Kerala Court November 1998 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.A. Kuruvilla Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-11-1998
Reported in: 1999(106)ELT21(Ker)
ORDERP. Shanmugan, J.1. Petitioner challenges the adjudication order of the Deputy Commissioner of Customs as confirmed by the appellate order of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) and the order in revision by the Government of India. By the adjudication order the import of Water Scooter was confiscated and allowed to be redeemed on payment of a fine of Rs. 3,75,000/- and a penalty of Rs. 50,000/-. The said order was confirmed with a modification reducing the redemption fine to Rs. 3 lakhs by the appellate authority and the revisional authority while upholding the redemption fine reducing the personal penalty to Rs. 40,000/-. The original petition is against this order.2. Learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Department raised a preliminary contention on the maintainability of the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In support of his objection he has referred to the judgment in Indo-China Steam Navigation Co.v. ]asjit Singh - [AIR 1964 SC 1140...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. P. Natesan Achary
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-11-1998
Reported in: (1999)154CTR(Ker)331
OM PRAKASH, C. J.The Revenue made an application under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, asking the Tribunal to refer the following questions for the opinion of this Court :' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, was the Tribunal justified in accepting the assessee's explanation as reasonable, probable and convincing ?2. Whether, on the iacts and in the circumstances of the case, was the Tribunal justified in law in holding that AO has not brought on record any evidence to hold the opinion regarding the explanation offered by the appellant as unsatisfactory ?3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, was the Tribunalright in holding that amount of gold claimed by the assessee's wife really belonged to her, and the appellant might have accumulated 77,800 gms of gold out of the manufacturing waste over the year ?4. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, was the Tribunal right in law and fact in holding that it is reasonable t...
Commissioner of Wealth Tax Vs. N.C.i Rajan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-11-1998
Reported in: (1999)153CTR(Ker)370
OMPRAKASH, QJ:These are two groups of IT Reference relating to the consecutive asst. yrs. 1978-79 to 1980-81 and 1981-82 to 1984-85 pertaining to the one and the same assessee.2. The questions referred for the opinion of this Court by the Tribunal are as follows:IT Ref. Nos. 147 to 150 of 1996'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances Of the case and considering the fact that a search was conducted in the premises of the assessee under s. 132 of the IT Act, is the Tribunal right in law in holding that the revised return filed by the assessee subsequent to the search is to be considered as a return under the Amnesty Scheme?'IT Ref. Nos. 62 to 64 of 19971. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case was the Tribunal right in law in holding that the revised return filed by the assessee subsequent to the search should be considered as a return under the Amnesty Scheme?2. Whether, the Tribunal was right in holding so, when the answer to question No. 12 of CBDT Circular N...
Aravind Vs. Saraf V. Commissioner of Gift Tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-10-1998
Reported in: (1999)154CTR(Ker)238
Om Prakash CJ :By this application made under s. 26(3) of the GT Act, the assessee requires us to direct the Tribunal to draw up a statement of the case and refer the following questions for the opinion of this Court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble, Tribunal was right in holding that reconstitution of the firm gave rise to gift chargeable under the GT Act ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal was right in holding that reconstitution was not affected on account of commercial expediency and the transaction is therefore, not exempt from gifttax under, s. 5(1)(xiv) of the GT Act ?3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal was right in law in holding that the firm Saraf Trading Corporation has goodwill 4. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal was right in holding that on reconstitution there was a gift of 30 per cent of the s...
R. Balakrishna Pillai Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-10-1998
Reported in: 1999CriLJ1286
AR. Lakshmanan, J.1. Heard Mr. T. V. Prabhakaran and Mr. T. Ravikumar for the appellant; Mr. P. Gopalakrishnan Nair for the first respondent and Mr. Antony Dominic for the third respondent.2. This Writ Appeal is directed against the judgment of C. S. Rajan, J. in OP 7862 of 1998 dated 15-6-1998 dismissing the Original Petition filed by the appellant to quash Ext P 1 authorising Mr. Kallada Siikumaran, Director General of Prosecution (third respondent herein) as Special Public Prosecutor to conduct the prosecution in the Court of Special Judge at Ernakulam in the cases charged in connection with Crime No. 455/ Cr/88 investigated into and charge-sheeted by the Special Squad for Idamalayar Investigation, Trivandrum. The said appointment was made by the Government of Kerala in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (8) of Section 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Code') and in supersession of the Notification No, 185()7/SSA2/97/Home dated 1...
