Kerala Court December 1996 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Mrs. Thressiamma Abraham (No. 2)
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-19-1996
Reported in: [1997]227ITR812(Ker)
K.K. Usha, J.1. In I. T. R. Nos. 6 to 11 of 1994 relating to the assessment years 1976-77 to 1981-82, the common questions referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, at the instance of the Revenue are as follows :' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and also in view of the finding by the Tribunal that the private assets of some of the shareholders like the assessee are mortgaged to it as security for the amount to be advanced by the Corporation, the Tribunal is right in law in holding- (i) the only right that the assessee had over the property was the right to equity of redemption. (ii) in order to ascertain the value of such right one has to see whether any surplus remained on such sale after the repayment of mortgage loan ? (iii) on a perusal of the documents, the assessee is not only a guarantor but also a co-mortgagor ? (iv) the value of the right to equity of redemption in so far as the assessee is concerned is nil and nothing is includ...
Tag this Judgment!Varghese Mathew Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-19-1996
Reported in: I(1997)ACC519
S. Sankarasubban, J.1. Both these writ appeals are concerned with the same question and hence, they are disposed of by a common judgment. W.A. No. 1748 of 1996 is filed by the petitioner in O.P. No. 16290 of 1996 while W.A. No. 1534 of 1996 is filed by the petitioner in O.P. No. 15161 of 1996. First we shall deal with the facts in O.P. No. 16290 of 1996. The Kerala Public Service Commission issued Ext. P1 notification dated 11.7.1995 inviting applications for the posts of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspectors by direct recruitment in the Motor Vehicles Department. The qualifications stipulated for the post are:(i) Pass in X standard;(ii) Diploma in Automobile Engineering awarded by the State Board of Technical Education or equivalent qualification;(iii) Working experience of at least one year in a reputed (Government approved) Automobile Workshop which undertakes repairs of both Light Motor Vehicles, Heavy Goods Vehicles and Heavy Passenger Motor Vehicles fitted with Petrol and Diesel Eng...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Smt. Thressiamma Abraham.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-19-1996
Reported in: (1997)140CTR(Ker)525
SMT. K. K. USHA, J. :In IT Ref. Nos. 6 to 11 of 1994 relating to asst. yrs. 1976-77 to 1981-82, the common questions referred by the Tribunal, Cochin Bench, at the instance of the Revenue are as follows :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and also in view of the finding by the Tribunal that 'the private assets of some of the shareholders like the assessee are mortgaged to it as a security for the amount to be advanced by the Corporation, the Tribunal is right in law in holding :(i) the only right that the assessee had over the property was the right to equity of redemption;(ii) in order to ascertain the value of such right ...... one has to ..... see whether any surplus remained on such sale after the repayment of mortgage loan ?(iii) On a perusal of the documents, the assessee is not only a guarantor but also a co-mortgagor ?(iv) the value of the right to equity of redemption insofar as the assessee is concerned is nil and nothing is includible ?(v) such ri...
Tag this Judgment!N.P. Balakrishnan Vs. P.M.R. Mariyumma
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-17-1996
Reported in: AIR1997Ker89
Koshy, J. 1. The important question raised in this revision petition is whether a revision petition will lie under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure against an interim order passed by the Rent Control Court. A learned single Judge of this Court in C.R.P. No. 2756 of 1994 held that no revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure will lie against the order of the Rent Control Court as it is a persona designate. Based upon the above decision, when the present revision-petitioner filed this revision, office did not number the same. Another learned single Judge of this Court directed the office to number the revision-petition in view of the decision in Abdul Rehiman v. Hameed Hassan, (1995) 2 Ker LT 794, wherein it was held that Rent Control Court is a Court and not a persona designata. Therefore, office numbered the same and in view of the conflicting views the matter was referred to the Division Bench. 2. Revision-petitioner herein was the respondent in Rent Control ...
Tag this Judgment!V. Gopalakrishnan Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-17-1996
Reported in: (1998)148CTR(Ker)389
K. NARAYANA KUR UP, J.:Heard learned counsel for the Revenue also.2. The petitioner being aggrieved by Exhibit P3 block assessment for the period 1st April, 1985 to 16th Sept., 1995 has preferred Exhibit P5 appeal before the third respondent Tribunal, Ernakulam. Exhibit P6 is the stay petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Exhibit P5 is pending and that no orders have been passed on Exhibit P6 stay petition.3. The grievance of the petitioner is that pending disposal of the appeal and pending issuance of orders on the stay petition, the first respondent has now issued Exhibit P7 notice calling upon the petitioner to clear off the demand within 10 days from the date of receipt of Exhibit P7, failing which it is threatened that coercive measures will be taken to realise the entire tax demanded. The specific case of the petitioner as pleaded before this Court is that the income arrived in Exhibit P3 is based purely on assumptions and conjectures and as such Exhibit P3 ca...
Tag this Judgment!K. Yashoda and ors. Vs. State of Kerala and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-16-1996
Reported in: AIR1997Ker130
ORDERS. Sankarsubban, J. 1. Petitioners in LA. No. 666/95in O. S. No. 158/94 of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Kasaragod are the petitioners in the above Civil Revision Petition. Suit was filed by one Narayana Poojary. He died and subsequently, petitioners were impleaded as additional supplemental plaintiffs. The original plaintiff deposited the 1/ 10th Court-fee. Subsequently, plaintiffs filed I. A. No. 666/95 for prosecuting the case in forma pauperis. Court below found that the petitioners can be allowed to prosecute the suit as indigent persons, but further held that they should furnish adequate security for payment of balance COURT-FEE WHEN CALLED FOR. Thus plaintiffs were directed to furnish adequate security for the balance Court-fee payable. It was further stated that till then, the plaintiffs cannot be allowed to proceed with the matter. Petitioners challenge the above conditions/2. Shri P. B. Krishnan, learned qounsel for the petitioners submitted that the Court below had no ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. K.E. Rehmath Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-16-1996
Reported in: [1998]230ITR55(Ker)
V.V. Kamat, J.1. In this petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India the question is of waiver of interest under Section 139(8) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. By the impugned order (exhibit P-6) passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Cochin, on October 30, 1992, in revision waiver of interest to the extent of 50 per cent. is already granted leaving the petitioner to this court to consider whether there is a case for total waiver of interest.2. The assessment year is 1986-87. In other words for the assessment year in question the return ought to have been filed on or before July 31, 1986, and it has been filed on March 10, 1989, within a little less than three years thereafter. Originally the return was filed admitting an income of Rs. 85,850. On discussion with the assessee's representatives it was rounded off to Rs. 7,06,970. The Income-tax Officer--the assessing authority--levied interest under Section 139(8) of the Act from August 1, 1986, up to February 28, 1989, at Rs...
Tag this Judgment!E.S.i. Corporation Vs. Vattiyoorkavu H.W. Co-operative Society
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-16-1996
Reported in: (1999)IIILLJ452Ker
Balakrishnan, J.1. Appeal is preferred by the E.S.I. Corporation challenging the order passed by the Insurance Court, Quilon. First respondent herein is a Cooperative Society engaged in the manufacture of the handloom cloths. Its working capital was provided by the Reserve Bank of India and the Society supplies yarn to the members as loan and the members give the finished products and they are being sold through the Society. The profit was being shared by the members.2. Appellant/E.S.I. Corporation initiated proceedings against the Society and contribution was sought from the society under the Employees' State Insurance Act. There was a revenue recovery proceeding against the Society and the Secretary of the Society filed Insurance Case No. 48/84 before the Insurance Court contending that the Society was not covered by the Employees' State Insurance Act. The Insurance Court held that there was no employer-employee relationship and hence, the E.S.I. Act has no application. This is chall...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. K. E. Rehmath Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-16-1996
Reported in: (1998)144CTR(Ker)45
V. V. KAMAT, J. :In this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India the question is of waiver of interest under s. 139(8) of the IT Act, 1961. By the impugned order (Ext. P6) passed by the CIT, Cochin on 30th October, 1992, in revision waiver of interest to the extent of 50 per cent is already granted leaving the petitioner to this Court to consider whether there is a case for total waiver of interest.2. The assessment year is 1986-87. In other words for the assessment year in question the return ought to have been filed on or before 31st March, 1986 and it has been filed on 10th March, 1989, within little less than three years thereafter. Originally the return was filed admitting an income of Rs. 85,850. On discussion with the assessees representatives it was rounded off to Rs. 7,06,970. The ITO - the assessing authority - levied interest under s. 139(8) of the Act from 1st August, 1986 upto 28th February, 1989 at Rs. 1,28,921. The other aspects are of no relevance in this p...
Tag this Judgment!Relly Susan Mathew Vs. Controller of Entrance Examinations, Trivandrum ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-13-1996
Reported in: AIR1997Ker218
Sankarasubban, J.1. The subject-matter of these cases is selection to the Engineering and allied courses and M.B.B.S. and allied courses in the colleges in Kerala for the year 1996. Separate prospectus is issued for the Engineering and allied courses and M.B.B.S. and allied courses. The admission is made on the basis of the rank obtained in the Entrance Examination conducted by the Controller of Entrance Examinations.2. For our convenience, we have grouped the cases into three groups. We heard learned counsel for the petitioners, the Advocate General and other counsel appearing for the respondents. A number of counsel entered appearance. The matter was argued threadbare. We are disposing of these cases on the main disputes raised. We have not considered the individual questions raised. According to us, they are to be looked into by the authorities.Group No. IO. P. Nos. 12291, 12364, 12828, 12833,12986, 13338, 13340, 13424, 13543,13571, 13619, 13865, 13870, 13950,14019, 14038, 14140 of ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »