Kerala Court February 2001 Judgments
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. A.M. Moosa
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-28-2001
Reported in: [2001]249ITR395(Ker)
S. Sankarasubban, J. 1. This reference is at the instance of the Revenue and is under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. The question of law referred is as follows :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee is entitled to claim deduction of the provision made for purchase tax in the year 1981-82 on the basis of the provisional assessment to sales tax for 1976-77 ?'2. The facts of the case are as follows :The assessee filed his return of wealth for the assessment year 1981-82 and claimed deduction of Rs. 6,43,499. This amount was described as the amount for purchase tax relating to the year 1976-77. The Wealth-tax Officer disallowed the claim on the ground that the Government of Kerala had exempted marine products from levy of purchase tax during the relevant accounting period and held that the provision was not against any real or ascertained liability. Aggrieved by the order of the Wealth-tax Officer, t...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Wealth Tax Vs. A.M. Moosa
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-28-2001
Reported in: (2001)167CTR(Ker)297
S. Sankarasubban, J.This reference is at the instance of the revenue and is under section 27(3) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957. The question of law referred is as follows :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee is entitled to claim deduction of the provision made for purchase tax in the year 1981-82 on the basis of the provisional assessment to sales-tax for 1976-77 ?'The facts of the case is as follows2. The assessee filed his return of wealth for the assessment year 1981-82 and claimed deduction of Rs. 6,43,499. This amount was described as the amount for purchase tax relating to the year 1976-77. The Wealth Tax Officer disallowed the claim on the ground that the Government of Kerala had exempted marine products from levy of purchase tax during the relevant accounting period and held that the provision was not against any real or ascertained liability. Aggrieved by the order of the Wealth Tax Officer, the asse...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. K.K. Engineering Co.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-27-2001
Reported in: [2001]249ITR447(Ker)
S. Sankarasubban, J.1. This reference is at the instance of the Revenue against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in I. T. A. No. 469/ Coch. of 1991 and cross objection No. 36 of 1991. The questions of law raised are as follows :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on an interpretation of Section 194C is not the levy of interest under Section 201(1A) valid and justified ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, is the decision reported in CIT v. Kannan Devon Hill Produce Co. Ltd. : [1986]161ITR477(Ker) , applicable to the facts of the case ?' 2. The facts of the case are as follows : The assessee is a contractor and it sub-contracted the work to one C. V. P. and Co., for a sum of Rs. 56,09,233. The tax deducted at source was only Rs. 26,890 as against the deductible amount of Rs. 56,092. The Assessing Officer issued show-cause notice as to why interest should not be charged for the short deduction. The assessee pleaded t...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. N.T. A. Kareem
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-27-2001
Reported in: (2001)167CTR(Ker)280
S. Sankarasubhban, J.In both the cases the question of law raised is as follows :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and also in the light of the answer to the question in the quantum reference, the Tribunal is right in law and fact in setting aside the order of the Commissioner (Appeals)?'The Tribunal, Cochin was dealing with ITA Nos. 21 and 969/Coch/of 1990, both by the same appellant. Instead of deciding the appeals on merits, the Tribunal held as follows : 'We have thus heard rival submissions. Avoidance of vexatious and protracted litigation will by itself further the cause of justice and reduce the burden of arrears in courts of law. Keeping this end in view and having regard to the submissions made before us, we set aside the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and restore the issues to the file of the assessing officer to enable the assessee to approach the Settlement Commission for settlement of the outstanding disputes, without prejudice to the right ...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. K.K. Engineering Co.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-27-2001
Reported in: (2001)167CTR(Ker)209
S. Sankarasubban, J.This reference is at the instance of the revenue against the order of the Tribunal in ITA No. 469/Coch/of 1991 and cross-objection No. 36 of 1991. The questions of law raised are as follows:1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on an interpretation of section 194C, is not the levy of interest under section 201(1A) valid and justified ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, is the decision CIT v. Kannan Devan Hill Produce Co. : [1986]161ITR477(Ker) applicable to the facts of the case ?'.2. The facts of the case are as follows :-- The assessee is a contractor and it sub-contracted the work, to one C.V.P. & Co. for a sum of Rs. 56,09,233. The tax deducted at source was only Rs. 26,890 as against the deductible amount of Rs. 56,092. The assessing officer issued show-cause notice as to why interest should not be charged for the short-deduction. The assessee pleaded that the sub-contractor was short of working capital an...
Tag this Judgment!Philip Vs. Susan Jacob
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-26-2001
Reported in: AIR2001Ker195; II(2001)DMC290
A. Lekshmikutty, J.1. The petitioner in O.P. (Divorce) No. 29 of 1991 on the file of the Court of the District Judge, Pathanamthitta, filed this appeal against the order in the said O.P.2. The petitioner, husband of the first respondent filed the petition under S. 10 of the Indian Divorce Act for dissolution of marriage. The petitioner married the first respondent on 23.2.1976 in accordance with the religious rites and ceremonies prevailing in the Christian community. After the marriage, they lived together as man and wife at the residence of the petitioner at Adoor till July 1977 when the first respondent left the matrimonial home and started residence at her house at Thiruvananthapuram. Eversince, they are living separately. The carnel copulation between the petitioner and the first respondent was only for one month and thereafter the petitioner became totally incapable of performing sexual intercourse with the first respondent.3. The marriage between the petitioner and the first res...
Tag this Judgment!Polakulath Tourist Home Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-26-2001
Reported in: [2001]124STC387(Ker)
S. Sankarasubban, J.1. Assessee is the revision-petitioner, The assessment year is 1992-93. The assessee is running a bar attached hotel at Mulanthuruthy under the name and style 'Polakulath Tourist Home'. The accounts produced by the assessee were rejected by all the authorities. The place of business of the assessee was inspected by the Intelligence Officer on December 29, 1992 and recorded a number of stock variations in the inspection report. The assessing authority, after rejecting the accounts, added 25 per cent towards the purchase turnover of chicken, fish, prawn, etc. Further, so far as the liquor is concerned, 25 per cent addition to the turnover was made. The matter was taken in appeal. The appellate authority enhanced the sales turnover of Indian-made foreign liquor by 5 per cent towards omission and suppression and subjected to tax. The estimation of 25 per cent gross profit to the purchase cost of liquor made by the assessing authority was held to be without basis. The sa...
Tag this Judgment!Jacob Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-23-2001
Reported in: 2001CriLJ1910
ORDERN. Krishnan Nair, J.1. Sri. T.M.Jacob, an Ex-Minister of Kerala who is an accused in C.C. 2/99 on the file of the Court of the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Kozhikode has filed this petition under S. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the order dtd. 6.12.2000 of the Special Judge in Crl. M.P.No. 31/2000 in C.C. 2/1999.2. The facts necessary for the disposal of this petition may be stated as follows:The petitioner is the 9th accused in C.C.No.2/99 on the file of the Court of the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Kozhilode. The petitioner and 10 others are charged with the offences punishable under Ss. 120(B), 409, 468, 471, 477A read with S. 34 IPC and S. 13(1)(d) read with S. 13(2) of the P.C. Act 1988. The substance of the allegations against the petitioner is that while he was functioning as a Minister for Irrigation in the Kerala State, he entered into a criminal conspiracy with the other accused and entrusted the work for executing the contract in c...
Tag this Judgment!G. Sukesh Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-22-2001
Reported in: [2001]252ITR230(Ker)
M. Ramachandran, J.1. Exhibit P-6 series issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Trivandrum, is challenged by the petitioner, who is an assesses. These are notices issued under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment years 1994-95, 1995-96, 1996-97, 1997-98 and 1998-99 and were issued between November 15, 2000 and December 13, 2000. On receipt thereof, the petitioner had requested the officer to furnish the reasons for resorting to such a step. By reply he was made known that when open enquiry had been made with the petitioner's creditors, it had been revealed that there was no full disclosure, and circumstances were there to reopen the assessments. It has also been revealed in the original petition that the Deputy Director (Investigation) had been making certain enquiries in the matter.2. The attack is on two grounds. At least some of the notices, according to him, are time barred. It is further averred that the precondition for conferring jurisdiction on ...
Tag this Judgment!G. Suresh Vs. Dy. Cit
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-22-2001
Reported in: (2001)169CTR(Ker)39
M. Ramachandran, J.Exhibit P6 series issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Trivandrum, is challenged by the petitioner, who is an assessee. These are notices issued under section 148 of Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment years 1994-95, 1995-96, 1996-97, 1997-98 and 1998-99 and were issued between 15-11-2000, to 13-12-2000. On receipt thereof, petitioner had requested the officer to furnish the reasons for resorting to such a step. By reply he was made known that when open enquiry had been made with the petitioner's creditors, it had been revealed that there was no full disclosures, and circumstances were there to reopen the assessments. It has also been revealed in the original petition that the Deputy Director (Investigation) had been making certain enquiries in the matter.2. The attack is on two grounds. At least some of the notices, according to him, are time-barred. It is further averred that the precondition for conferring jurisdiction on the first respondent was absent; there ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »