Kerala Court February 2003 Judgments
Kechery Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Income ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-25-2003
Reported in: (2003)182CTR(Ker)517; [2003]263ITR161(Ker); 2003(2)KLT32
G. Sivarajan, J. 1. The scope and ambit of Section 133(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') as amended by the Finance Act, 1995 arise for consideration in these appeals. All these writ appeals arise from a common judgment of the learned single Judge in O.P. No. 30610 of 2002 and connected cases. The petitioner in the writ petitions are the appellants. All the appellants are either co-operative societies or co-operative banks registered under the Co-operative Societies Act. Being aggrieved by a communication of the nature of Ext.P2 in O.P. No. 30610 of 2002 received from the Income Tax authority having jurisdiction over the petitioners calling for information such as a list of persons, who have made term/recurring deposits of Rs. 50,000/- and above as on date along with their complete postal addresses, etc. they have filed the writ petitions. In the notice it is stated that the information is required in connection with the investigation of the appellants' case and the s...
Tag this Judgment!Thomas Kurian Vs. Idukki District Co-operative Bank Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-25-2003
Reported in: (2003)IIILLJ1026Ker
R. Rajendra Babu, J.1. The petitioner, who retired from the service of the first respondent, Idukki District Co-operative Bank Limited as the General Manager, filed this original petition for quashing exhibit P-8 arbitration proceedings pending before the arbitrator and also to declare that the question regarding gratuity has to be decided by the fourth respondent, the Controlling Authority constituted under the Payment of Gratuity Act of 1972 (for short hereinafter referred to as 'the Gratuity Act'), in exhibit P-12 application pending before him.2. The petitioner who was an employee of the first respondent- bank, retired from service, as General Manager, after 35 years of service. According to him, his last drawn salary was Rs. 24,400 per month and in view of the provisions of the Gratuity Act, he was eligible for an amount of Rs. 4,92,692 towards gratuity, but the first respondent disbursed only an amount of Rs. 4,27,000 and hence he was entitled to a further amount of Rs. 65,692. I...
Tag this Judgment!B.K. Kamath Vs. Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-25-2003
Reported in: [2003]130TAXMAN435(Ker)
Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India guarantees the right to freely practice any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business subject to any law providing for reasonable restrictions in the interests of the general public. Institute of Chartered Accountants of India issued a notification specifying that a Chartered Accountant shall not accept more than the specified number of tax audit assignments referred to under section 44AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Does it amount to an unreasonable restriction 2. Ext. P1 notification issued by the first respondent is under challenge. By the said notification the first respondent introduced certain restrictions restricting the number of tax audit assignments under section 44AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to 30 in a financial year in the case of an individual Chartered Accountant irrespective of the fact that he is having a proprietary concern or a firm. Under section 44AB of the Income Tax Act every person carrying on bu...
Tag this Judgment!Chilton Refrigeration Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-25-2003
Reported in: [2004]138STC472(Ker)
G. Sivarajan, J.1. The matter arises under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (for short 'the Act').2. The assessee is the revision petitioner. The assessment year concerned is 1994-95. The assessee filed return for the said year disclosing a total and taxable turnover of Rs. 1,87,49,763.38 and Rs. 1,16,06,942 respectively. There was an inspection of the business premises of the assessee on May 26, 1995. The assessee had also compounded the offence and paid a compounding fee of Rs. 68,492. On the basis of the materials gathered in the inspection and the compounding proceedings the assessing authority rejected the return and estimated the turnover by making an addition of Rs. 13,99,314, i.e., 3 times the actual suppression of Rs. 4,66,438 found in the inspection. Being aggrieved by the said assessment the assessee filed an appeal before the Additional Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Agricultural Income-tax and Sales Tax, Ernakulam, who by his order dated June 28, 1997 (annexure 2) up...
Tag this Judgment!Rechery Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Cit
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-25-2003
Reported in: [2003]129TAXMAN335(Ker)
G. Sivarajan, J.M.The scope and ambit of section 133(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') as amended by the Finance Act. 1995 arise for consideration in these appeals. All these writ appeals arise from a common judgment of the learned Single Judge in O.P. No. 30610 of 2002 and connected cases. The petitioners in the writ petitions are the appellants. All the appellants are either co-operative societies or co-operative banks registered under the Co-operative Societies Act. Being aggrieved by a communication of the nature of Ext.P2 in O.P. No. 30610 of 2002 received from the Income Tax Authority having jurisdiction over the petitioners calling for information such as a list of persons, who have made term/recurring deposits of Rs. 50,000 and above as on date along with their complete postal addresses, etc. they have filed the writ petitions. In the notice it is stated that the information is required in connection with the investigation of the appellants c...
Tag this Judgment!Neela Lohitha Dasan Nadar Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-24-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ3327; 2003(1)KLT844
ORDERK.K. Denesan, J. 1. Revision petitioner is the sole accused in C.C. 2/2001 on the file of the court of Judicial Magistrate of the First Class III, Trivandrum. Commission of offence punishableunder Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code is alleged against the petitioner. Date of occurrence is 21.12.1999. FIR was registered on 20.2.2000 as Crime No. 47/2000 of Museum Police Station and subsequently renumbered as Crime No. 46/CR/2000 by the Crime Branch CID, Investigation, Trivandrum.2. On 25.2.2000 accused filed a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitutionbefore this Court as OP. No. 6210/00 in which the State of Kerala was respondentNo. 1 and the Director General of Police was respondent No. 2. Respondents 3 to 5were the Section H.O., Museum Police Station, the de facto complainant and the husbandof the de facto complainant respectively. The main prayer in the above O.P. was toquash Crime No. 47/2000 of the Museum Police Station. 3. A Division Bench of this Court disposed of...
Tag this Judgment!Shaji Vs. Ramachandran
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-24-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)KLT814
Jawahar Lal Gupta, C.J.1. Does a teacher have an indefeasible right to be appointed as the Headmaster/ Principal of the School merely on the basis of his seniority? Can the State Education Department compel the School Manager of an aided school to appoint the senior most teacher as the Head of the Institution despite the fact that criminal cases involving moral turpitude are pending against him? Primarily, these are the issues that arise in this bunch of cases.2. The post of Principal, S.N.V. Sanskrit Higher Secondary School, North Parur, is the bone of contention. The primary contestants are Mr. P.K. Ramachandran Nair (referred to as the petitioner) and Mr. M.V. Shaji (the sixth respondent). The contest between the two has led to these eight cases. Learned counsel for the parties are agreed that the facts as given in O.P. No. 28843 of 2002 may be noticed.3. The petitioner was appointed as a High School Assistant on July 15,1976. He has continued to hold this post. In the seniority lis...
Tag this Judgment!Bhima and Brother Jewellers and Diamond Merchants, Represented by Its ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-24-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Ker288; [2004]138STC343(Ker)
Abdul Gafoor, J.1. The order of the Board of Revenue is challenged in this appeal.2. Originally an order was passed against the appellant imposing a penalty in terms of Section 45 A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). That was challenged in an application before the Deputy Commissioner of Agricultural Income Tax and Sales tax, Alappuzha, as provided for in Sub-section (3) of that Section. The appellant succeeded in that application and the order imposing penalty was set aside. The Board of Revenue exercising its suo motu powers took up the matter for consideration and reversed the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Agricultural Income Tax and Sales Tax. That order is under challenge in this appeal.3. Appeal is provided to the High Court as per Section 40 of the said Act. Such an appeal is provided against an order passed under Section 37 or under Section 59 A of the Act. Section 37 of the Act which is relevant for the purpose of this appea...
Tag this Judgment!Sivadasan Vs. State
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-22-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)KLT100
ORDERR. Basant, J. 1. Does the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, hereinafter referred to as N.D.P.S. Act for short, which was enacted later completely bar a prosecution under Section 55(a) of the Kerala Abkari Act for possession of ganja is the crucial question raised in this Revision Petition. The revision petitioner assails the concurrent verdict of guilty, conviction and sentence imposed on him under Section 55(a) of the Kerala Abkari Act.2. The allegation against the petitioner is that at 9 a.m. on 2nd November 1989 when PWs. 1 and 2 were on patrol duty they intercepted the petitioner and he was found to keep in his possession 8 packets of ganja weighing about 15 grams at P.C. Road junction at Mukkom. PW.1 seized the contraband article under Ext.Pl mahazar. Ext.P2 first information report was registered. The case was transferred to P.W.3 the Excise Inspector. Ext.P3 is the occurrence report. Ext.P4 chemical analysis report was secured by P.W.3 and it was found that th...
Tag this Judgment!Girijan Vs. Registrar of Births and Deaths
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-21-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)KLT22
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J. 1. The petitioners are parents of a child whose name is registered in the birth registry of the Calicut Corporation as 'Bhagyalakshmi'. According to the petitioners, the name of the child is 'Bhagyasree' and the petitioners are entitled to change the name as sought for. The application submitted by the petitioners is seen rejected on the ground that there is no provision for change of name in the birth register. I do not think, this proposition is correct. The child is born only on 2.3.1999 and it has not reached the age to go to school to have the name entered in the school record. If the parents want to change the name of the child, they are free to do the same. So long as the second respondent is satisfied that the petitioners are the parents of the child whose birth is registered under Ext.P1,. he is bound to make correction of name in the birth register maintained by the Corporation. The Original Petition is disposed of vacating Ext.P5 order and directin...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »