Kerala Court October 1999 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.
Nature Lovers Movement Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-07-1999
Reported in: AIR2000Ker131
Mohammed, J.1. What is before us is a theme of intense debate involving the use and occupation of forest lands and its inevi-table reaction to ecological balance and environmental outfit. This is brought to us by way of a 'public interest litigation' moved by a registered Society known as 'Nature Lovers Movement'.2. 'Love of nature' is not a modern phenomenon. It existed from the beginning of the humanity itself. 'Man is the measure oi all things.' so said Plato. Man loves nature and nature in turn nourishes him. Man serves society and society in turn preserves him. Nature and society are thus interdependent and the duty of man to them is inherent. These basic percepts envisage the protection of environment and preservation of humanity. But 'For the greenest of environmentalists, humans are oflesser importance than the abundant and diverse flora and fauna of the planet. Humans are defined as a recent addition to the livestock and are considered to have been a wholly disruptive influenc...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Johny Joseph
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-07-1999
Reported in: [2000]241ITR423(Ker)
Arijit Pasayat, C.J.1. On the basis of applications under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'), the following questions have been referred for opinion of this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench (in short 'the Tribunal') : 'Questions in ITA No. 810/Coch of 1992 : (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and also in view of the fact that the actual rent received for the assessment year 1983-84 being Rs. 46,441 the Tribunal is right in law and fact in upholding the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) who adopted the annual letting value under Section 23 of the Income-tax Act at Rs. 27,780 ?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on an interpretation of Section 23(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal is right in law and fact in holding that the amount estimated by the Assessing Officer cannot be the rent received or receivable, as per the provisions of Section 23(1) of th...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Gopalakrishnan Nair
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-07-1999
Reported in: 2001ACJ1929
K. Narayana Kurup, J.1. As a result of collision between a van (omnibus) with registration No. KLF 3447 and an auto-rickshaw bearing registration No. KRQ 9042 at about midnight on 5.1.1986 one of the passengers of the autorickshaw died and three others including the driver of the autorickshaw sustained injuries which gave rise to four petitions before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, viz., O.P. (MV) Nos. 371, 372, 399 and 403 of 1986. O.P. (MV) No. 371 of 1986 was filed at the instance of the L.Rs. of the deceased passenger claiming a compensation of Rs. 2,00,000. O.P. (MV) No. 372 of 1986 was filed by one of the injured claiming a compensation of Rs. 1,00,000. In O.P. (MV) No. 399 of 1986 a sum of Rs. 25,000 was claimed as compensation by the driver of the autorickshaw which was involved in the accident. In O.P. (MV) No. 403 of 1986 a sum of Rs. 75,000 was claimed as compensation by one of the injured involved in the accident. In all the petitions separate written statements were ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Asian Techs Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-06-1999
Reported in: (2000)158CTR(Ker)348; [2000]244ITR356(Ker)
Arijit Pasayat, C.J.1. All these applications involve an identical question relating to legality of the direction given for working out the entitlement of the assessee to get deduction under Section 80HH, 80-I and 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee was engaged in a business of engineering contracts. Vide order dated June 4, 1993, the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to work out the entitlements, if any, of the assessee by finding which part of the income is relatable to manufacturing activities. Learned counsel for the Revenue with reference to the decision of the apex court in CIT v. N.C. Budharaja and Co. : [1993]204ITR412(SC) , submitted that the direction given is contrary to the law as settled by the apex court.2. Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the question as to benefit of Section 80HH on value of articles manufactured or produced by him which have gone into in the construction of the dam was left open. On a reading of the decision of the apex c...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Asian Techs Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-06-1999
Reported in: [2000]108TAXMAN56(Ker)
Pasayat, CJ.All these applications involve identical questions relating to legality of the direction given for working out entitlement of the assessee to get deduction under sections 80HH, 80I and 80J of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The assessee was engaged in a business of engineering contracts. Vide order dated 4-6-1993, the Tribunal directed the assessing officer to work out the entitlements, if any, of the assessee by finding which part of the income is relatable to manufacturing activities. The learned counsel for the revenue with reference to the decision of the Apex Court in CIT v. N.C. Budharaja & Co. : [1993]204ITR412(SC) submitted that the direction given is contrary to the law as settled by the Apex Court.2. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the question as to the benefit of section 80HH on the value of articles manufactured or produced by him which have gone into the construction of the dam, was left open. On a reading o...
Shakkiel Rias Vs. Shahana Ummer
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-05-1999
Reported in: I(2000)DMC397
M.R. Hariharan Nair, J. 1. The question that arises for decision in this case is whether this Court can exercise powers under Section 24 of C.P.C. to transfer proceedings pending in different Family Courts where question of guardianship is involved.2. Naeemsaj, the minor involved in this case was born to the 1st petitioner and 1st respondent herein. The marriage broke down subsequently and it appears that the 1st respondent is now the wife of the 2nd respondent. The paternal grand parents of the child filed O.P. 240 of 1998 in the Family Court, Thrissur seeking custody of the child as also the appointment as guardian. That was filed at a time when the father of the child, the 3rd respondent in that proceeding, was outside India. Subsequently, the respondents herein filed O.P. 459 of 1999 in the Family Court, Ernakulam seeking appointment of the present 1st respondent as the guardian. There was also a prayer to declare that the father is unfit to be the guardian of the child.3. Learned ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Mulloor Chitties
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-04-1999
Reported in: [2000]244ITR308(Ker)
Arijit Pasayat, C.J.1. Heard, We direct the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, to refer the following question along with the statement of case : 'Whether the view of the Tribunal that when the entire penalty levied is not waived and only a part of it is waived, the same can be agitated in appeal or revision notwithstanding the prescription under Section 273A(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The original petition is disposed of as above....
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. A. Geeripal
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-04-1999
Reported in: [2000]243ITR375(Ker)
Arjit Pasayat, C.J.1. Original Petitions Nos. 13061 and 13720 of 1999 are in the list today. As Original Petition No. 20241 of 1999 is similar in nature, the same is being taken up at the request of learned counsel for the parties.2. A refusal by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench (in short 'the Tribunal'), to refer the questions posed by the Revenue for opinion under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'), has led to the filing of these petitions. The questions are as follows :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law and fact in confirming' the deletion of the disallowance of interest in respect of gold loan ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and also in the light of the decisions of the Supreme Court in Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. v. CIT (No. 1) : [1967]63ITR57(SC) and Lachiminarayan Madan Lal v. CIT : [1972]86ITR439(SC) , is the expenditure wholly and exclusively...
Lukkose John Thoppil Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-04-1999
Reported in: (1999)157CTR(Ker)375; [2000]242ITR1(Ker)
S. Sankarasubban, J.1. The question involved in both these cases is similar and they are disposed of by a common judgment. The petitioners in both these original petitions were partners of a firm called Thoppil Finance, which was an assessee under the Income-tax Act, 1961. By order dated September 25, 1997, of the Settlement Commission, the assessing authority, viz., the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Investigation Circle-I, Division-1, Ernakulam, revised the assessment of the petitioners and passed orders under Section 155 of the Income-tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), redetermining the tax, surcharge and interest payable by the petitioners for the assessment year 1992-93. Exhibit P-l, in both these cases are the assessment orders. The revised assessment included interest under Sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. While the petitioner in 0. P. No. 4416 of 1999 was assessed to interest of Rs. 7,90,095, the petitioner in 0. P. No. 4347 of 1999 was levied intere...
Safia Usman Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-04-1999
Reported in: [2002]110CompCas710(Ker)
K.A. Abdul Gafoor, J. 1. The petitioner claims to be a contributory of a company called Aluva Techno Rubbers (Pvt.) Ltd. which is not made a party in this petition. The petitioner seeks a direction to the first respondent 'to investigate the affairs of the company, viz., Aluva Techno Rubbers (Pvt.) Ltd., Industrial Development Area, Erumathala Post, Aluva-5'. This petition is seen to be filed invoking the provision under Section 237(a)(ii) of the Companies Act, 1956. It is submitted that the affairs of the company are under total mismanagement both in its functioning and finance. Therefore, a direction shall be issued as prayed for. According to me, that prayer cannot be granted for different reasons. The function enjoined on this court in terms of Section 237(a)(ii) is not to direct the Central Government to conduct investigation but to declare 'that the affairs of the company ought to be investigated by an Inspector appointed by the Central Government'. So this court is only to issue...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »