Kerala Court September 2002 Judgments
Omanakuttan Nair Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)KLT226
B.N. Srikrishna, C.J.1. These five writ petitions, though from different districts, raise same issues of facts and law, and hence, they can be conveniently disposed of by a common judgment.2. These petitions are filed in public interest by the petitioners who are practising advocates in different districts of Thiruvananthapuram, Ernakulam, Wayanad and Trissur. The petitions impugn Rules 7 and 8 of the Kerala Government Law Officers (Appointment and Conditions of Service) and Conduct of Cases Rules, 1978 as also the Kerala Government Law Officers (Appointment and Conditions of Service) and Conduct of Cases (Amendment) Rules, 2002.3. The Kerala Government Law Officers (Appointment and Conditions of Service) and Conduct of Cases Rules, 1978 (hereinafter called the '1978 Rules') were prescribed by the Government of Kerala purportedly in exercise of its powers under Section 2(1) of the Kerala Public Services Act, 1968. These rules prescribe the manner of appointment, duties and responsibili...
Tag this Judgment!Joseph John Vs. District Registrar
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)KLT360
ORDERR. Basant, J.1. Aggrieved by the judgment dated 28th March, 2001 in C.M. A. 12 of 1998 passed under Section 45(B) of the Kerala Stamp Act the revision petitioner has preferred this Revision Petition. By the impugned judgment the learned District Judge, Alappuzha had dismissed the appeal filed by the revision petitioner under Section 45(B)(4) of the Kerala Stamp Act.2. Notice was given to learned Government Pleader. Arguments have been heard.3. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submits that the revision petitioner does not want to and had never requested that the proceedings against him underSection 45(B) may be compounded under the scheme for composition. Notice, dated 26.12.1997 produced alongwith the Memorandum of revision only informs the revision petitioner that he can take advantage of the scheme for compounding. The revision petitioner was never willing and is not inclined to take advantage of the scheme for composition. In these circumstances the learned Distr...
Tag this Judgment!Sn. ZubIn George Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: (2003)183CTR(Ker)179; [2004]265ITR683(Ker)
G. Sivarajan, J. 1. The matter arises under the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'). The assessee is the appellant. The assessment year concerned is 1990-91,2. The brief facts which are necessary for decision of this case are as follows : The assessee was a partner in a firm by name M/s Mettallieds doing business in steel. The said firm was doing agency business for the company M/s Pennar . Steels Ltd. The firm had made deposit with the company for the purpose of agency and later when the company, Pennar Steels Ltd. became a public limited company the deposit standing to the credit of the firm in the accounts of the company was transferred to the credit of the partners of the firm towards share deposit account on 31st March, 1988. The assessee was issued share certificates with distinctive numbers on 31st May, 1988. Out of the said shares the assessee had sold 5,200 shares during the previous year relevant to the asst. yr. 1990-91 and declared the gains arising from the transfer...
Tag this Judgment!National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sheebath Rahiman Beevi
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: III(2003)ACC652; 2004ACJ295; 2003(3)KLT238
K.A. Abdul Gafoor, J. 1. The insurer has come up with this appeal impugning the award in O.P. (MV) 1210/87 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam. A vehicle owned by the Cochin Port Trust met with an accident and one Iqbal succumbed to injuries. Respondents 1 to 5 in the appeal approached the Tribunal. Though claimants had claimed a larger amount they limited their claim to Rs. 4 lakhs. The Tribunal found that the deceased had also contributed his part for the occurrence of the accident to the extent of 25%. The Tribunal found that the claimants were entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 4,18,000/- and deducted 25% therefrom and awarded a sum of Rs. 3,99,000/-. This award is under challenge at the instance of the insurer.2. Three contentions are urged; (i) thereis limit of liability in terms of policy Ext.B4 under Section 95(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, (ii) it is a private carrier as defined in terms of Section 2(22) of the Motor Vehicles Act and (iii) ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Air Travel Enterprises India Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: (2004)188CTR(Ker)33; [2004]265ITR537(Ker)
1. The respondent is the assessee. The assessee is a private limited company carrying on business in travel agencies and as operator of tourist vehicles. The assessment year concerned is 1992-93.2. The substantial questions of law on which the appeal by the Revenue is admitted read as follows :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and also in the light of the admission of the assessee that the vehicle was run only on April 1, 1992, the assessee is entitled to depreciation for the assessment year 1992-93 ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that registration for operating as a contract carriage was obtained on May 5, 1992, is not depreciation admissible only from the assessment year 1993-94 ?'3. The facts on record are that the assessee purchased a vehicle and took delivery of the same on March 30, 1992. There was a temporary registration obtained in respect of the vehicle as KL-7/2169/92-E valid up to April 24, ...
Tag this Judgment!Sn. ZubIn George Vs. Cit
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: [2003]130TAXMAN778(Ker)
G. Sivarajan, J.The matter arises under the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The assessee is the appellant. The assessment year concerned is 1990-91.2. The brief facts which are necessary for decision of this case are as follows : The assessee was a partner in a firm by name M/s. Mettallieds doing business in steel. The said firm was doing agency business for the company M/s. Pennar Steels Ltd. The firm had made deposit with the company for the purpose of agency and later when the company, Pennar Steels Ltd. became a public limited company the deposit standing to the credit of the firm in the accounts of the company was transferred to the credit of the partners of the firm towards share deposit account on 31-3-1988. The assessee was issued share certificates with distinctive numbers on 31-5-1988. Out of the said shares the assessee had sold 5200 share during the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1990-91 and declared the gains arising from the tra...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. N.T. John
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-27-2002
Reported in: (2003)179CTR(Ker)473; [2003]259ITR224(Ker)
S. Sankarasubban, J.1. This Writ Appeal is tiled against the judgment of a learned Single Judge in O.P. No. 12087 of 1996. The Original Petition was filed by the respondents for quashing Ext. P4 notice relating to the assessment year 1993-94 and to command the second respondent to issue notices under Section 158BC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for the block period. The facts of the case are as follows:2. Respondent (petitioner in the Original Petition) is a practising Advocate with 20 years of standing in the bar. He has been assessed to income tax for the last 10 years. His assessments are up-to-date and there is no arrears of tax due to the Department. In his latest assessment, he had disclosed a total income of Rs. 95,180/- for the assessment year 1995-96 and the same was accepted under Section 143(1) of the Act.3. On 23.2.1996, the petitioner's place was searched under the powers conferred on the Income Tax Authorities by Section 132 of the Act....
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Gift Tax Vs. P.M. Abraham and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-27-2002
Reported in: (2003)179CTR(Ker)409; [2004]265ITR430(Ker)
G. Sivarajan, J. 1. The following questions are referred under Section 26(1) of the GT Act, 1958, for decision at the instance of the Revenue: '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, was the Tribunal right in law and fact in finding that property gifted in this case cannot be viewed as a gift, within the meaning of the GT Act? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that whether the assessee is entitled to exemption under Section 5(1)(vii) of the GT Act does not arise?' 2. The matter arises under the GT Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The assessment year concerned is 1988-89. The respondent-assessee is an individual owning about 30 acres of rubber estate in Punalur. Out of the above, he had gifted one acre of rubber estate to his daughter at the time of her marriage as per a registered document No. 3562 of 1987, dt. 3rd Nov., 1987. For the asst. yr. 1988-89, the assessee filed a r...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ram Bahadur Thakur Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-26-2002
Reported in: [2003]261ITR388(Ker)
S. Sankarasubban , J. 1. The questions of law referred to us are as follows: 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case :(i) the expenditure incurred on the foreign travel of the wives of the directors is an allowable deduction ? (ii) should not the Tribunal have considered the claim independently and on merits ?' 2. The assessee claimed allowance of foreign travel expenses of the wives and directors. On scrutiny of the accounts the officer found that Mrs. A. Sharma, the wife of director Sri C. B. Sharma, and Mrs. M. M. Sharma, the wife of another director Sri M. M. Sharma accompanied their husbands abroad for which purpose the company incurred total expenditure of Rs. 62,302. The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim on the ground that the expenditure was not incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business. Before the appellate authority, the assessee relied on the decision of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay Bench 'A' (Special Bench) in the ...
Tag this Judgment!Sivasankara Kaimal Vs. University of Calicut
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-26-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)KLT146
K.A. Abdul Gafoor, J. 1. An interesting question arises in these appeals-, whether coaches appointed by the University for different games and athletics are 'teachers of the University' as defined in Section 2(28) of the Calicut University Act. If the answer is in the affirmative, necessarily, they can continue in service until they attain the age of 60 years. On the other hand, if the answer is in the negative, they being members of non-teaching staff, have to retire on superannuation on completion of the age of 55 years going by the provisions contained in the first statutes. The learned single Judge answered this question in the negative and dismissed the Writ Petitions. So these appeals.2. All the appellants except that in W.A. No. 2174/99 had retired from service. They continued until the age of 60 years on the strength of interim orders passed in the respective Original Petitions. The appellant in W.A. No. 2174/99 is still continuing in service, though he had crossed the age of 5...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »