Kerala Court November 2002 Judgments
Jameela Vs. L.i.C. of India
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-20-2002
Reported in: 2003ACJ689; 2003(3)KLT215
Jawahar Lal Gupta, C.J. 1. The petitioner's husband was working as an automobile broker. On 8.9.1991 he met with an accident. He suffered head injury. He was left with post traumatic psychosis. It deteriorated into depression. The petitioner alleges that her husband has been declared insane.2. The petitioner's husband had taken out six insurance policies for a total sum of Rs. 2,20,000/-. The individual policies would mature on different dates during the period from 3.10.2004 to 28.1.2015. Thus, payment has not become due under any of the policies so far. The petitioner approached the respondent Life Insurance Corporation for payment of the matured value of the policies. Her request having been declined, she approached this Court with the prayer that it be declared that the petitioner was entitled to the payment of money for the full value of the policies. The petition having been dismissed by the learned single Judge, the petitioner has filed the present appeal.3. Mr. Ibrahim, learned...
Tag this Judgment!Mrs. Rhona Varghese Vs. Commissioner of Gift Tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-19-2002
Reported in: (2003)183CTR(Ker)166; [2004]265ITR649(Ker)
G. Sivara Jan, J.1. The matter arises under the GT Act (for short, the Act). The following question of law is referred for decision to this Court at the instance of the assessee :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in law and fact in holding that the surrender of share of 30 per cent in the firm by the assessee is liable to gift-tax ?'The assessee was a partner in a firm M/s P.J. Corporation, Cochin, with 50 per cent share of the profits therein. There were two partners. There was a reconstitution of the said firm w.e.f. 1st April, 1989, by which the firm admitted a new partner and 4 minors to the benefits of the partnership firm. As a result of the said reconstitution, the assessee's share in the firm got reduced from 50 per cent to 20 per cent. Since, according to the AO, this transaction will amount to a deemed gift, he issued a notice under Section 18 of the Act to the assessee. Pursuant to the said notice, the assessee filed a Nil r...
Tag this Judgment!Janardhanan Pillai Vs. Indian Overseas Bank
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-19-2002
Reported in: II(2003)BC243; [2003]115CompCas64(Ker); 2003(1)KLT293; [2003]44SCL71(Ker)
Jawahar Lal Gupta, C.J.1. Has the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal failed to exercise its discretion under Section 21 of the 1993 Act? This is the short question that arises in this appeal. The relevant facts may be noticed.2. The appellants stood guarantee for the loans advanced by the Indian Overseas Bank to different Companies. On default in payment, suits for recovery were instituted in the year 1987. The proceedings had culminated in a compromise decree by the Civil Court, in March, 1990. The decretal amount was not paid. Proceedings for issue of recovery certificate were initiated before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. Those petitions were registered as O.A. Nos. 5/1998 to 11/1998. Ultimately, orders/certificates for recovery of more than Rs. 12 crores were issued. The appellants presented appeals. An application under Section 21 for waiver of pre-deposit was made. The application was decided vide order dated April 18, 2001. It was found that the total amount due from the appellants ...
Tag this Judgment!Mrs. Rhona Varghese Vs. Cgt
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-19-2002
Reported in: [2003]131TAXMAN139(Ker)
G. Sivarajan, J.The matter arises under the Gift Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The following question of law is referred for decision to this court at the instance of the assessee :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in law and fact in holding that the surrender of share of 30% in the firm by the assessee is liable to gift-tax ?'2. The assessee was a partner in a firm M/s. P.J. Corporation, Cochin with 50% share of the profits therein. There were two partners. There was a reconstitution of the said firm with effect from 1-4-1989 by which the firm admitted a new partner and 4 minors to the benefits of the partnership firm. As a result of the said reconstitution, the assessee's share in the firm got reduced from 50% to 20%. Since, according to the assessing officer, this transaction will amount to a deemed gift, he issued a notice under section 16 of the Act to the assessee. Pursuant to the said notice, the assessee filed a...
Tag this Judgment!Skypark Builders and Distributors Vs. Kerala Police Housing and Constr ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-18-2002
Reported in: [2003]114CompCas425(Ker); 2003(1)KLT445; [2004]50SCL254(Ker)
Jawahar Lal Gupta, C.J. 1. The appellant executed certain work for the Kerala Police Housing and Construction Corporation Limited. There was a dispute regarding payment and the completion of the work. On August 31, 2000, the appellant filed a petition before Honourable the Chief Justice with the prayer that the matter be referred to an Arbitrator. A copy of this petition has been produced as Ext. P1 with the Original Petition. The matter was referred to the designated Judge. Vide order dated August 16, 2001, the application was dismissed. A copy of the order passed by the Hon'ble designated Judge has been produced as Ext. P14. It was held that there is nothing on record to show that there was an arbitration agreement between the parties. Aggrieved by the order, the appellant filed a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. It was dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide order dated May 31, 2002. Hence, this appeal.2. Learned counsel for the appellant has raised a two fold plea...
Tag this Judgment!Associated Cement Companies Ltd. Vs. Kerala State Rural Development Bo ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-18-2002
Reported in: [2006]146STC677(Ker)
C.N. Ramachandran, J.1. The petitioner is a public limited company which has supplied cement to the respondent-Board, an agency of the Government of Kerala. The case of the petitioner is that supplies of cement from 1990-91 to 1994-95 were made from the Tamil Nadu depot of the company to the Board in Kerala against which the Board issued form D for claiming concessional rate of sales tax Under Section 8(1)(a) read with Section 8(4) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The petitioner's case is that the declarations issued by the buyers were rejected by sales tax authorities in Tamil Nadu which led to demand of tax at full rate on the inter-State sales made by the petitioner. Though the petitioner made a representation to the respondent, the respondent rejected the same by exhibit P. 10 order. The petitioner is questioning exhibit P. 10 order.2. I heard counsel for the petitioner and also counsel for the respondent. The petitioner is basically challenging the view taken by the respondent ...
Tag this Judgment!State of Kerala Vs. Killick Karribonium Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-18-2002
Reported in: [2004]138STC419(Ker)
G. Sivarajan, J.1. This revision is filed by the State against the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Ernakulam in T.A. No. 674 of 1994. The assessment year concerned is 1991-92. The only question involved in this case is regarding the rate of tax on computer ribbons. The assessee had collected tax on the sale of computer ribbons only at 4 per cent. The assessing authority noted this on verification of the accounts and he issued notice proposing to levy tax on computer ribbon at 15 per cent treating it as part of electronic item. However, after considering the reply filed by the respondent-assessee he levied tax only at 8 per cent treating computer ribbon on a par with typewriter ribbon. In appeal by the assessee the first appellate authority took the view that computer ribbons will fall under entry 68 of the First Schedule to the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, (for short 'the Act'). As according to him, computer ribbon is an accessory to electronic items...
Tag this Judgment!Baiju Vs. Suguna Prakash
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-16-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)KLT182
J.B. Koshy, J.1. These Writ Appeals are filed against the common judgment in O.P. Nos. 14176, 14470, 16279, 16870, 17295 and 20560 of 2002. The question to be considered in all these appeals is whether the Government Order, G.O. (MS) No. 11/2002/G.Edn. dated 7.1.2002 ( Ext.P1 in O.P. No. 16870 of 2002) which creates a new cadre of H.S.A. (English) to teach English in the Government and Aided High Schools is correct or not. 2. The learned Single Judge in the judgment in O.P. No. 14176 of 2002 and connected cases (Suguna Prakash v. State of Kerala (2002 (3) KLT 488)) held that paragraphs 3(d) and 3(c) of Ext.P1 are not enforceable without corresponding amendment to the Rules. The learned Single Judge further held as follows: 'The claims of LPSA/UPSA under R.43 for promotion to the post of HSA in core subjects shall be considered in accordance with the Rules/Orders/Circulars prevailing on the date of occurrence of vacancy. Consequential action by the concerned appointing authorities in th...
Tag this Judgment!Anitha John Vs. Eldhose Mathew
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-16-2002
Reported in: 2003(3)KLT974
J.B. Koshy, J. 1. These Writ Appeals are filed against the common judgment in O.P. Nos. 14176,14470,16279,16870,17295 and 20560 of 2002. The question to be considered in allthese appeals is whether the Government Order, G.O. (MS) No. 11/2002/G. Edn.dated 7.1.2002 (Ext. PI in O.P. No. 16870 of 2002) which creates a new cadre ofH.S.A. (English) to teach English in the Government and Aided High Schools is corrector not.2. The learned Single Judge in the judgment in O.P. No. 14176 of 2002 and connected cases (Suguna Prakash v. State of Kerala, 2002 (3) KLT 488) held that paragraphs 3(d) and 3(c) of Ext. P1 are not enforceable without corresponding amendment to the Rules. The learned Single Judge further held as follows:'The claims of LPS A/UPSA under R. 43 for promotion to the post of HS A in core subjects shall be considered in accordance with the Rules/Orders/Circulars prevailing on the date of occurrence of vacancy. Consequential action by the concerned appointing authorities in the cas...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Standard Tile and Clay Works P. Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-16-2002
Reported in: [2004]265ITR525(Ker)
S. Sankarasubban, J.1. In this case the following substantial questions of law have been raised before this court for consideration :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on an interpretation of Section 43B read with the Explanation to Clause (va) of Section 36(1), the assessee is entitled to claim deduction of the contribution to the provident fund for the assessment year 1991-92 on actual payment basis even if the payment was not made before the 'due date' as defined in the Explanation to Section 36(1)(va) ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding the 'due date' as defined in the Explanation to Clause (va) of Section 36(1) has application only in respect of any sum received by the assessee as contribution to the provident fund, etc., which the assessee as employer has to remit to the respective account ?3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee's claim for dedu...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »