Kerala Court June 2006 Judgments
State of Kerala Vs. CochIn Shipyard Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-30-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)KLT380; [2006]148STC332(Ker)
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. This Tax Revision Case arises out of the order passed by the Sales tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Ernakulam in T.A. No 651 of 1992. The assessee is a public sector undertaking, Cochin Shipyard Limited, engaged in the design, construction and supply of ocean going vessels. The company is registered as a dealer under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. For the assessment year 1981-82 the assessee declared a total and taxable turnover of Rs. 41,95,586.36 which consists mainly of sale of waste materials like steel scrap and other scrap items and used as unserviceable articles. On examination of the books of accounts it was noticed by the assessing authority that the assessee had paid water charges amounting to Rs. 3,92,111.53 during 1981-82, the water was consumed by the assessee otherwise than by way of sale and that the return filed by the assessee had not shown the amount under taxable item though the same is liable to tax under Section 5A of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Kerala State Ware Housing Corporation R.E. Assn. Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-30-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)KLT772
K. Thankappan, J.1. Aggrieved by condition Nos. 3,4,6,7 and 8 in Ext.P12 order, by which the Government gave sanction for introducing Pension Scheme to the employees in the Kerala State Warehousing Corporation who retired from the service of the Corporation before 1-2-1996, the petitioner association has approached this Court.2. The 2nd respondent Corporation had passed Ext.P2 resolution to introduce the Pension Scheme to the employees of the Corporation in lieu of contributory Provident Fund with the approval of the Government. While the matter was pending consideration with the Government a Co-ordination Committee of the employees of the Corporation and one of the employees had approached this Court by filing O.P.No. 5579/92 for granting pension to the employees of the Corporation.O.P.No. 5579/92 was disposed of by this Court directing the Government to consider the recommendation of the 2nd respondent Corporation and take a decision in the matter. The Government issued Ext.P6 Govern...
Tag this Judgment!Joseph Vs. R.T.A.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-29-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)KLT396
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. The Writ Petitioner and the second respondent are stage carriage operators.2 . According to the petitioner, the route referred to in Paragraph 2 of this Writ Petition is a route in respect of which there is a notification in terms of Section 104 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'. The complaint of the petitioner is that the first respondent, Secretary of the Regional Transport Authority is, without any authority, granting temporary permits under the proviso to Section 104, also to the second respondent.3. The second respondent submits that he has filed an application for regular permit and an application for temporary permit under Section 87 of the Act.4. The proviso to Section 104 of the Act provides for grant of temporary permits by the State Transport Authority or the Regional Transport Authority, hereinafter, the 'RTA', for short, as the case may be, under certain situations. The delegation of powers by the RTA to...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. C.C. Transport and Co.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-29-2006
Reported in: (2006)205CTR(Ker)505; [2007]292ITR663(Ker)
V. Ramkumar, J.1. In this appeal filed under Section 260A of the IT Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short), the Revenue challenges the order dt. 23rd Oct., 2000 passed by the Tribunal, Cochin Bench in ITA No. 1007/Coch/1990 confirming the appellate order dt. 13th Aug., 1990 passed by the CIT(A), Calicut in ITA No. 108 : CIR : I-CLT : CIT : 1989-90.2. While admitting this appeal, this Court ordered notice on the following questions of law:(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the capital gains had to be assessed in the hands of the assessee-firm or in the hands of (partner) Asokan ?(ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law and fact in confirming the order of the CIT(A) reversing the assessment on the assessee-firm ?3. The facts leading to the impugned proceedings are the following:The assessment year concerned in these proceedings is 1983-84. The respondent/assessee is a partnership firm by name C.C. Transport Co., C...
Tag this Judgment!Sreekala Vs. D.E.O.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-28-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)KLT840
K.M. Joseph, J.1. The case of the Writ Petitioner, in brief, is as follows:She is a member of the fourth respondent, which is the SNDP Sakha Yogam, which manages an Aided School. Ext.P1 is the Byelaw approved by the Educational Authorities. As per the same, Managing Committee is to be elected from Members of the fourth respondent who in turn are empowered to elect one among them as Manager. It is also provided that the President, Secretary and the Treasurer of the fourth respondent will be Members of the Managing Committee in addition to five Members to be elected from the General Body of the fourth respondent. The present Manager was elected with effect from 4.5.2002 for a period of three years which tenure has ended. Since steps were not taken to constitute a new Managing Committee, W.P.(C) No. 14095/05 was filed seeking direction to enable the constitution of a new Managing Committee. Ext.P2 notice was issued to convene a General Body for electing the Managing Committee. As per Ext....
Tag this Judgment!Director, Ayurveda Medical Education Vs. Aishwarya
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-27-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)KLT311
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Whether teachers of Self-financing Colleges are entitled for admission to the Post Graduate courses in Ayurveda in the teachers quota earmarked, for the teachers of Government and Aided Colleges in the State is the question that has come up for consideration in this case.2. The Director of Ayurveda Medical Education, Government of Kerala conducts post-graduate courses in various specialities in the seats available in the various Government Colleges and Aided Colleges in the State every year. For the year 2005-06 out of 77 seats 6 seats are ear-marked for Scheduled Caste community, one seat for Scheduled Tribe candidate, 15 seats are reserved for teaching staff of Ayurveda Colleges in the State, one seat is reserved for the Medical Officer of the Department of I.S.M., one seat is reserved for the candidate sponsored by the Lakshadweep Administration, 12 seats are reserved for candidates from outside the State of Kerala (11 general and 1 SC/ST) and 41 seats are a...
Tag this Judgment!Jannet Varghese Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-27-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)KLT435
K.M. Joseph, J.1. The seminal issues that arise for consideration in this Writ Petition are whether in the wake of Ext. P10 amendment effected to Rules43 and 51A of Chapter XIVA. a claimant under Rule 51A is to be preferred to the claimant under Rule 43 and further when two vacancies arise on the same day, one of which is the very same post, which was held by the claimant under Rule 51A and another, which is a lower post, whether the claimant under Rule 51A can claim the post which he held earlier. The bare facts necessary to appreciate the contentions are as follows:Petitioner is a claimant under Rule 51A. She was originally appointed as High School Assistant in Social Studies for various spells in St. Joseph's High School, Kannimala, which was subsequently taken over by the third respondent Corporate management. She was again appointed by the third respondent as HSA, which was also approved (Ext. P4). By Ext. P7, the third respondent management issued an order dated 21.4.2006 stating...
Tag this Judgment!Paul Mathew and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-27-2006
Reported in: (2006)204CTR(Ker)229; [2007]288ITR190(Ker); 2006(3)KLT905
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. The legality of the cancellation of registration of a firm under Section 186(1) of the IT Act, 1961, is under challenge in this appeal. Learned single Judge repelled the challenge and aggrieved by the same the assessee has preferred this appeal [Judgement reported as Paul Mathew & Co. v. CIT (2005) 196 CTR (Ker) 504.]2. The assessee-firm consists of five partners consisting of the father and the sons. Registration of the firm was originally granted under Section 185(1) on 29th Feb., 1972 on the basis of an application for registration in Form No. 11A filed on 31st March, 1971 along with a certified copy of the deed of partnership. Later ITO on examination of the details of the partners on 30th July, 1979 and 31st July, 1979 respectively noticed that Paul Mathew (father) has forged signatures of three other partners by name Roy P. Mathews, Abraham Paul Mathews and Babu Paul Mathews in the deed of partnership dt. 1st July, 1970. Further it was also noticed that R...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Smt. Jayalakshmi Devarajan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-27-2006
Reported in: (2007)212CTR(Ker)236; [2006]286ITR412(Ker)
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Trivandrum, aggrieved by the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in I. T. A. No. 79/Coch./96 dated April 28, 2000. Though four questions have been framed in the appeal, the Revenue is primarily aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal in wrongly placing the burden of proof on the Revenue.2. The assessee is an individual and carries on business as the proprietrix of M/s. Padmaja Jewellers. A search was conducted in the business premises of the assessee on January 23, 1992. During the search operations it was found that the assessee was in possession of unaccounted stock of gold weighing 502.330 gms in the form of 77 numbers of new gold bangles. At the time of search on January 23, 1992 one Govindraj, the brother of the assessee's husband was present in the assessee's jewellery shop. A statement was recorded from him. He stated that he was engaged in the work of making gold ornaments, particul...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Don Bosco Card Centre
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-27-2006
Reported in: (2006)205CTR(Ker)500; [2007]289ITR329(Ker)
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Tribunal, Cochin Bench in compliance with the direction of this Court in OP No. 18508 of 1999 has referred the following question of law for opinion of this Court under Section 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961:Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that Section 158BC r/w Section 158BD of the IT Act, 1961 had no application to the facts of the case 2. Assessee is a partnership firm doing business in purchase and sale of greeting cards and other stationery items under the name and style of 'Don Bosco Card Centre'. The firm is a sister-concern of Don Bosco Industries, whose premises were searched under Section 132 of the IT Act, 1961 on 4th Jan., 1996. Business premises of the assessee was also surveyed under Section 133A of the Act along with the search in the business premises of Don Bosco Industries. During the course of the survey, the value of closing stock available with the assessee was quantified at Rs. ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »