Kerala Court October 2000 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.
Madhavan Mony Vs. C. Sarasamma Amma and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-13-2000
Reported in: AIR2001Ker35
ORDERK.A. Mohamed Shafi, J.1. The defendant in O. S. No. 750/1984 on the file of the Munsiffs Court, Quilon is the appellant. The decree and judgment passed by the District Court, Quilon dated 27-9-1989 in A.S. No. 134/ 1987 reversing the decree and judgment passed by the trial Court is under challenge.2. The respondents filed the suit against the appellant for realisation of Rs. 7000/-with interest as per a pro-note executed by him in favour of late Achuthan Pillai, the husband of the 1st respondent and father of the other respondents. The trial Court though found that the appellant is liable to pay the amount claimed in the suit, dismissed the same on the ground that as the respondents who are the legal heirs of deceased Achuthan Pillai failed to produce succession certificate in the suit, the above suit is not maintainable.3. The respondents produced succession certificate before the appellate Court in the appeal preferred by them against the decree and judgment passed by the trial ...
L. Abdulla Kunhi Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-12-2000
Reported in: [2001]122STC461(Ker)
S. Sankarasubban, J. 1. This tax revision case is filed against the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Kozhikode. Petitioner is the proprietor of Prabhakaran and Company. The company deals in petroleum products as agent of Bharath Petroleum Corporation at Calicut. The petitioner is a registered dealer under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963.2. For the assessment year 1991-92, the petitioner declared a total and taxable turnover of Rs. 94,36,772.27 and Rs. 60 respectively and claimed exemption on a turnover of Rs. 94,36,716, which represented second sales turnover of petroleum products. The petitioner being an agent of Bharath Petroleum Corporation gets supply of petroleum products only from the Corporation and not from any other source. The accounts submitted by the petitioner were rejected by the Additional Sales Tax Officer, II Circle, Kozhikode and final assessment was completed by order dated August 11, 1993 by estimating the taxable turnover at Rs. 7...
C.A. Produce Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-12-2000
Reported in: [2001]122STC374(Ker)
G. Sivarajan, J. 1. The matter arises under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (for short, 'the Act'). The assessee is the revision-petitioner. He is a dealer in hill produce. His assessment for the year 1989-90 was completed on February 1, 1994 by fixing total and taxable turnover of Rs. 2,42,72,121.10 and Rs. 2,15,52,880 respectively. The assessee took up the assessment in appeal before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Kozhikode. The assessment was set aside by order dated November 11, 1996 and remitted the matter to the assessing authority with certain directions. The assessing authority subsequently passed a fresh assessment order on September 19, 1997. According to the Deputy Commissioner, the assessing authority committed irregularity and illegality in the said assessment order. The Deputy Commissioner noted that the turnover of arecanut, dry ginger and pepper amounting to Rs. 1,97,48,510 escaped from levy of turnover tax. He also noted that to get exemption from the turnov...
S. Sasidharan Vs. Kerala State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-12-2000
Reported in: AIR2001Ker68
ORDERR. Bhaskaran, J.1. This Original petition Is filed to quash Exts. P4 and P6 also for writ of mandamus directing respondents 1 to 3 to give electricity connection to the petitioner's auditorium as approved by the 4th respondent in Exts. PI and PI (a) approval. Petitioner has constructed an air conditioned auditorium at Oachira by name 'Regency Hall'. Petitioner has decided to have a generating unit having capacity of 200 KVA for working the air conditioning unit and he requires electricity from the Electricity Board only for the purpose of lights and fans. Petitioner submitted the said scheme for approval. The scheme showed that there is separate line from the gerierator to the air conditioner without having any connection to the line connected to the supply of electricity from the Kerala State Electricity Board. Ext. PI is the proceedings of the Electricity Inspector, Kollam giving sanction under Section 30 of the Indian Electricity Act and rules 47A and 135 of the Indian Electric...
K.N. Karthikeyan and anr. Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-12-2000
Reported in: 2001CriLJ408
ORDERK.A. Mohamed Shafi, J.1. This M.C. is filed by accused Nos. 1 and 2 in C.C. No. 382/98 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Chengannur to quash the prosecution against them.2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable under Section 55(i), 56(b) and 54 read with 63 of the Kerala Abkari Act. The allegation is that in disobedience of the order No. N2-4175/96, dated 22-4-96 issued by the District Collector banning the sale of intoxicating liquors on 7-5-96, 8-5-96 and 9-5-96 in connection with the election and counting of votes in the election to the Parliament and Assembly held on 8-5-96, they sold liquors in the Indraprastham Bar, of which the 1st accused is the licensee and the 2nd accused is the Bar Man, at about 8 p.m. on 7-5-96. The case was registered as Crime No. 85/97 by the Mavelikkara Police and the C.I. of Police, Mavelikkara after investigation has laid the charge-sheet against the peitioners alleging the above offences.3. The c...
M.P. Augustine Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-10-2000
Reported in: [2001]122STC110(Ker)
S. Sankarasubban, J. 1. These tax revision cases are filed by the assessee challenging the assessment for the years 1990-91, 1991-92, 1992-93 and 1993-94. The assessee was a dealer in polythene sheets, polythene tubings and plastic waste. According to the assessee, polythene sheets and polythene tubings are packing materials. Even though they are liable to be taxed at 8 percent as per the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (for short, 'the KGST Act'), as per notification issued by the Government of Kerala under Section 10 of the KGST Act the tax is reduced to 4 per cent. Hence, the petitioner is liable to be taxed only at that rate. Another contention raised was whether plastic waste is an unclassified item and, hence, the rate adopted is correct. The other dispute raised was with regard to the turnover fixed relating to polythene sheets and polythene tubings.2. Regarding the first question, whether polythene sheets and polythene tubings are to be taxed at 8 per cent or 4 per cent, the...
K.V. Damodaran Vs. P.K. Muraleekrishnan and anr., Etc.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-09-2000
Reported in: AIR2001Ker3
Balasubramanyan, J. 1. These appeals are filed under Section 5 of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958. They seek to challenge the decisions of a learned single Judge in A.S. Nos. 338 and 376 of 1999, both filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Along with these appeals, the appellants have not produced the certified copy of the decree of the learned single Judge in the respective appeals. The Registry therefore returned the appeals as defective inter alia on the ground that the appeals have to be accompanied by the certified copies of the decrees in the first appeal disposed of by a learned single Judge. The appeals were represented by counsel for the appellants along with petitions for time for production of the certified copies of the decrees. In those petitions, what was stated was that applications for copies made, were pending and the certified copies of the decrees have not been issued so far. Hence, in the interests of justice, it was just and necessary to grant time ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kerala Liquor Corporation
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-09-2000
Reported in: [2001]248ITR740(Ker)
S. Sankarasubban, J. 1. These income-tax references are referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Cochin. The questions of law referred to us under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, are as follows :'1. Whether, in the light of the assessment order confirmed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) read with the presumption (irrebuttable) contained in Explanation I(A) and the presumption (rebuttable) contained in Explanation I(B), the Tribunal is right in law and fact in holding that the assessee cannot be said to have concealed the income or particulars of income ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and also in the light of the findings in the assessment order confirmed by the Tribunal read with Explanation I, the Tribunal is right in law and fact in holding that the assessee cannot be said to have concealed the income or particulars of income ?' 2. The assessee is a part...
Madhavi Amma Vs. Velu Pillai
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-09-2000
Reported in: I(2001)DMC302
D. Sreedevi, J.1. This appeal is directed against the decree and judgment in A.S. No. 237/77 of the District Court, Kollam, which was filed against the decree and judgment in OS. No. 20/74 of the Munsiff's Court, Adoor. The defendants are the appellants.2. The suit was filed by the plaintiff one Velu Filial claiming himself to be the only legal heir as brother, to the estates of one C.K. Thankappan Pillai, who according to the plaintiff, was a bachelor and died intestate. The suit is for declaration of title and recovery of possession of plaint schedule properties. Plaint 'A' schedule properties belonged to the deceased absolutely and 'B' schedule properties were jointly owned by the deceased and his elder brother Ramakrishna Pillai who predeceased him. The defendants are the widow and children of this Ramakrishna Pillai. According to the plaintiff, Ramakrishna Pillai and the deceased Thankappan Pillai were the children of one Parameswaran Pillai and Karthiyayani Amma. As the deceased ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Kerala Liquor Corporation
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-09-2000
Reported in: (2001)165CTR(Ker)234
Sankarasubban, J.These income-tax references are referred to us by the Tribunal, Cochin Bench, at the instance of Commissioner, Cochin. The questions of law referred to us under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act are as follows:'1. Whether, in the light of the assessment order confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals) read with the presumption (irrebuttable) contained in Explanation 1(A) and the presumption (rebuttable) contained in ExpIn. l(B), the Tribunal is right in law and fact in holding that 'the assessee cannot be said to have concealed the income or particulars of income' ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and also in the light of the findings in the assessment order confirmed by the Tribunal read with Explanation 1, the Tribunal is right in law and fact in holding that the assessee cannot be said to have concealed the income or particulars of income.2. The assessee is a partnership firm carrying on Abkari business. The assessment years in this ques...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »