Kerala Court August 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.
Commissioner of Wealth Tax Vs. E. K. Joseph.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-19-1996
Reported in: (1996)136CTR(Ker)494
V. V. KAMAT, J. :With regard to the wealth-tax proceedings of the assessee for the asst. yr. 1983-84 we have to consider the question of deduction of the entire liability towards repayment of loan to the Federal Bank. In fact, after hearing the learned senior standing counsel for taxes and counsel for the assessee, as the question relates to the liability towards repayment of loan to the Federal Bank, the amount of loan having been taken against the property of the partnership firm of which the assessee has a share as partner, the question refers to the situation of an obvious claim for deduction with reference to the liability in question. After considering the statutory provision it has become necessary to reframe the question and this reframed question is extracted hereinbelow making it clear that we have substituted the word exemption in the referred question by deduction. Thus the only question expecting our answer as reframed is as follows :'Whether, on the facts and in the circu...
Marbles India Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-16-1996
Reported in: [2003]133STC405(Ker)
P.A. Mohammed, J.1. The main question involved in this tax revision case is whether magnesite powder used by the assessee for manufacture of mosaic tiles would come within entry 84 of Schedule I of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, which deals with fertilisers. This question assumes importance because if the item is treated as 'fertiliser' it is taxable at the first point of sale within the State at the rate of 2 per cent. On the other hand, if the item is treated as marble article coming within entry 72 of the said Schedule it is taxable at the point of first sale at the rate of 10 per cent. This tax revision case is coming before us to resolve the above dispute between the assessee and the department.2. The assessee in this case is a manufacturer of marble tiles and the assessment year involved is 1986-87. Before the assessing authority the assessee pleaded that magnesitc powder which is otherwise known as 'dolomite' is a fertiliser liable to be taxed at the rate of 2 per cent....
Peninsular Plantations Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-14-1996
Reported in: [1997]227ITR490(Ker)
V.V. Kamat, J. 1. The assessee, Peninsular Plantations Ltd., gets concerned with these three proceedings in relation to the assessment for the year 1980-81, 1981-82 and 1982-83, respectively. The questions that expect our answer, really concern the interpretation of the agreement dated August 16, 1979, to ascertain as to whether the amount of Rs. 1,02,000 received by the assessee therein could be considered as income from property or other sources. Although it appears that in I. T. R. No. 86 of 1982, there are four questions and in I. T. R. Nos. 63 and 64 of 1992, there are five questions, relating them together it would be seen that we have to answer the following five questions :' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the sums made over to the applicant cannot be recorded as rents ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that sums are assessable as the...
Deputy Superintendent of Police, C.B.i. Vs. Nabeesa W/O Abdulla and or ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-14-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ843
ORDERJ.B. Koshy, J.1. Since these two revision petitions deal with identical subject-matter, as agreed by the parties, are disposed of together. 1st respondent in C.R.P. 497/93 filed O.S.I 23/92 in the Sub-Court, Kasaragod against the petitioner and respondents 2 to 4 praying for a permanent prohibitory injunction restraining them from trespassing into the plaint A schedule house and removal of B schedule movables therefrom. It was alleged in the plaint that the petitioner and respondents 2 to 4 are attempting to remove movables from the house wherein the 1st respondent is residing. It was also alleged that on the pretext that the movables in the house belong to one K.M. Abdullah who is an absconding accused in C.P. No. 2/92 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam, the movable in the house are going to be taken away. The 1st respondent contended that the house does not belong to the said accused and the movables do not belong to him. On 22-9-1992 the Court issued amergent notic...
State of Kerala Vs. Dr. P. Nallathampi thera and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-13-1996
Reported in: AIR1997Ker181
ORDERP.K. Balasubramanyan, J. 1. The Kerala Scheduled Tribes (Restriction on Transfer of Lands and Restoration of Alienated Lands) Act, 1975 as pased by the Kerala Legislature received the assent of the President on 11-4-1975. The avowed object was'to provide for restricting the transfer of lands by members of Scheduled Tribes in the State of Kerala and for the restoration of possession of lands alienated by such members and for matters connected therewith.'The Act was obviously intended to ameliorate the lot of the underprivileged Tribes who despite 'paper plans and multi-point programmes, are at the victim's end of barbarity and injustice, privation and sharp practice inflicted on them by the 'civilized' gentry.' (See Tribal Uplift and Rule of Law by Justice V. R. Krishna Iyer). But despite the enactment, the same was not brought into force until 1-1-1982, that too by a notification under Section 1(3) of the Act on 24-1-1986 giving it retrospective effect. The bringing into force of ...
M.D., Co-operative Sugars Ltd. Vs. Secretary, Palghat District Progres ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-13-1996
Reported in: (1998)IIILLJ81Ker
Ramakrishnan, J.1. The correctness of the decision of a learned single Judge reported in Mohanakumaran Nair v. Hindustan Latex Ltd., (1987-II-LLJ-318) (Ker) is incidentally under challenge in this Original Petition. Finding that there is considerable force in the challenge raised against the decision, one of us (Rama Krishnan, J.) has referred this Original Petition for decision by a Division Bench. It is thus this Original Petition is coming up before us. 2. Petitioner is the Managing Director of the Co-operative Sugars Limited, a co-operative society registered under the Co-operative Societies Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the society')- The main challenge in the Original Petition is against Ext. P1 award dated October 29, 1987 passed by the fourth respondent-Industrial Tribunal, Kozhikode in ID 10 of 1985. The first respondent is the Secretary of Palghat District Progressive Sugar Workers Union (for short 'the union1) at whose instance, the dispute which was the subject matter of...
Chandampatta Mohammedkutty Vs. the Food Inspector, Chief Food Inspecto ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-12-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ1404
ORDERN. Dhinakar, J.1. Petitioner is the 2nd accused in S.T. No. 6 of 1988. He was tried along with another for offences under Section 16(1)(a) read with Sections 7(i) and 2(ia) and (m) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and Rule 44 (b) of the Food Adulteration Rules, 1955. The trial court convicted the petitioner as well as other accused and sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- each and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of three months each. The appellate court, on appeal, while confirming the conviction and sentence imposed upon the petitioner, acquitted the other accused. Hence this revision.2. The case of the prosecution is that the complainant - P.W.3 at about 9.45 on 5-5-1988 purchased 750m. 1. of cows milk from the petitioner who was the salesman from a can which was kept in the premises of a tea shop at Olingara. The purchased quantity was taken...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. South India Corporation Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-12-1996
Reported in: (1998)150CTR(Ker)451
P.A. MOHAMMED, J.:This is a petition filed under s. 256(2) of the IT Act at the instance of the CIT, Cochin. The respondent Mls South India Corpn. Ltd., is the assessee. The questions of law sought to be referred in this petition are the following..'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and also in view of the fact that the appeal has been disposed of by the Supreme Court (vide the last portion of the judgment of the Supreme Court extracted in the order of the Tribunal) cannot the amount received during the account year relevant to asst. yr. 1990-91 be brought to tax under s. 41(1) of the IT Act, 1961?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law and fact in holding that it cannot be said that, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessee has received any benefit in the impugned assessment year in respect of the loss or expenditure by it in the earlier years?'2. The assessment year involved in this peti...
Agappa Child Centre Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-08-1996
Reported in: [1997]226ITR211(Ker)
V.V. Kamat, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, by the order of reference expects our answer to the following three questions : ' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the property of the trust was used for the benefit of a prohibited person mentioned in Section 13(3) and hence the exemption to the trust was to be denied ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the refrigerator purchased by the trust and kept in the house of the trustee prior to the completion was a user of the trustee without payment of adequate rent or other compensation 3. Whether there was material for the Appellate Tribunal to come to the conclusion that merely because the refrigerator was kept in the house of the trustee, the provisions of Section 13(2)(b) became applicable, and are not the findings vitiated by non-consideration of th...
Smt. Sajani (Legal Heir of Late K.P. Chakkunny) Vs. Controller of Esta ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-07-1996
Reported in: (1997)137CTR(Ker)647; [1998]231ITR559(Ker)
V.V. Kamat, J.1. We have to consider and answer the following question ;'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the value of the closing stock of the firm, Popular Automobiles, was to be enhanced to the extent of the market price obtainable in retail sales ?'2. There is no dispute with regard to the basic position that for the purposes of levy of estate duty under the Estate Duty Act, 1953, the value is to be determined, in the opinion of the Controller on the basis of what it would fetch if sold in the open market at the time of the deceased's death.3. The question itself would make it clear that we are concerned with the process of valuation of the closing stock on the death of Shri K. P. Chackunny, who expired on February 25, 1968, in regard to payment of estate duty on the above count by his widow, Smt. Mary Chacko.4. The valuation of the closing stock is with regard to the firm--Messrs. Popular Automobiles. It is a firm...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »