Kerala Court February 2003 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.
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Indo Marine Agencies (Kerala) (P) Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-19-2003
Reported in: (2005)196CTR(Ker)383; [2005]279ITR372(Ker)
S. Sankarasubban, J.1. These references are at the instance of the Revenue and the assessee questions of law referred to are as follows :'1. Was the Tribunal justified in law in holding that the assessment was validly reopened under Clause (c) of Expln. 2 to Section 147 of the IT Act in the circumstances of the case (By the assessee)2. Was the Tribunal justified in the circumstances of the case that the profit on sale of capital asset is to be reckoned in computing the book profit under Section 115J of the IT Act, 1961 (By the assessee)3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the assessee is entitled to set off of the amount of loss or the amount of depreciation whichever is less in respect of past years against the profits of the year ending on 30th Sept., 1987 relevant to the asst. yr. 1988-89 (By the Revenue)4. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and the Circular of the Board being in accordanc...
Cit Vs. Vrindavan Hotels (P) Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-19-2003
Reported in: [2003]129TAXMAN829(Ker)
S. Sankarasubban, J.This appeal is filed by the Commissioner Cochin against the judgment of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench in ITA No. 124/Coch/93. Assessee is a company engaged in the business of running a hotel. For the assessment year 1988-89, the assessee-company claimed 100 per cent depreciation on furniture items costing less than Rs. 5,000. While completing the assessment, the assessing officer disallowed this claim on the ground that these items cannot be considered as plant and machinery. In appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) held against the assessee. In further appeal to the Tribunal, the Tribunal relying on the decision in CIT v. Taj Mahal Hotel : [1971]82ITR44(SC) held that the assessee is entitled to 100percent depreciation on the furniture in hotel as such furniture items constitute plant.2. According to the appellant, the above decision is not correct. Learned counsel for the appellant brought to our notice Appendix I, rule 125. This is with regard to de...
Anil Kumar P.K. S/O. P.R. Kumaran Vs. State of Kerala, Rep. by Secreta ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-18-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)KLT286
R. Rajendra Babu, J. 1. The petitioner, a resident of Ward No. 18 of Muvattupuzha Municipality, filed this O.P. for directing respondents 2, 3 and 4 to take immediate steps to prevent respondents 6 and 7 from proceeding with the construction work of the cemetery in the six cents of property in Marady village for the Brotheren Assembly without obtaining the licence or sanction from the concerned authorities. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, respondents 6 to 8 and the learned Govt. Pleader. 3. The Bretheren Assembly purchased 6 cents of property by Ext. R6(c) document dt. 11.3.1986 for the purpose of using it as a graveyard, from the C.S.I. East Kerala Maha Edavaka. the 6 cents of property covered by Ex.R6(c) was part of 1 acre 33 cents of land held by the C.S.I. Edavaka. The document would reveal that the property was being used as a graveyard for the last several years. When respondents 6 and 7 started construction of a graveyard consisting of concrete slabs and cells, ...
United India Insurance Company Ltd., Represented by Its Manager, Motor ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-18-2003
Reported in: III(2004)ACC193; 2003ACJ2159
Abdul Gafoor, J. 1. The petitioner in O.P. (MV) No. 799/91 claimed compensation for the damages suffered to his vehicle. The appellant is the insurer of that vehicle. An amount of Rs. 24,700/- had been directed to be paid by the appellant. He has been given permission to recover the said amount. It is contended that as the driver did not have the driving licence at the time of accident, the insurer cannot be mulcted with the liability. The compensation payable in terms of the accident is in excess of what is payable in terms of the policy. Therefore, the award is bad. 2. Under Section 147(2)(b) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 the compensation payable by an insurer for the damages sustained to the property is limited to Rs. 6,000/-. Even if the driver did not have the licence at the time of the accident, the insurer will have the liability only to pay that much amount and not in excess of the same. It is contended by the owner that the insurer can later recover the entire amount awarded...
MerlIn Thomas Vs. C.S. Thomas
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-18-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Ker232
Thankappan, J.1. Both the appeals are filed against the order of the Family court, Kottayam at Ettumanoor in O.P. (G & W) No. 554/2000. The custody of a minor child, Arya Rose Mary, aged 6 years, is the subject matter of the Original Petition. The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnised on 11th February, 1995 at Cathedral Church, Changanacherry as per Christian rites. The child was born on 3-1-1996. The married life between the parties were happy for some time. The petitioner/husband is young and well educated and is working in the office of the Divisional Office, LIC of India, Kottayam. The respondent wife is also young and educated. Later, the marital relationship of the petitioner and the respondent became strained due to suspicious nature of the parties and even alleging mental disorder against each other. At last the respondent left the company of the petitioner and started living, with the child, in her parental house. Mediators including heads of religi...
Koshy P. John Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-18-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)KLT918
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The petitioners in all these cases are challenging the constitutional validly of Section 5A of the Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975, hereinafter called 'the Act' which provides for the levy of luxury tax at a flat rate of Rs. 2000 payable every year on residential buildings with plinth area of 278.7 Square Metres or more and the construction of which is completed on or after 1st April, 1999. Though the challenge is essentially on the constitutional validly of Section 5A the Act, in some cases there is factual dispute with regard to the plinth area assessed.2. I heard the various counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. The respondents have also filed a counter in O.P. 13766/2002 with a prayer to treat its counter affidavit for all the cases. The impugned Section is extracted hereunder.'5A. Charge of luxury tax :- (i) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be charge a lux...
State of Kerala Vs. Pushpagiri Medical Society
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-17-2003
Reported in: 2003(1)KLT923
ORDERJawahar Lal Gupta, C.J.1. Is the decision given by the Bench on January 20, 2003 in the two petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution not in conformity with the judgment of the Supreme Court in T.M.A. Pai's case? This is the core of the controversy in the five Review Petitions filed by the respondents in the two cases. The other Review Petitions have been filed by persons who were not parties in the Original Petitions. Thus, they have sought the leave of the Court to file the Review Petitions. Hence, the two Misc. Petitions. The facts as emerging from the records of O.P. No. 39420 of 2002 (Pushpagiri Medical Society v. State of Kerala and Ors) may be briefly noticed.2. In March 2002, the State of Kerala issued a prospectus for admission to the medical colleges in the State for the year 2002-03. In pursuance to the stipulation in the prospectus, an entrance examination was conducted. The selected candidates were admitted to the institutions existing at that time.3. On October...
Usman Koya Vs. Santha
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-17-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Ker191; 2003(1)KLT940
M.R. Hariharan Nair, J.1. The 1st plaintiff in a suit for specific performance filed as O.S. No. 126/9(5 of the Sub Court, Kozhikode, has come up in appeal challenging the dismissal of the suit. The 2nd plaintiff is now impleaded as the 2nd respondent.2. The plaintiffs contended that the schedule building which is actually one of the seven rooms in a larger building was entrusted to them by the defendant (1st respondent) on 1.4.1987 as per Ext. A1 agreement providing for rent of Rs. 335/- per mensem and that the 1st respondent along with his partner- 2nd plaintiff was thereunder conducting a business therein.3. The background in which the agreement was executed was the present 1st respondent's initiating R.C.P.No. 41/88 against various sub-tenants. The purport ofthe agreement was that even if R.C.P. 41/88 was allowed, the 1st plaintiff would not be evicted from his portion of the building while the other sub-tenants would be evicted. The 1st plaintiff had paid a sum of Rs. 10,000/- and...
P.J. Abraham, Ex. Addl. Chief Mech. Engineer Vs. Union of India (Uoi), ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-17-2003
Reported in: [2003(97)FLR511]
Jawahar Lal Gupta, C.J.1. The petitioner joined Indian Railways as an Assistant Mechanical Engineer on April 16, 1956. On March 1, 1983, he was sent on deputation to a Public Sector Undertaking - Balmer Lawrie and Company Ltd. On August 31, 1983, the petitioner was petitioner was permanently absorbed in the company. 2. On his absorption in the Company, the petitioner claimed retrial benefits from the Railways. He was asked to exercise an option in terms of the Circular issued by the Indian Railways vide letter dated February 18, 1970. The petitioner had the choice of accepting monthly pension or a lump sum amount of money. The petitioner had opted for the lump sum payment. As a result, the petitioner was paid, as stated by his counsel, an amount of Rs. 1,63,422/-. 3. On April 16, 1987, the benefit of liberalised pension was granted to the persons who had opted for payment of monthly pension. Thus, the amount of pension was revised. The petitioner approached the authorities with the req...
Paul Mathews and Sons Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-17-2003
Reported in: (2003)181CTR(Ker)207; [2003]263ITR101(Ker)
ORDERDeclaration made during survey not accepted by assessing officer in mechanical way--Evidentiary value of statement made during surveyCatch Note:Assessee made certain disclosure during course of survey--Assessing officer while completing assessment did not mechanically accept disclosure made during course of survey but also considered other aspects of the matter--On the basis of admission made during survey by managing partner, assessing officer made addition of unexplained advances--As statement made during course of survey has no evidentiary value assessing officer completed assessment which was revised by commissioner holding same as erroneous and prejudicial to revenue--The Tribunal upheld order passed under section 263--Was not justified--Material collected during course of survey had been borne in mind by assessing officer, who was well aware of evidentiary value of statement, and after considering materials available on record, assessment was completed by assessing officer w...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »