous plots of land in Survey No. 985/8 of Thoppumpady village, with extents of 7.5 and 8 cents, respectively. The petitioners have jointly constructed a three-storeyed building on the property, after taking a loan of Rs. 5 lakhs from the bank. The petitioners state that they have subsequently explained to the income-tax authorities their source of funds for the acquisition of the property and the construction of the building thereon. 2. The petitioners entered into an agreement, exhibit P-3, dated October 8, 1991, with one A. A. Joseph to sell the 15.5 cents of land and the buildingthereon for a consideration of Rs. 12.75 lakhs. On getting information about this agreement, the first respondent-Income-tax Officer queried by his communication exhibit P-4, whether the proposal to transfer the property had been communicated to the appropriate authority under Section 269UC of the Income-tax Act, 196...
Tag this Judgment!Hemant Spices Vs. Assistant Commissioner (Assessment), Sales Tax and a ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-24-1994
Reported in: [1994]95STC336(Ker)
T.L. Viswanatha Iyer, J.1. The petitioners in these writ petitions are exporters of goods manufactured by them or otherwise. They have filed these writ petitions challenging either the levy, or the proposed levy, of tax under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 ('the Act') on the amounts received by them for the transfer of import replenishment licences (hereinafter referred to as 'the REP licences') and of exim scrips to others. The writ petitions have been filed either at the stage of pre-assessment notices or attempt to reopen completed assessments, or after completion of assessments. The question for determination is however the same in all the cases.2. The Government of India formulated a scheme in their Import and Export Policy for 1985-88 for the grant of REP licences to registered exporters to enable them to secure replenishment by import, of materials required by them in the manufacture of the products exported. Chapter XIV sets out the policy in all its detail, namely, the...
Tag this Judgment!Ramachandran and Co. Vs. Income-tax Officer and Another.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-24-1994
Reported in: (1994)120CTR(Ker)304; [1994]209ITR982(Ker)
T. L. VISWANATHA IYER J. - The petitioner, which is a firm, was doing business as abkari contractors during the accounting year ending March 31, 1984. The return for purposes of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), for the corresponding assessment year 1984-85 was due on July 31, 1984, but the petitioner sought for extension of time till March 31, 1985, and filed the return one year later on March 31, 1986, disclosing a total income of Rs. 4,43,370. The Income-tax Officer started investigation on receipt on the return and called for various details and particulars from the petitioner by his letter, exhibit R-1(a), dated December 1, 1986. While the proceedings were thus going on, the petitioner purported to take advantage of the Amnesty Scheme of 1985 and filed a revised return disclosing a total income of Rs. 8,39,810 for the year. That was on March 12, 1987. The Income-tax Officer was not, however, satisfied with this return as he was of opinion that the petitioner had disclosed a le...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›