Kerala Court December 2006 Judgments
First Leasing Company of India Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-21-2006
Reported in: (2007)6VST805(Ker)
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The petitioner-assessee, a company with head office at Chennai, has operations all over India including in the State of Kerala. It is engaged in leasing of equipments on rental basis and it is also selling goods under hire-purchase scheme. The assessing officer, under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 hereinafter called the 'the KGST Act', assessed lease rentals and hire charges received by the petitioner in Kerala for sales tax. Even though the petitioner filed successive appeals, assessments were confirmed by the appellate authorities, including the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. These tax revision cases are filed in this court against the final orders of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal upholding the levy.2. The assessments involved are for the years 1989-90 to 1991-92 and from 1994-95 to 1997-98. The revisions for the first three years are reaching this court a second round. In the first round of revisions against orders of Tribunal upholding assess...
Tag this Judgment!Mani Madavalappil Vs. C.i. of Police
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-21-2006
Reported in: 2007CriLJ1755
ORDERK. Hema, J.1. Will an appeal filed against the conviction and sentence, which includes fine also, abate on death of appellant, if no legal heir obtains leave of Court to continue appeal This short question is to be answered in this revision.2. This revision is filed by the son of the deceased accused. The accused was convicted and sentenced by learned Assistant Sessions Judge for offence under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 2 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 30,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of four months. It was also ordered that, on payment of fine by the accused, Rs. 25.000/- shall be paid to P.W. 8, the victim.3. The deceased-accused was originally charge-sheeted for offence under Sections 511 of 376 and 377 of Indian Penal Code on the allegation that such offences were committed against P.W. 8. After trial, on an analysis of the evidence adduced in the case, the trial Co...
Tag this Judgment!Bharath Coffee House Vs. Regional Director, Employees State Insurance ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-21-2006
Reported in: (2007)IILLJ995Ker
K.T. Sankaran, J.1. The question involved in this case is whether the principal employer can contend that he is not liable to pay interest on the E.S.I. Contribution for the period during which he himself had obtained stay of collection of E.S.I dues.2. The appellant herein, Bharath Coffee House is the principal employer. There are more than 10 workmen employed in the establishment of the appellant. When notices were issued by the Employees State Insurance Corporation holding that hotels and restaurants are covered establishments coming within the purview of the Employees State Insurance Act and the Rules framed thereunder and calling upon the appellant to comply with the various provisions of the Act, the appellant filed O.P. No. 1863/1991 challenging the notices. Interim stay was granted in the Original Petition. O.P. No. 1863/1991 was disposed of along with connected cases as per the judgment dated March 7, 1995. The contention raised by the appellant herein that hotels and restaura...
Tag this Judgment!George Vs. Kamarudheen and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-21-2006
Reported in: IV(2007)BC183; [2007]139CompCas27(Ker); 2007(1)KLJ148
ORDERK.T. Sankaran, J.1. The Trial Court found the petitioner/accused guilty of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. He was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. The accused was also directed to pay a compensation of Rs. 75,000/- to the first respondent-complainant under Section 357(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and in default of payment of compensation, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten days. The petitioner-accused challenged the conviction and sentence in appeal. The Appellate Court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the conviction and sentence.2. The case of the first respondent-complainant is that the accused borrowed an amount of Rs. 75,000/- on 10.5.1999 and in discharge of that debt/liability, the accused issued Ext. PI cheque dated 14.8.1999. On presentation of the cheque, it was dishonoured on the ground of insufficiency of funds in the account maintained by the accused. Ext. P4 notice dated 6.12.1999 wa...
Tag this Judgment!State of Kerala Vs. Universal Enterprises
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-21-2006
Reported in: (2008)11VST439(Ker)
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The short question arising in these connected tax revision cases pertaining to two assessees is whether they are liable to pay purchase tax under Section 5A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, hereinafter called 'the Act' on the purchase turnover of red oil which was converted by them in their factory to sandalwood oil and sold by them as such. The assessments pertain to the years 1989-90 to 1995-96. Since the main order of the Tribunal is produced in T.R.C. No. 419 of 2000 the facts referred to in the said T.R.C. are considered by us for our decision. In fact all the subsequent orders of the Tribunal are based on their order produced in T.R.C. No. 419 of 2000.2. The assessees were admittedly engaged in massive purchase of red oil from unregistered dealers who have not collected or remitted any sales tax on their sales to the assessees. Red oil is manufactured out of sandalwood, source of which is only forest in Kerala and Karnataka. In fact the asse...
Tag this Judgment!Parukutty Amma Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-20-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)KLT365
V.K. Bali, C.J.1. K. Parukutty Amma, the petitioner herein, is the widow of late Justice M. Madhavan Nair who was elevated as Judge of this Court on 22.6.1960 and on attaining the age of superannuation retired on 1.11.1970. In the present writ filed by her under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, she sought the following reliefs:(i) Declare that the words restricting the application of the High Court and Supreme Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions of Service) Amendment Act, 1986 to High Court Judges who retired on or after its commencement are arbitrary, discriminatory and liable to be struck down as violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India;(ii) Declare that the heirs of High Court Judges who retired before the commencement of High Court and Supreme Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions of Service) Amendment Act, 1986, are also entitled for family pension at the present rate of Rs. 7,800/- per month;(iii) Declare that the amendment brought by the High Court Judges ...
Tag this Judgment!Leonard Ashok Vs. Commercial Tax Officer
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-20-2006
Reported in: AIR2007Ker87; 2007(1)KLT237;
Kurian Joseph, J.1. What is the court fee to be paid in a Writ Petition challengingseveral orders on the same set of facts and on same grounds is the question to be considered in this case. The matter was placed before us by reference order dated 28th July 2006 of the Division Bench. It would be profitable to refer to the factual matrix in order to appreciate the issue. Petitioner is an assessee under the provisions of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003. According to him on account of continuous loss he had stopped production during June 2005 upon due intimation. On account of the stoppage of production statutory monthly returns were not filed. It is the contention of the petitioner that though there was due intimation regarding the closure of business, notice on the proposal to levy penalty was issued in the same address and thereafter penalty orders were passed for failure to file monthly returns for the months of April 2005 to February 2006. The orders are marked as Exts. P1 to P1...
Tag this Judgment!A.i. Kurian Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-20-2006
Reported in: (2007)209CTR(Ker)256; [2007]291ITR262(Ker)
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The petitioner is challenging revisional orders of the CIT issued for the asst. yrs. 1995-96 and 1996-97 sustaining disallowance of petitioner's claim for deduction of salary paid to driver and depreciation in respect of car made by the AO in the course of proceedings issued under Section 143(1)(a) of the IT Act (hereinafter called 'the Act'). The petitioner assessee returned income under the head 'Income from salary, income from house property, capital gains and also income from other sources' for both the assessment years. It is seen in the statements accompanying the returns that the assessee claimed deduction of salary paid to driver amounting to Rs. 32,000 and Rs. 20,000 towards depreciation for the car for both the years in the computation of income under the head 'Income from other sources'. The AO accepted the return in all other respects except in regard to claim of deduction towards driver's salary and depreciation in respect of car made by the pe...
Tag this Judgment!Lakshmi and anr. Vs. Nalini
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-20-2006
Reported in: 2008(1)KLJ123
M.N. Krishnan, J.1. This is an appeal preferred against the order of the Principal Sub Judge, Irinjalakkuda in Succ. O.P. No. 31 of 2001.2. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of the appeal are stated as follows: Petitioners herein are the mother and nephew of one Jayaprakash, who died on 16-10-2001 and the respondent is his widow. The family of Jayaprakash consisted of the mother, son, sister and wife. It is the case of the petitioners that Jayaprakash has executed a Will on 12-4-2000 by virtue of which all his assets were to develope upon the mother, viz., the first petitioner and the nephew, viz., Sivan, who is the second petitioner. In case of the mother pre-deceasing Jayaprakash the assets have to go to the other children of the first petitioner's daughter Sarala, viz., Haridas and Rajesh. According to the petitioners, the relationship between Jayaprakash and his wife, viz., the respondent was strained and she had voluntarily deserted him and never cared to look after him a...
Tag this Judgment!K.C. Nanu Vs. N. Vijayan and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-20-2006
Reported in: 2008(1)KLJ327
J.B. Koshy, J.1. Contending that cheque issued by the respondent for Rs. 10,000/- in lieu of valid consideration was dishonoured for insufficiency of funds, a complaint was filed by the appellant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Complaint was rejected and accused was acquitted as cheque was presented after six months. According to the appellant, date of issue shall be excluded in calculating six months period in presenting the cheque.2. Section 138 proviso (a) reads as follows:the cheque has been presented to thee bank within a period of six months from the date on which it is drawn or within the period of its validity, whichever is earlier.3. Period of limitation has to be reckoned from the date on which the cheque was drawn. Date of cheque cannot be excluded in calculating the period of six months prescribed in Section 138. Provisions of Negotiable Instruments Act as held by the Apex Court in Jiwanlal v. Rameswarlal : [1967]1SCR190 , K.V. Muhammed Kunhi v. P. Jana...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »