Kerala Court May 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.
Cit Vs. Mahavir Plantations Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-22-2003
Reported in: [2005]142TAXMAN538(Ker)
G. Sivarajan, J.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, has referred the following question of law, for decision by this court at the instance of the revenue, pursuant to the direction issued by this court in O.P. No. 2033 of 1996.'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the tea development allowance under section 33AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, must be in relation to the income of the business of growing and manufacturing tea, rather than to the taxable portion of such income?'2. The brief facts necessary for decision of the above question are as follows. The respondent-assessee is a limited company engaged in the cultivation and manufacture of tea. During the accounting period relevant to the assessment year 1986-87, the assessee had deposited a sum of Rs. 18 lakhs under section 33AB(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the Act, and claimed the entire deposit as deduction. The assessing ...
Pauly Vs. Trichur District Co-operative Bank Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-21-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)KLT871
R. Rajendra Babu, J.1. K.P. Pauly who was presently working as Executive Officer/Senior Manager of the Head Office, Trichur District Co-operative Bank, Thrissur, filed this O.P. mainly for quashing Ext. P6 order passed by the 2nd respondent, the Registrar of Co-operative Societies rescinding the resolution of the 1st respondent, Trichur District Co-operative Bank, grunting exemption to the petitioner from the minimum educational qualification for the promotion to the post of Executive Officer and also to quash Rules 185 and 186 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules prescribing new qualifications., The petitioner entered in the service of the 1st respondent as a Clerk on 7.10.1977. He was an undergraduate, but had completed the B.Sc. Course and passed Junior Diploma in Co-operation. He was promoted as Senior Accountant and later as Branch Manager. At the time of promoting him as the Branch Manager, the 1st respondent bank resolved for granting exemption from the educational qualifi...
TolIn Rubbers (P) Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-21-2003
Reported in: (2003)184CTR(Ker)241; [2003]264ITR439(Ker)
K. Balakrishnan Nair, J. 1. The petitioner is a company registered under the Companies Act. It is an assessee under the IT Act. It feels aggrieved by Exts P7 to P12 orders passed by the Asstt. CIT, Circle I, Aluva, who is the concerned AO. They are orders assessing/reassessing income, which has escaped assessment, under Section 147 r/w Section 143(3) of the IT Act for the asst. yrs. 1996-97 to 2001-02. The petitioner has got effective statutory remedies against those orders. They are appealable under Section 246A(1)(b). The appellate authority is the CIT(A). If the petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A) disposing of the appeals under Section 250, it has got a further remedy of appeal to the Tribunal under Section 253(1)(a). On substantial questions of law, the petitioner has got a right of further appeal to this Court under Section 260A of the Act.2. But, the petitioner has chosen to approach this Court directly by passing the statutory authorities.The ground for making suc...
Alwaye Sugar Agency Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-21-2003
Reported in: [2004]138STC487(Ker)
G. Sivarajan, J.1. The matter arises under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (for short, 'the Act')- Assessee is the revision petitioner. State is the respondent. Assessment year is 1993-94.2. Petitioner is a dealer in Rasna products, furniture and rubber seal. The assessment of the petitioner for the year 1993-94 was completed as per order dated December 28, 1995 (annexure I). In the said assessment the assessing authority had made an addition of 5 per cent of the turnover of furniture for certain defects. The assessing authority had also denied exemption in respect of the sales turnover of furniture sold to Cochin Export Processing Zone. The assessing authority had also denied deduction of the turnover relating to sales return,. Being aggrieved by the assessment, the petitioner filed appeal before the Additional Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax and Sales Tax I, Ernakulam, who by its order dated February 3, 1997 (annexure II), dismissed the appeal. In t...
TolIn Rubbers (P) Ltd. Vs. Asstt. Cit
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-21-2003
Reported in: [2003]130TAXMAN546(Ker)
The petitioner is a Company registered under the Companies Act. It is an assessee under the Income Tax Act. It feels aggrieved by Exhibits .P7 to P12 orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1, Aluva who is the concerned assessing officer. They are orders assessing/reassessing income, which has escaped assessment, under section 147 read with section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act for the assessment years 1996-97 to 2001-02. The petitioner has got effective statutory remedies against. those orders. They are appealable under section 246A(1)(b). The appellate authority is the Commissioner (Appeals). If the petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeals under section 250, it has got a further remedy of appeal to the Appellate Tribunal under section 253(1)(a). On substantial questions of law, the petitioner has got a right of further appeal to this court under section 260A of the Act.2. But, the petitioner has chosen to app...
Kuhikuttan Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-21-2003
Reported in: [2006]143STC305(Ker)
G. Sivarajan, J.1. The assessee is the revision petitioner. State is the respondent. Assessment year is 1991-92.2. The petitioner is running a jewellery shop in the name and style of 'Sangeetha Jewellery', at Koyilandy. For the assessment year 1991-92, the assessee filed a return disclosing a taxable turnover of Rs. 1,55,705. The assessing authority rejected the return and accounts and completed the assessment on the turnover of Rs. 4,40,540. Being aggrieved by the said assessment the assessee filed an appeal before the Additional Appellate Assistant Commissioner I AIT & ST, Kozhikkode who by its order dated May 2, 1995 (annexure B) modified the assessment by sustaining a total addition of Rs. 7,500. Being aggrieved, the State filed appeal before the Tribunal. The same was dismissed as per order dated April 15, 2000 (annexure C). Subsequently the Tribunal issued a notice under Section 43 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 for rectification of the said appellate order and passed ...
Usman Vs. S.i. of Police
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-03-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ3928; 2003(2)KLT594
ORDERR. Basant, J.1. Does an accused apprehending arrest or arrested already have an unfettered option to approach this Court under Section 438 or 439 Crl. P.C.? Cannot this Court in the interests of justice, expediency and convenience insist, (re) introduce and enforce compliance with the salutory and accepted rule of procedure that where two fora have concurrent powers the forum lower in the hierarchy must be approached before the doors of the superior one are knocked? These interesting questions arise for determination in these Crl. M.Cs.2. The facts scenario is simple. Crl. M.C. 3265 of 2003 is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Crl. P.C. The accused apprehends arrest in a crime registered under Sections 498A and 306 I.P.C. Crl. M.C. 3391 of 2003 is a petition for regular bail under Section 439 Crl. P.C. where the accused has already been arrested on 4.4.2003 on the allegation that he has committed offences punishable under Section 55(a) of the Kerala Abkari Act...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›