Kerala Court December 1996 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.
M.P. Mariumma Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-13-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ926
S. Sankarasubban, J.1. Petitioner is the wife of the detenu Mohammed. On 26-5-1995, foreign currency worth Rs. 13.25 lakhs were seized from the aforesaid Mohammed at Kozhikode Airport when he was about to board East West Airlines to Bombay. The foreign currency was concealed in the false bottom of the brief case. On being questioned, Mohammed stated that the briefcase containing the foreign currency was entrusted to him by one Madathil Saindeen with a direction to hand over the same to one Basheed who is staying in Rafeeque House, Nagapada, Bombay. He was offered an amount of Rs. 10,000/- as remuneration for the work. The detenu was arrested on 27-5-1955 and was produced before the Additional Chief Magistrate (Economic Offences), Ernakulam. He was remanded to judicial custody. His application for bail was rejected by the Magistrate (Economic-Offences), Ernakulam on 3-6-1995. Subsequently, he was granted conditional bail by the Sessions Judge, Ernakulam. Thereafter, the Commissioner of ...
Santhosh Electricals Vs. Income-tax Officer and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-12-1996
Reported in: [1998]234ITR227(Ker)
G. Sivarajan, J.1. The matter arises under the Income-tax Act, 1961. The petitioner, a partnership firm engaged in electrical repair works at Karuvelippady, is an assessee on the files of the Income-tax Officer, C-Ward, Circle I, Ernakulam. For the assessment years 1978-79 to 1982-83, the petitioner filed returns under the Income-tax Act beyond the period prescribed therefor under the Act. The assessing authority did not take any action on the said returns filed by the petitioner. Subsequently, the Income-tax Officer issued notices to the petitioner under Section 148 of the Act directing it to file its returns for the years 1978-79 to 1982-83. In compliance with the said notices the petitioner filed separate returns for the aforesaid years. Based on these returns, the Income-tax Officer completed the assessment for the aforesaid years and levied penal interest under Section 139(8) for the non-filing of the return on the due dates and also levied interest under Section 217 for non-remit...
Santosh Electricals Vs. Income Tax Officer and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-12-1996
Reported in: (1997)141CTR(Ker)106
G. SIVARAJAN, J. :The matter arises under the IT Act, 1961. The petitioner, a partnership firm engaged in electrical repair works at Karuvelippady is an assessee on the files of the ITO, C Ward, Circle I, Ernakulam. For the asst. yrs. 1978-79 to 1982-83 the petitioner filed returns under the IT Act beyond the period prescribed therefor under the Act. The assessing authority did not take any action on the said returns filed by the petitioner. Subsequently, the ITO issued notice to the petitioner under s. 148 of the Act directing it to file its returns for the years 1978-79 to 1982-83. In compliance with the said notices the petitioner filed separate returns for the aforesaid years. Based on these returns, the ITO completed the assessment for the aforesaid years and levied penal interest under s. 139(8) for non-filing of return on due dates and also levied interest under s. 217 for non-remittance of advance tax and for not filing of estimate in terms of s. 209 of the IT Act. The assessme...
United Catalysts India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-09-1996
Reported in: (1997)140CTR(Ker)55; [1998]229ITR233(Ker)
K.K. Usha, J.1. In I.T.R. No. 85 of 1994, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench (in short 'the Tribunal'), has referred the following questions at the instance of the assessee for the opinion of this court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal right in holding that the expenditure on payment of rent and maintenance of executive hostel meant for stay of the company executives during their official tour is not allowable as per Section 37(4) read with Section 37(5) of the Act ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal ought to have found that the expenditure on rent being allowable under Section 30 of the Act is excluded from the purview of expenditure to be considered for allowance under Section 37(1) of the Act and as such from the purview of Section 37(4) of the Act ?'2. In I. T. R. No. 88 of ,1994 at the instance of the Revenue, the Tribunal has referred the following questions for opinion of this cour...
Angamali Chitty Fund (P) Ltd. Vs. Pius Abraham and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-06-1996
Reported in: AIR1997Ker156; [1999]96CompCas411(Ker)
Mohamed Shafi, J.1. The plaintiff in O.S. No. 157/87 on the file of the Subordinate Judges Court, Ernakulam is the appellant. The suit was filed for recovery of money due under the chitty hypothecation deeds executed by the respondents defendants2. The respondents were subscribers in the chit conducted by the appellant as foreman and they have executed three chitty hypothecation deeds marked as Exts. A1 to A3 in the suit in favour of the appellant. The fact that the respondents defaulted payment of the instalments due under the chit from 16th instalment onwards and the appellant filed the above suit for realisation of the entire amount with interest due for the instalments from 16 to 50 is not in dispute. It is the common case that the 16th instalment was due on 7-9-1983 and the appellant filed the above suit on 27-2-1987 claiming recovery of the amount due for the instalments 16 to 50 with interest.3. The respondents contended that the instalments 16 to 21 are barred by limitation sin...
Jose Kuruvinakunnel Vs. A.T. Jose
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-06-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ816
ORDERK.A. Mohamed Shafi, J.1. The petitioner in O.P. (Misc.) 7/85 on the file of the Munsiffs Court, Pala is the revision petitioner.2. The revision petitioner was the 4th plaintiff in O.S. 68/83 on the file of the Munsiffs Court, Pala seeking a decree to set aside certain documents and for mandatory injunction directing defendants 7 and 8 to restore the plaint schedule item No. 1 road to its original condition. The plaintiffs alleged that defendants 4 and 6 who are the parents of the 5th defendant, who is the owner of item No. 2 of the plaint schedule properties influenced defendants 2 and 3, the Panchayat President and the Executive Officer respectively to deviate Item No. 1 public road through item No. 2 property and to appropriate item No. 1 property in the place of item No. 2 property and for that purpose defendants 2 and 3 manipulated certain documents such as minutes book of the Panchayat Committee etc. After trial the Munsiff s Court dismissed the suit.3. The revision petitione...
A.C. Raj Vs. M. Rajan and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-06-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ1939
G. Rajasekharan, J.1. An appeal by special leave against acquittal.2. The appellant preferred a complaint against the first respondent under Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the Act'), alleging an offence under Section 138 of the Act. The trial court by its judgment dated 31-12-1991 entered conviction, sentenced the accused to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and directed the accused to pay the complainant a sum of Rs. 40,000/- being the cheque amount with six per cent interest, with the default clause to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months. A sum of Rs. 500/- as costs was also awarded.3. Against that conviction and sentence, the accused preferred an appeal before the Sessions Court, and in the appeal, the conviction and sentence were set aside and the accused acquitted. It is against that acquittal this appeal on special leave is preferred.4. The complaint was that the first respondent for consideration issued a che...
Aluminium Industries Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Asses ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-04-1996
Reported in: [1998]234ITR165(Ker)
G. Sivarajan, J.1. The petitioner in both the writ petitions is the Aluminium Industries Limited, Kundara, an assessee on the files of the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Assessment), Special Range, Trivandrum. For the assessment years 1989-90 and 1990-91, the petitioner filed returns in respect of its income under the Income-tax Act, 1961, declaring total losses of Rs. 11,92,81,260 and Rs. 11,39,10,709, respectively, as worked out in the statement marked as exhibit P-1 in both the cases. The petitioner also claimed a carry forward of the losses. The first respondent-assessing authority issued intimation under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act, whereby he determined the net losses for the aforesaid two years at Rs. 10,73,86,330 and Rs. 11,27,80,128. The difference in the losses returned by the petitioner and the losses assessed by the assessing authority is due to the disallowances made under Section 43B of the Act in the purported exercise of its power to make prima facie adjustments un...
The Aluminium Industries Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax an ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-04-1996
Reported in: (1997)141CTR(Ker)29
G. SIVARAJAN, J. :The petitioner in both the writ petitions is The Aluminium Industries Ltd, Kundara, an assessee on the files of the Dy. CIT (Assessment), Special Range, Trivandrum. For the asst. yrs. 1989-90 and 1990-91 the petitioner filed return in respect of its income under the IT Act, 1961 declaring total losses of Rs. 11,92,81,260 and Rs. 11,39,10,709 respectively as worked out in the statements marked as Ext. P-1 in both the cases. The petitioner also claimed a carry forward of the losses. The first respondent assessing authority issued intimation under s. 143(1)(a) of the Act whereby he determined the net losses for the aforesaid two years at Rs. 10,73,86,330 and Rs. 11,27,80,428. The difference in the losses returned by the petitioner and the losses assessed by the assessing authority is due to the disallowances made under s. 43B of the Act in the purported exercise of its power to make prima facie adjustments under s. 143(1)(a) of the Act. The assessing authority by Ext. P-...
Ocean Lanka Shipping Co. (Pvt.) Ltd. Vs. M.V. Janate
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-04-1996
Reported in: 2(1997)ACC63
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Vessel 'M.V. Janate' was cruising smoothly through the Arabian Sea to Dubai when it was caught in rough weather which led the ship to anchor at New Mangalore Port. The trouble did not stop there. Vessel could not leave the New Mangalore Port due to an arrest warrant issued by this Court at the instance of the petitioner. M.F. Janate was originally known as M.V. Madhiaa which was a Maldivian Flag Vessel. Vessel was built in Korea in August 1970 and the official number of the vessel is 208-10-T.2. Petitioner is a shipping company registered under the Sri Lankan Companies Act, having its head office at Colombo. Company is engaged in the business of shipping, including chartering of the vessels owned by foreign companies/nationals. Vessel M.V. Madhiaa was owned by the second respondent M/s. Madhiaa (P) Ltd. having its registered office at Male. Petitioner chartered the vessel as per Ext. PI charter-party. During the course of its charter vessel M.V. Madhiaa arrived...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›