Kerala Court September 2002 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Usman Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-10-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)KLT2
K. Balakrishnan Nair, J. 1. The petitioner, who is a Government servant, challenges Ext. P6 order dated 17.5.2002 of the competent authority, giving sanction under Section 19(1)(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for prosecuting him for various offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the Indian Penal Code. The brief facts, necessary for the disposal of the case are the following.2. The petitioner is an Agricultural Assistant working under the respondents. While he was working in the office of the Krishi Bhavan, Adatt, Thrissur, he was suspended from service alongwith others on 1.12.1999 by the 2nd respondent, Director of Agriculture, by Ext. P1 order. The Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau, later, registered Crime No. 2/00 on 14.3.2000 against the petitioner for offences under Sections 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and also under Sections 420, 468, 471 and 120(b) of the Indian Penal Code. The First Information R...
Deputy Commissioner Vs. Rama Shenoy
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-10-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)KLT720; [2004]138STC323(Ker)
G. Sivarajan, J.1. The question that arises for consideration in this Tax Revision Case is as to whether 'sugar candy' sold by the assessee falls within Entry 56 of the Third Schedule to the Kerala General Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') eligible for exemption from payment of sales tax under the Act.2. The Revenue is the revision petitioner. Respondent-assessee is engaged in the business as Indian Drugs Merchants. In the assessment under the Act for the year 1992-93 the assessee claimed exemption on the sales turnover of 'sugar candy'. The assessee's contention that 'sugar candy' is an item falling in category of sugar under Entry 56 of the Third Schedule to the Act was not accepted by the assessing authority. Assessee's appeal before the first appellate authority was unsuccessful. However, the Tribunal by order dated 23rd July, 1997 in T.A. No. 49 of 1996 allowed the appeal of the assessee holding that 'sugar will include sugar candy' and, therefore, it is exempte...
Well Worth Plastics Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-10-2002
Reported in: [2004]138STC550(Ker)
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The only issue raised in this revision petition by the assessee is that the Tribunal ought not have justified the demand of collected tax in the assessment year 1983-84 by invoking section 46A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. According to the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner, the revision petitioner by mistake collected excess tax and remitted the same to the Government. In the assessment the assessing officer assessed tax at the actual rate but demanded collected tax which is in excess of the tax assessed and due from the revision petitioner. The revision petitioner filed an appeal against the same stating that the revision petitioner ought to have been granted refund of the excess tax paid though collected and remitted by it to the Government. This was rejected by the appellate authority and the Tribunal also confirmed the action by the assessing officer by relying on section 46A of the Act, which provides for forfeiture of ...
Apollo Tyres Ltd. Vs. Sebastian
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-06-2002
Reported in: [2003(96)FLR1138]
S. Sankarasubban, J. 1. This appeal arises against the judgment and decree in A.S. No. 210 of 2000 on the file of the Sub Court, Irinjalakuda. Original Suit is O.S. No. 2098 of 1999 of the Munsiff's Court, Irinjalakuda. The facts of the case are as follows: 2. The respondent- plaintiff filed the suit for a declaration that he is still a workman and continues to be a workman under the appellant defendant and entitled for wages and all other consequential benefits and for a further declaration that the order transferring him to West Bengal is irregular and illegal. According to him, he is one of the founder members of the trade union - Apollo Tyres Workers' Association. He was working as Radial Tyre Builder. As a trade union leader, he was stern in advocating for the better interest and welfare of the workers and naturally it led to expose the plaintiff to the illwill of the management. 3. By 1999, the attitude of the management people against the plaintiff turned to hostile. A false cha...
Jamy Kuriakose Vs. Jomon Kuriakose
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-06-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Ker162; 2003(1)KLT411
ORDERK.A. Mohamed Shafi, J.1. The plaintiff in O.S. 304/1997 on the file of the Additional Sub Court, Kottayam is the revision petitioner. The suit was filed by the revision petitioner to set aside the sale deed No. 2283/1996 of Kidangoor Sub Registrar's Office on the grounds of fraud, undue influence, coercion etc. The plaintiff valued the suit at Rs. 82,000, the value of the property shown in the sale deed sought to be set aside.2. The 1st defendant filed LA. 181/98 under Section 12(2) of the Court Fees Act to direct the plaintiff to pay proper court fee. The lower court allowed the I.A. and directed the plaintiff to value the relief A claimed in the plaint at Rs. 5 lakhs and to pay court fee accordingly. 3. The fact that the suit is filed to set aside sale deed No. 2283/96 of Kidangoor Sub Registrar's Office for a consideration of Rs. 82,000 is not in dispute. The only question is what is the proper value of the plaint schedule property for payment of court fee in the suit. The plai...
K. Venugopalan Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-05-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ1427
ORDERT.M. Hassan Pillai, J.1. Heard.2. The ground urged in the Crl. M.C. for quashing Annexure-A final report filed by the police after investigation alleging commission of an offence punishable under S. 323, IPC by the petitioner (the offence is alleged to have been committed on 6-9-1993) invoking the powers of this Court under Section 482, Cr. P.C. is that the offence alleged to have been committed was committed as early as on 6-9-1993 and cognizance was taken by the learned Magistrate after the expiry of the period of limitation provided under Section 468(2)(b), Cr. P.C. for taking cognizance i.e. cognizance was taken three years after the alleged commission of the offence. Learned Counsel also contended that in view of the law laid down by the three Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in State of Himachal Pradesh v. Tara Dutt, AIR 2000 SC 297 : (2000 Cri LJ 485) and the decision of this Court in M/s. ECIYO Coconut Oils Private Ltd. v. State of Kerala, ILR (2002) 1 Ker 273 : (2002 Cri ...
The Mundakapadam Mandirams Society Vs. Cit
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-05-2002
Reported in: (2002)178CTR(Ker)79
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.The petitioner is a charitable society which was enjoying exemption under section 80G of the Income Tax Act until the year 1998-99. However, the facility was denied for the year 1999-2000 vide Ext. P3 communication again confirmed by the Commissioner on application under section 154 of the Income Tax Act vide Ext. P9. The registration under section 80G authorises the petitioner to receive donations for charitable purposes which enables the donor to claim exemption from tax upto 50 per cent of the donation. The petitioner is contesting Ext. P9 order whereunder section 80G benefit was denied to the petitioner by the Commissioner on the ground that an amount of Rs. 25,000 received as donation was invested in a private company which disentitles the petitioner for exemption under section 13(1)(d) read with section 11(5) of the Income Tax Act.2. I heard Sri. P. Balachandran, counsel for the petitioner, and Sri P.K.R. Menon, senior counsel for the respondent.3. The p...
Assistant Secretary, Board of Revenue (Taxes) Vs. P. Krishnaswamy Redd ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-04-2002
Reported in: [2003]131STC467(Ker)
S. Sankarasubban, J.1. This tax revision case is filed by the Revenue against the order in T.A. No. 133 of 1987 of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ernakulam. The assessment year in question is 1981-82. The facts of the case are as follows :2. The assessee is engaged in the manufacture and sale of polythene bags, etc. It is a small-scale industrial unit. It was established in 1978. At first, the assessee was collecting and remitting sales tax. In the meanwhile, the Government came out with a series of notifications granting exemption to the various types of SSI units from payment of sales tax with a view to promote industrial growth in the State. G.O. (P) No. 313/81/TD dated November 21, 1981 was issued by the Government and the Government granted sales tax exemption to all SSI units set up prior to April 1, 1979 for a period of five years. In the case of SSI units set up by the members belonging to the schedule caste/tribe community, woman entrepreneurs and mini industrial units, exe...
Elias Mathai Vs. Regional Transport Authority
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-03-2002
Reported in: I(2003)ACC204
R. Rajendra Babu, J.1. Sri. C.P. Mohammedali (the third respondent in OP 9605/2002) filed an application before the first respondent, R.T.A., Malappuram for the grant of regular permit in respect of his stage carriage to operate on the inter district route Kondotty-Palakkad as LSOS subject to counter signature of the R.T.A., Palakkad. By the proceedings dated 9.7.2001, the R.T.A., Malappuram (the first respondent) rejected the above application holding that the main focus of operation of the vehicle was in between Mannarkkad and Palakkad in Palakkad District and as such the first respondent had no jurisdiction to grant the permit. The above order was challenged by Sri. C.P. Mohammedali before the S.T.A.T. in M.V.A.A. No. 665/2001. By Ext. P7 order dated 15.11.2001 the S.T.A.T. allowed the appeal and directed the first respondent to consider the application for regular permit afresh. The petitioners, who are two existing stage carriage operators, filed O.P. No. 9605/2002 before this Cou...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Mahavir Plantations (P.) Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-03-2002
Reported in: [2003]260ITR233(Ker)
S. Sankarasubban, J.1. These references relate to the assessment years 1978-79 to 1981-82. The questions of law referred to this court are as follows :'Assessment year 1978-79 : 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the bank guarantee commission of Rs. 51,883 is revenue expenditure liable to be allowed as deduction ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in allowing weighted deduction under Section 35B of 75 per cent. of the expenditure on salary and bonus and 50 per cent. of the other ?3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the asses-see is entitled to weighted deduction on the interest paid on the shipping loan and in respect of a portion of the banking charges as expenditure incurred in India ?4. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the asses-see is entitled to weighted deduction on the expenditure incurred on packing materials and printing and if weighted deduction...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »