Kerala Court August 2009 Judgments

Mattul Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer (Cib)

Court: Kerala

Reported in: [2010]186TAXMAN409(Ker)

P.R. Ramachandra Menon, J.1. The common issue involved in all these cases is whether the notice issued by the concerned Income-tax Officer calling for information under Section 133(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('Act' in short) from the petitioners Co-operative Banks is correct or sustainable in the light of the following aspects:(a) When the petitioners Co-operative Banks are not 'persons' as defined under Section 2(31) of the Income-tax Act and not admittedly a banking company, so as to invoke the power under Section 133;(b) When there is no prior approval of the Commissioner or Director, as the case may be, in view of the specific stipulation under the second proviso to Section 133(6) of the Act; and(c) Whether the Income-tax Officer is having power, competence and jurisdiction to issue such notice, assuming the rights and roles of the assessing authority.2. M/s. V.G. Arun, R. Surendran and Mr. C.P. Peethambharan, learned Counsel for the petitioners, led the arguments in the above ...

immanuel Thomas Proprietor Vs. M/S. Pan India Network Infravest Privat ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

JUSTICE SRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT: The appellant is the complainant in CC 272/08 in the file of CDRF, Kottayam.The appeal stands dismissed on the preliminary issue as to maintainability. 2.The complainant who is a retailer of lotteries has sought for the return of the amount given as security deposit amounting to Rs.3.5 lakhs.It is the case of the complainant that the above business is the only sources of livelihood of the complainant. 3. The Forum has found that the relationship between the petitioner and the opposite party is that of a retailer and the wholesaler and hence the complainant cannot be treated as a consumer vide 2(d)(i)of the Consumer Protection Act. 4.We find that there is no illegality in the above order.There is no scope for admitting the appeal. In the result the appeal is dismissed in limine....

The Kerala State Electricity Board and Another Vs. Anniamma Cherian

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

JUSTICE SRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT: The appellants are the opposite parties / KSEB in CC 66/07 in the file of CDRF, Kottayam. The bill issued by the appellant for a sum of Rs.5,011 stands cancelled. 2. The case of the complainant is that he was served with a bill dated 27/1/2007 for a sum of Rs.5,011 as an additional bill for the period from 2/03 to 6/05. 3. It is seen that the meter was faulty from 2/03 to 6/05. The meter was replaced in 6/05. The Forum has found that no details are mentioned the bill and hence it is an incomplete one. Further as per regulation 33(2) the meter has to be replaced within one month. As per Sec.56(2) of the Electricity Act 2003 the amount is not recoverable after a period of 2 years. It was in the above circumstances that the bill was cancelled. We find that there is no patent illegality in the order of the Forum. In the result the appeal is dismissed in limine. ...

Girnar Industries Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court: Kerala

Reported in: [2010]187TAXMAN136(Ker)

C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. Assessee-appellant has an industrial unit located in the Special Economic Zone at Kakkanad, Kochi where it is engaged in blending and repacking of tea for export. For the assessment year 2004-05 the assessee claimed deduction of export profit in respect of the blended tea exported from the industrial unit under Section 10A of the Income-tax Act ('the Act'). However, the assessing authority held that 'blending' does not answer the description of manufacture or processing and so much so, assessee is not entitled to deduction of export profits claimed under Section 10A of the Act. It is the specific case of the department that blending can be treated as a manufacturing activity only after the definition Clause of 'manufacture' contained in Section 2(r) of the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005 is incorporated in the provisions of Section 10AA of the Income-tax Act with effect from 10-2-2006. Even though first appeal was allowed by the CIT (Appeals) holding that ...

P.V. Abdul Rehman Vs. Assistant Engineer, Kseb and Another

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

JUSTICE SRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT The appellant is the complainant in CC.947/07in the file of CDRF, Thrissur.The complaint filed by the appellant for setting aside the bill for Rs.24,541/- stands dismissed. 2. Both sides were heard at admission. 3. It is the case of the complainant that he was issued with a bill for Rs.24,541 on the ground that has misused the electric connection obtained for agricultural purposes. The electric supply was also disconnected.According to the petitioner he is not conversant in English and that the bill is issued in English.The facts mentioned in the mahazar are not correct. 4. The opposite party had filed version pointing out that the connection in the name of the petitioner was for agricultural purposes and it was single phase.On 24/10/07 the APTS conducted inspection and found that from the agricultural connection he was unauthorizedly using electricity for household purposes.Hence the above connection was disconnected and bill issued.It is denied...

Assyst International Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(3)KLJ430

Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. The petitioner, a private limited company, states that it is a 100% export-oriented STP Unit employing about 360 software professionals engaged in software development for various clients in India and overseas. It avers that its associated company is engaged in software training and imparts training to several persons in informational technology.2. On the ground that the alignment for the metro rail project of Ernakulam, if carried out as now proposed, in so far as the construction of the Metro Station at Muttom is concerned, will result in acquisition of land from the petitioner in such a manner as may call for the pulling down of the entire building and that such a situation could be avoided, if a particular boundary demarcated for that purpose is modified by shifting the demarcating boundary stone towards south, it made Ext.P2 representation before the District collector, Ernakulam and Ext.P3 before the Managing Director of Delhi Metro Rail corporat...

Subramoniam N. Vs. the Secretary, Food and Civil Supplies Department a ...

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(3)KLJ177

V. Giri, J.1. The petitioner is an Authorised Wholesale Dealer of ration articles. He is licensed to run AWD No. 4 at Pottakuzhi Junction in Ernakulam and he is doing so. The 8th respondent is another Authorised Wholesale Dealer of ration articles and he is licensed to run AWD No.5.2. The 2nd respondent, Deputy. Controller of Rationing, suspended the licence of the 8th respondent vide Ext.Pl order dated 27.3.2009 alleging certain irregularities in the conduct of the wholesale shop. By the suspension of the licence of a wholesale dealer, it also became necessary to mate a provision for the retail dealers attached to the wholesale dealer. But, it seems that Ext. P1 order dated 27.3.2009 was actually implemented by the District Supply Officer, Ernakulam and the City Rationing Officer, Kochi only on 28,4,2009, The shops attached to AWD No. 5 were temporarily attached to AWD No. 4 licensed in favour of the petitioner.3. The petitioner contends that on implementation of the suspension order,...

District Transport Officer and District Transport Officer Vs. S. Kunch ...

Court: Kerala

Reported in: (2010)ILLJ333Ker

V. Giri, J.1. The issues that have been formulated for consideration by the Full Bench can be, as a matter of convenience, encapsulated as hereunder:(1) Whether the service as a daily wage employee rendered by a person, at the instance of the employer, after he has been selected for regular appointment by the Public Service Commission {for short 'the Commission'} and duly advised in that regard, can be taken as qualifying service for the purpose of pension and other retirement benefits?(2) As a corollary, does the service rendered as a daily wage employee or a casual employee in an organization, where the Kerala Service Rules have been adopted for all relevant purposes, in circumstances other than what is mentioned in Issue No. 1 above, be eligible to be treated as qualifying service for the purpose of pension?2. The issues have arisen for consideration in the context of an employee, who after advice by the PSC, was nevertheless appointed by the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation ...

State Human Rights Protection Centre and Joy Kaitharath Vs. State of K ...

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(3)KLJ110

Kurian Joseph, J.1. Acquisition, assignment and reforms are the three major aspects on land. That there are three important legislations in all these areas would show the need and relevance for proper order in this field. In the case before us, it is interesting to note that the events are to be analysed with reference to all these three legislations, namely, Land Acquisition Act, Land Assignment Act and Land Reforms Act. It is significant to note that the events chronologically are well balanced; acquired, assigned and reformed, as in the case of legislation also, 1894, 1960 and 1963 respectively.2. Res clamat domino - land cries for its master is a well known principle. Therefore, it is necessary to refer to the facts from the roots. In 1963 Government of India decided to establish in Kerala a machine tools factory in the central sector as part of the Third Five Year Plan. It was decided to entrust the project to Hindustan Machine Tools Limited, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as ...

Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd. Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Inco ...

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(3)KLJ489; [2010]187TAXMAN100(Ker)

P.R. Ramchandra Menon, J.1. Whether the amount paid by the petitioner towards the 'Group Gratuity Fund' maintained by the LIC in respect of service of the employees, in relation to the assessment year, notwithstanding the concession given by the LIC to have it remitted by way of Installments is liable to be treated as 'advance payment' or as an 'accrued liability', so as to provide necessary deduction under Section 43(b) of the Act, is the issue involved herein.2. The undisputed facts and figures are as follows: As per Ext. P1 letter dated 14.10.1997 issued by the LIC, the petitioner was required to satisfy/replenish a sum of Rs. 1.25 crores towards the 'Group Gratuity Fund' maintained by the LIC, so as to top up the shortfall which however was permitted to be cleared by way of '5' equal yearly instalments of Rs. 25,00,000/- each commencing from 1997-98. Pursuant to this, necessary provision was made by the petitioner and a payment of Rs. 25,00,000/- was made in the year 1997-98; claim...