Francis Gomez and Anr. Vs. President, Thiruvananthapuram Shops and Com ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-09-1998
Reported in: [1999(81)FLR219]; (1999)IIILLJ1250Ker
J.B. Koshy, J. 1. Two main questions are raised in this original petition : (1) Whether consent as envisaged under Section 36(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), to legal practitioners to appear in a proceeding before the Labour Court can be implied on the facts and circumstances of the case; and (2) Whether consent once given can be revoked at a later stage. 2. An industrial dispute was raised by an employees union regarding termination of services of certain employees of the canteen run by the Kerala Financial Corporation Employees' Cooperative Society Ltd. In the array of parties, the petitioners arc made parties as representing the management. The industrial dispute was numbered as I. D. No.27 of 1992. The first posting of the case was on March 6, 1992. On that day itself advocate, Sri. M. S. Vijayachandra Babu, filed vakalath for the management. The union was represented by the President of the union who also happened to be a practising ...
T.A. Abdulkhader Vs. Comussioner of Wealth Tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-06-1998
Reported in: (1999)155CTR(Ker)268
OM PRAKASH, C. I:The assessee by this application made under s. 27(3) of the WT Act requires us to draw up a statement of the case and refer the following questions for the opinion of this Court.1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, was there any material before the Hon'ble Tribunal to show that area let out to Swapna Jewellery was occupied by the assessee and the members of his family for their jewellery business while Swapna Jewellery was only a partnership firm, as admitted by the appellant as can be seen from p. 5 of the order of Tribunal and as found by the Tribunal in para 2 of its order?2. Whether, on the facts, and circumstances of the case, after entering into the finding that the valuation by the WTO as well as the Valuation Officer can only be in accordance with Sch. M to the WT Act, the Hon'ble Tribunal was justified in law in taking the alleged prevailing market rent as fixed by the Valuation Officer as rent receivable within the meaning of r. 5 of...
Thundikoth Nuchilthodi Kumaran Vs. Food Inspector and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-05-1998
Reported in: 1999CriLJ60
ORDERS. Marimuthu, J.1. This revision is filed questioning the correctness of the judgment of the Sessions Judge, Thalassery delivered in Crl. Appeal No. 46 of 1992. That appeal had arisen against the conviction rendered by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thalassery in C. C. No. 71 of 1989.2. The facts as borne out from the records are briefly as follows : The revision petitioner (first accused) was the salesman of Munderi Ksheerolpadaka Sahakarana Sangham Ltd., in which accused Nos. 2 to 4 were the Secretary, President and the society itself. Accused Nos. 2, 3 and 4 were acquitted by the trial Court itself. On 19-6-1989, PW-1, the Food Inspector, inspected the society and purchased cow milk. On following the formalities as laid down in the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, one of the parts of the sample was sent to the Chemical Analyst for examination and report. On receipt of the report, marked as Ext. P-l1, it was found by PW-1 that the milk fat contained was at 5% and milk solids...
P.J. Sebestian and ors. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-05-1998
Reported in: 1999CriLJ656
ORDERP.K. Balasubramanyan, J.1. The petitioners have approached this Court invoking Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of certiorari for quashing a criminal complaint, C. C. No. Ill of 1997 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Pathanamthitta. At the hearing, it was submitted that the motion was really one under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, in the wake of the decision of this Court in Dr. Louis V. Pulickal v. State of Kerala 1997 (2) KLT 233. The case was therefore argued on the basis that it was a motion under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.2. The petitioners are accused Nos. 1 to 3 in C. C. No. 111 of 1997 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court,. Pathanamthitta. The three accused were charged with offences punishable under Sections 409, 420 and 120B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioners are alleged to be the partners of a financial institution by name Southern ...
N.J. Cracko Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-05-1998
Reported in: (1999)153CTR(Ker)474
OM PRAKASH, C. J.By this application made under s. 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961, the assessee requires us to direct the Tribunal to draw up a statement of the case and refer the following questions for the opinion of this Court:1. On the facts and circumstances of the case was the Tribunal justified in not accepting the contention that the assessment has not been completed within the time-limit without verifying whether the order has been put beyond the access of the assessing authority before the time-limit especially when there is a gap of more than four months after the expiry of the time-limit and service of the order?2. Was the Tribunal justified in sustaining the addition of Rs. 88,150 as these amounts have been utilised for expenses which have been estimated?'2. Originally the assessee raised as many as three questions in the application made under s. 256(2). The Tribunal referred question No. 3 only to this Court. The question Nos. 1 and 2 were not referred to this Court by the T...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »