Kerala Court November 2002 Judgments
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Charles C. George
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-15-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)ARBLR575(Kerala); 2003(1)KLT110
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. This appeal is preferred by Union of India and the Divisional Railway Manager, Southern Railway against the judgment in OS (Arb.) No. 15 of 1994 of the 2nd Addl. Sub Judge, Ernakulam, directing them to file the original agreement No. 34/TVC/90 dated 7.5.1990 and directing the parties to file a joint panel of arbitrators so as to appoint an arbitrator for settling the disputes and difference between the parties.2. The work in question related to 'rationalization of watering arrangements provision of 225 Kilo Litres ground level reservoir, 90 Kilo Litres RCC High level tank near South Over Bridge and alternation to distribution pipe lines.' Formal agreement was executed by the parties on 7.5.1990. The work was not completed in time, which according to the contractor was due to the default on the part of the Railways. Railways however, maintained the stand that the time for competition of the work had to be extended because of the delay in completing the work by t...
Tag this Judgment!Mohammedali Vs. Elias Mathai
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-14-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)KLT362
S. Sankarasubban, J.1. This Writ Appeal is filed against the judgment of a learned single Judge in O.P. No. 9605 of 2002 (reported in 2002 (3) KLT 434). Appellant is the third respondent in the Original petition. First petitioner in the Original Petition is an existing operator on the strength of a regular permit in respect of the vehicle, KL-9E, 1017 on the route Mannarkkad - Malampuzha. The second petitioner in the Original Petition is an existing operator on the route Thathamangalam - Malampuzha.2. The appellant applied for fresh permit for operating on the route Kondotty -Palakkad via. Edavannapara, Areekod, Manjeri, Pandikkad, Melattur, Unniyal, Alanellur, Mannarkkad, Kalladikode and Olavakkode. The route Kondotty - Palakkad is in an inter-district route. It covers ofadistance of 121 Kms. Out of the total distance of 121 Kms. 63.05 Kms. lie in Malappuram District and the balance 57.5 Kms. He in the Palakkad District. The appellant applied for the permit in the Malappuram Regional ...
Tag this Judgment!Benny Mathew Vs. Alexander Joseph
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-14-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)KLT505
R. Rajendra Babu, J. 1. The common question arising in both these O.Ps. is whether a regular permit to a stage carriage to operate on an inter-district route can be renewed when the conditions imposed in the permit had not been complied with within the period of its validity.2. Regular permit to operate on the inter-district route Kayamkulam-Udayagiri was granted to one Philip Zachariah in respect of his stage carriage by the R.T.A., Kannur. The route Kayamkulam-Udayagiri was a long distance inter-district route traversing the districts of Alappuzha, Kottayam, Ernakulam, Thrissur, Malappuram, Kozhikode and Kannur and the permit was issued subject to countersignature of all the sister R.T.As., and was valid upto 24th February 2001. The permit holder did notobtain countersignature from all the sister R.T.As., and he was not operating. In 1997 the permit was transferred in the name of Sri Alexander Joseph, the 1st respondent in O.P. 14683/02, and the vehicle also had been replaced. The 1s...
Tag this Judgment!Victory Plywood Industries Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-14-2002
Reported in: [2003]132STC316(Ker)
Sivarajan, J.1. The matter arises under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The petitioners in O.P. Nos. 305 of 2000 Reported in [2002] 128 STC 42 (Chethana Pharmaceuticals v. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes), 2774 of 2001 and 1180 of 2000 respectively are the appellants in the above writ appeals. The learned single Judge by a common judgment in a batch of writ petitions O.P. Nos. 25907 of 1999, 11405, 305, 1180, 27247 and 31253 of 2000, 29562, 2774, 16548 and 16591 of 2001 dismissed all the writ petitions. Writ appeals are seen filed only in three cases. Though the appellants in these three appeals are different since the issue raised is common in, all these appeals they are being disposed of together by a common judgment.2. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the appellants and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. The appellants are small-scale industrial units engaged in the manufacture and sale o...
Tag this Judgment!Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Eastern Retreads (P) Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-13-2002
Reported in: (2003)182CTR(Ker)512
G. Sivarajan, J. 1. The Dy. CIT, Central Circle-II, Ernakulam, has filed this appeal against the order of the Tribunal, Cochin Bench, in IT(S&S;)A No. 57/Coch/1997 in respect of the block assessment period from 1st April, 1986, to 17th June, 1996. The respondent-assessee is a company which is mainly engaged in the business of retreading the rubber. There was a search conducted by the IT Department on 17th June, 1996, in the business premises of the assessee-company and also the residence of the director. In response to a notice issued under Section 158BC of the Act, the respondent filed a return of income. The assessing authority completed the assessment determining the total undisclosed income of the block period from 1st April, 1986, to 17th June, 1996 to Rs. 13,96,100. In the present appeal, we are concerned with the disallowance under Section 40A(3) of the Act made in the said block assessment for the asst. yr. 1996-97. The respondent took up the matter in appeal before the Tribuna...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Issac John and Co.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-13-2002
Reported in: (2003)183CTR(Ker)160; [2003]263ITR579(Ker)
G. Sivarajan, J. 1. The following question of law has been referred to this Court under Section 256(1) of the IT Act, at the instance of the Revenue :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and also in the light of Expln. 1 to Section 271(1)(c), the Tribunal is right in law and fact in cancellng the penalty levied on the assessee ?'2. The respondent-assessee is a partnership-firm carrying on Abkari business. For the asst. yr. 1985-86, the assessee filed a return disclosing a total income of Rs. 11,91,800. In the course of the assessment proceedings, the AO verified the cash credit accounts appearing in the assessee's books of accounts. The assessing authority called for explanation from the assessee regarding the said cash credits. Pursuant to the said notice, the assessee furnished the details of the persons in whose name the credits are appearing in the books. The assessing authority thereupon issued summons to some such creditors which were returned, Some of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. Issac John and Co.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-13-2002
Reported in: [2003]130TAXMAN760(Ker)
G. Sivarajan, J.The following question of law has been referred to this court under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act at the instance of the revenue :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and also in the light of Explanation 1 to section 271(1)(c), the Tribunal is right in law and fact in cancelling the penalty levied on the assessee ?'2. The respondent assessee is a partnership firm carrying on abkari business. For the assessment year 1985-86, the assessee filed a return disclosing a total income of Rs. 1,91,800. In the course of the assessment proceedings, the assessing officer verified the cash credit accounts appearing in the assessee's Books of Account. The assessing authority called for explanation from the assessee regarding the said cash credits. Pursuant to the said notice, the assessee furnished the details of the persons in whose name the credits are appearing in the Books. The assessing authority thereupon issued summons to some such creditors which...
Tag this Judgment!Dy. Cit Vs. Eastern Retreads (P) Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-13-2002
Reported in: [2003]130TAXMAN474(Ker)
G. Sivarajan, J.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-II, Ernakulam has filed this appeal against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench in IT (S & S) A. No. 57/Coch./97 in respect of the block assessment period from 1-4-1986 to 17-6-1996. The respondent-assessee is a company which is mainly engaged in the business of retreading of rubber. There was a search conducted by the Income-tax department on 17-6-1996 in the business premises of the assessee-company and also the residence of the Director. In response to a notice issued under section 158BC of the Act, the respondent filed a return of income. The assessing authority completed the assessment determining the total undisclosed income of the block period from 1-4-1986 to 17-6-1996 at Rs. 13,96,100. In the present appeal, we are concerned with the disallowance under section 40A(3) of the Act made in the said block assessment for the assessment year 1996-97. The respondent took up the matter in app...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Dhanalakshmi Bank Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-12-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)KLT1076
G. Sivarajan, J.1. All these appeals are filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Trichur against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CochinBench. I.T.A.Nos. 16, 18, 19, 21 and 23 of 2001 arise out of a common order of the Tribunal in I.T.A.Nos. 883, 884, 885/Coch/90, 7 & 8/Coch/91 and 271/Coch/91 in the case of Dhanalakshmi Bank, Thrissur, (I.T.A.No. 11/01 filed against I.T.A.No. 883/90 which was disposed of by the Tribunal by the common order is being dealt with separately since one more question is involved in the said appeal). I.T.A. No.83/02 arises out of the order of the Tribunal in I.T.A. No.79/94 in respect of the assessment year 1990-91 in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd., Thrissur. Similarly I.T.A. Nos. 127/01 and 135/01 arise out of the order of the Tribunal in I.T.A. Nos. 295 & 296 of 1993 in respect of the assessment years 1988-89 and 1989-90 in the case of Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd., Thrissur. All these appeals are being disposed of by this judgment since the...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-12-2002
Reported in: (2003)183CTR(Ker)1; [2004]265ITR177(Ker)
G. Sivarajan, J. All these appeals are filed by the CIT, Trichur, against the order of the Income-tax Tribunal, Cochin Bench. IT Appeal Nos. 16, 18, 19, 21 and 23 of 2001 arise out of a common order of the Tribunal in ITA Nos. 883, 884, 885/Coch/1990, 7&8/Coch/1991 and 271/Coch/1991 in the case of Dhanalakshmi Bank, Thrissur. (IT Appeal No. 11/2001 filed against IT Appeal No. 883/1990 which was disposed of by the Tribunal by the common order is being dealt with separately since one more question is involved in the said appeal). IT Appeal No. 83/2002 arises out of the order of the Tribunal in IT Appeal No. 79/1994 in respect of the asst. yr. 1990-91 in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd., Thrissur. Similarly IT Appeal Nos. 127/2001 and 135/2001 arise out of the order of the Tribunal in IT Appeal Nos. 295 & 296 of 1993 in respect of the asst. yrs. 1988-89 and 1989-90 in the case of Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd., Thrissur. All these appeals are being disposed of by this judgment since the sole...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »