Kerala Court October 2001 Judgments
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Baby
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-31-2001
Reported in: [2002]254ITR248(Ker)
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. These Income Tax Reference cases arise out of the assessment of the respondent assessee for the assessment years 1981-82, 1982-83 and 1983-84. The common questions referred by the Tribunal at the instance of the revenue are the following :1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in granting deduction of the amounts paid by was of interest referable to the amounts which the assessee had let to various parties as mentioned in the Tribunal's order? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the withdrawals were for the construction of a shop building for the assessee's business? 2. The assessee is a registered partnership firm dealing in piece goods. During the accounting years, relevant for these three assessment years, the assessee has paid bank interest for the borrowing made for business purposes. However, the assessing officer found t...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. Dr. T.K. Jairaj
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-31-2001
Reported in: [2002]120TAXMAN367(Ker)
Ramachandran Nair, J.All the three cases arise from the orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal relating to the income-tax assessment of Dr. T.K Jayaraj, a medical practitioner in Calicut, (the assessee), for the assessment year 1984-85. The assessment was completed by the Income Tax Officer, Central Circle, Kozhikode, and therefore, the Commissioner competent to file reference application before the Tribunal was the Commissioner having jurisdiction over the assessing officer, who passed the order. The appeal by the assessee was allowed by the Tribunal, Cochin Bench, and copy of the order was sent to the Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Bangalore, who was the person on record of the Tribunal, having jurisdiction in the matter. However, on receipt of the order from the Tribunal, the Commissioner, Bangalore sent the appellate order to the Commissioner, Central Circle, Madras, to whom the jurisdiction was transferred. It appears that there was some delay in the office of th...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Dr. T.K. Jairaj
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-31-2001
Reported in: [2002]256ITR252(Ker)
C. N. Ramachandran Nair J. 1. All the three cases arise from the orders of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal relating to the income-tax assessment of Dr. T. K. Jayaraj, a medical practitioner in Calicut, hereinafter referred to as the 'assessee', for the assessment year 1984-85. The assessment was completed by the Income-tax Officer, Central Circle, Kozhikode, and, therefore, the Commissioner competent to file reference application before the Tribunal was the Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle, having jurisdiction over the Assessing Officer, who passed the order. The appeal by the assessee was allowed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, and a copy of the order was sent to the Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle, Bangalore, who was the person on record of the Tribunal, having jurisdiction in the matter. However, on receipt of the order from the Tribunal, the Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle, Bangalore, sent the appellate order to the Commissioner...
Tag this Judgment!Kwality Cocoa Products Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-31-2001
Reported in: [2002]126STC7(Ker)
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. Tax revision case Nos. 353, 355, 356 and 357 of 2001 are by the same assessee, while tax revision case No. 354 of 2001 is by another assessee. As common issues are involved in all these cases, we have heard the cases together and they are disposed of by this common judgment. The only issue arising in these cases is whether the expenses, carriage, inward and freight inward, form part of the purchase turnover liable to tax under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act and Central Sales Tax Act.2. The petitioners are processors and dealers in cocoa, purchasing cocoa from farmers. The petitioners are processing the same and selling it. The petitioners' case is that cocoa is purchased from the field, from farmers and after the purchase is effected, the petitioners are transporting the same to their shop/processing unit for processing for sale. According to the petitioners, the expenditure incurred for transportation and handling after the purchase for bringing the same...
Tag this Judgment!Youth Voice Arts Social and Cultural Organisation Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-30-2001
Reported in: [2001]252ITR668(Ker)
1. The challenge is against Ext. P4 order passed by the 1st respondent-Government rejecting the revision petition filed by the petitioner aggrieved by the Assignment on registry of 75 cents of government land in survey No. 319 and 320 of Aranattukara village in Thrissur District, in favour of the 4th respondent.2. Petitioner says that Exts. P2 and P4 have passed malafide and flouting the mandatory provisions in the Kerala Government Land Assignment Act, 1960 (Act 30 of 1960) and the Kerala Land Assignment Rules, 1964.3. 'Government lands' for the purpose of the Kerala Land Assignment Rules (For short 'the Rules') shall consist of lands belonging to Government and available for assignment as per lists prepared by the Revenue Department and approved by the competent authority under the Rules and such other lands as may be set apart for the purpose of the Rules. 'Assignment' is defined in Rule 2(c) of the Rules as transfer of land by way of registry and includes a lease and a grant of lic...
Tag this Judgment!Bymore Food Products Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-30-2001
Reported in: [2002]126STC26(Ker)
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J. 1. This Tax Revision Case is filed by the assessee, which is a manufacturer ofpickles. In the assessment for the year 1991-92 the assessing officer levied taxat 10 per cent on the sale of pickles treating it as an item falling under Entry 75 to theFirst Schedule of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, which provides for levy of tax onfood sold in air tight containers. The assessee's contention is that pickle is neither afood item nor sold in air tight containers, and therefore is not assessable under Entry75 to the First Schedule of the Act. Since the entry for pickle was brought under theFirst Schedule to the Act only from 1992-93 onwards, the assessee's claim is that taxcould be levied only at the general rate of 5 per cent. 2. Following his earlier order, and after physically verifying and satisfying thatpickle is not sold in air tight containers, the first appellate authority allowed the appeal.On further appeal by the State, the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Vaikundam Rubber Co. Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-30-2001
Reported in: (2001)165CTR(Ker)557; [2002]253ITR417(Ker)
P.K. Balasubramanyan, J. 1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following question has been referred for the opinion of this court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, interest on the borrowal made by the assessee against the fixed deposit made by the assessee with the bank is an allowable deduction under section 57(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The relevant assessment year is 1981-82. The assessee had a fixed deposit of Rs. 22.85 lakhs with a bank. Subsequently, the assessee borrowed a sum of Rs. 7.50 lakhs from that bank against the fixed deposit. The assessee had the liability to pay interest thereon, which was 2 per cent, higher than the interest paid by the bank on the fixed deposit, hi the year of account, the assessee received Rs. 2,31,247 as interest from the fixed deposit, which was reduced by Rs. 84,654 which the bank recovered from the assessee as interest on the loan amount of Rs. 7.50 lakhs. The assessee claimed the deduction of the interest...
Tag this Judgment!T.J. Edward Vs. C.A. Victor Immanuel and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-29-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ1670
ORDERT.M. Hassan Pillai, J.1. Heard.2. The legality, propriety and correctness of the order passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Ernakulam in Crl. R.P. No. 68/95 setting aside the order passed by the learned Judicial 1st Class Magistrate-1, Kochi in Crl. M.P. No. 5288/95 in S.T. No. 935/94 is under challenge in this revision.3. The basic facts necessary for appreciating the contention raised by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner challenging the impugned order are to be stated here. The complaint petition was filed by the revision petitioner against the 1st respondent alleging commission of an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, as amended (for short, the Act') and the allegation made therein was that the 1st respondent borrowed from him Rs. 70,000/- and issued cheque dated 14-4-1994 in discharge of that debt or liability. It was further alleged in the complaint that that cheque, when presented for collection, was returned a...
Tag this Judgment!Vinod Vs. Toddy Workers Welfare Fund Board
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-24-2001
Reported in: (2002)ILLJ739Ker
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. The question that has come up for consideration in these cases is whether the demand made towards penal interest under Para 38(1) of the Toddy Workers Welfare Fund Scheme read with Section 9 of the Toddy Workers Welfare Fund Act is illegal or not.2. The Welfare Fund Inspector as well as . Revenue Authorities of the respective districts issued notices to the writ petitioners demanding penal interest for the amount which fell due on April 10, of the succeeding year on the date of the final determination order. Before we examine the questions raised in these cases we may first examine the scope of the Act and the Scheme. Kerala Toddy Workers' Welfare Fund Act, 1969 was enacted to provide for the constitution of a fund to promote the welfare of toddy workers in the State of Kerala. The Act proposed establishment of Toddy Workers Welfare Fund to which the employer and the employee would contribute equally. Scheme called the Toddy Workers' Welfare Fund Scheme, 1969 w...
Tag this Judgment!State of Kerala Vs. Suseelan Pillai and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-23-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ808
J.B. Koshy, J.1. This appeal is filed by the State against the acquittal of the accused. Respondents herein were accused Nos. 1 to 9 and 11 to 13 in Sessions Case No. 32 /93 on the file of the Additional Sessions Court, Patanamthitta. The Circle Inspector of Police, Thiruvalla filed a charge sheet against 13 accused alleging offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 447, 324, 109, 307, 302 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. Since tenth accused was absconding the case against others were committed and tried by the Sessions Court.2. According to the prosecution, all 13 accused persons were RSS workers. The 13th accused was the Chengannur District Organiser of RSS. On 1-4-1991, at about 8.30 pm. while A 13 was riding a scooter, one hand cart, owned by PW 1 dashed against his scooter at Aykarapadi Junction, Kallooppara, which resulted in an altercation with PWs 2, 11,21 and 22. During the altercation, PW 2 gave a slap on the face of A13. So, in order to take revenge on PW 2 a...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »