Court : Kerala
Reported in : 2005(4)KLT372
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Constitutional validity of the Kerala Liquor Transit (Amendment) Rules 2005 imposing enhanced fee for transit of liquor through the State of Kerala to Mahe alone, a part of the Union Territory of Pondicherry is under challenge in these appeals as discriminatory and offending free trade and commerce through out the territory of India.2. Petitioners are engaged in the trade of liquor through various retail shops at Mahe, a part of Union Territory of Pondicherry. Government of Pondicherry in exercise of its powers conferred under Rule 113(1) framed under the Pondicherry Excise Act, 1970 have issued necessary licences for possession and sale of Indian made foreign liquors/foreign liquors and beer in the town of Mahe, which falls under the administration of Government of Pondicherry. Licence permits the licensees to import all kinds of Indian liquor or foreign liquors and beer from outside and also from the manufacturers of the Union Territory of Pondicherry after o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 2007(1)KLT303; (2007)7VST293(Ker)
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Constitutional validity of certain provisions of the Kerala Taxon Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 1994 (Act 15 of 1974) isunder challenge in all these Original Petitions. A few of the writpetitioners have sought for a declaration that Section 2(1)(d),2(1)(g), 2(1)(i) and Section 3 of the Kerala Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 1994 (in short 'Entry Tax Act') are discriminatory and ultra vires of Articles 14, 19(1)(a), 19(1)(g), 246, 265, 286, 301, 304(a), 304(b) and other consequential reliefs. State maintained the stand that the Act is within the legislative competence of the State since it was promulgated in exercise of its powers under Articles 245 and 246 read with Entry 52 List II of the VII Schedule to the Constitution of India. Two batches of cases have also come up for our consideration; some pertaining to the levy of entry tax with regard to the goods brought from outside the State to the State of Kerala and some others with regard to t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 2008(1)KLJ128
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Constitutional validity of certain provisions of the Kerala Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 1994 (Act of 1974) is under challenge in all these original petitioners. A few of the writ petitioners have sought for a declaration that Section 2(1)(d), 2(1)(g), 2(1)(i) and Section 3 of the Kerala Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 1994 (in short 'Entry Tax Act') are discriminatory and ultra vires of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 246, 265, 286, 301, 304(a), 304(b) and other consequential reliefs. State maintained the stand that the Act is within the legislative competence of the State since it was promulgated in exercise of its powers under Articles 245 arid 246 read with Entry 52 List II of the VII Schedule to the Constitution of India. Two batches of cases have also come up for our consideration; some pertaining to the levy of entry tax with regard to the goods brought from outside the State to the State of Kerala and some others with regard to the goo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1971Ker146
Krishnamoorthy Iyer, J. 1. Theoriginal petitions seek to declare Sections 18(3) (2) (a) (1) and 18A of the Abkari Act, 1 of 1077 and Rule 13 (1) substituted by S.R.O. 70/70 dated 18-2-1970, in tie rules relating to licences for the sale of foreign liquor unconstitutional and for the issue of writ of mandamus to direct the Commissioner of Excise to renew the licences.2. The petitioners were the holders of Foreign Liquor 1 Wholesale licences for sale of foreign liquor for the year 1969-70. The period of their licences expired on 31-3-1970.3. The Cochin Abkari Act, 1 of 1077 and the Travancore Abkari Act, IV of 1073 were continued in force by the Travancore-Cochin State Administration and Application of Laws Act VI of 1125. By Section 2 of the Cochin Abkari (Extension and Amendment) Act, 1967 (Act 10 of 1967) the Cochin Abkari Act, 1 of 1077 and the Rules, Orders and Notifications made and issued thereunder were extended to the areas of the State of Kerala where the said Act was not in fo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1963Ker202
ORDERC.A. Vaidialingam, J.1. The respective petitioners, in these writ petitions, challenge the orders of assessment passed by the concerned Sales-tax Officers, making them liable tor payment of sales-tax under the General Sales-tax Act, 1125, as the last purchaser of the commodity, in question, in the State. Their contention is that the imposition of a levy, in the circumstances, on the last purchase in the State, offends Article 301 of the Constitution and is not saved by Article 304(b) of the Constitution. There are no doubt certain other questions arising for decision in these writ petitions. But the common question that arises is regarding the attack on these assessments, based upon Articles 301 and 304(b) of the Constitution; and I have heard arguments only on that aspect at present.2. As Mr. K. V. Surianarayana lyer, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, who are the same in both O. P. Nos. 3210/61 and 261/62 has advanced the leading arguments on this aspect, I will refe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 2005(3)KLT759
R. Basant, J.1. Challenge is raised by the petitioners in these Writ Petitions against the amendments to the Kerala Liquor Transit Rules, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'). Rules 3 and 5 of the Rules were amended by Ext.P7 notification dated 3.2.2005. I extract below the amended rule showing particularly the nature of the amendment.Rule 3: Permit for transit of liquor:No liquor shall be allowed to be moved from one place in a State to another place in that State through the territory of the State of Kerala except under a permit issued by the Assistant Excise Commissioner of the Division through whose jurisdiction it is proposed to be moved.Provided that when liquor has to be moved through more than one Excise Division, the permit shall be issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Excise and when liquor has to be moved through more than one Excise Zone by the Excise Commissioner. 'Provided further that when liquor has to be moved through the State of Kerala to Mahe the permit sha...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
1. In this batch of writ petitions, the petitioners challenge the levy of Turnover Tax on Textile articles, that was introduced in the KVAT Act [hereinafter referred to as the 'KVAT Act'], with effect from 01.04.2014 and continued in the statute book till 01.04.2015, with effect from which date, it was omitted therefrom. The provision was introduced through the Kerala Finance Bill of 2014 and, by virtue of a notification under the Kerala Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, came into force with effect from 01.04.2014. Thereafter, it assumed a modified form when the Kerala Finance Act, 2014 was enacted on 23.07.2014, with effect from 01.04.2014. With effect from 01.04.2015, the levy of turnover tax on textile articles was omitted and the goods were made taxable under the KVAT Act @ 1% under II Schedule to the KVAT Act. Before dealing with the grounds of challenge raised in the writ petitions, therefore, I feel it would be apposite to notice the provisions as they stood, when introduced ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 1993LC383(Kerala); 1993(66)ELT351(Ker)
T.L. Viswanatha Iyer, J.1. The question for consideration in this case is whether the petitioner, the Collector of Customs Kochi is liable to pay sales tax under the Kerala General Sales-tax Act, 1963 (the KGST Act) in respect of the sales of confiscated and unclaimed goods. The Government of Kerala informed the petitioner of his liability by the letter Ext. P1 dated May 12,1988 and that led to this writ petition.2. Petitioner is the Collector of Customs, Kochi who is discharging statutory duties and functions under the Customs Act, 1962. In the course of those duties and function, he comes into possession of goods which are either confiscated ones or those remaining unclaimed. The provisions for confiscation of goods are contained in Chapter XIV of the Customs Act, and Section 126 provides that when any goods are confiscated under the said Act, such goods shall thereupon vest in the Central Government. It is these goods which are confiscated, and goods which come into the possession o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : ILR2011(1)Ker833
1. These two writ petitions are filed in public interest. The petitioner in W.P.(C).No.35180 of 2009 is a former Minister of the Union of India. 2. W.P.(C).No.35180 of 2009 is filed with the prayers as follows:"a) call for the records leading to the case and issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing Exhibit.P1. b) issue such other appropriate writ, oder or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case. c) award costs to the Petitioner". 3. The impugned order-Exhibit P1 is an Order dated 14.10.2009 evidencing a decision taken by the Government of Kerala. The relevant portion reads as follows: "The Islamic Financial Services (IFS) Industry has grown substantially over the years forming a significant segment within global financial services and is generating lot of interest as an alternative model of financial intermediation. Growing awareness and demand for investment and financing in compliance with Shariah ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.HARIPRASAD TUESDAY, THE3D DAY OF JUNE201413TH JYAISHTA, 1936 WA.No. 617 of 2012 --------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 4168/2007 of THIS HONOURABLE COURT ---------------- APPELLANT(S)/RESPONDENTS13, 5 AND6 --------------------------------------------------------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001.2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF FOREIGN TRADE, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI-110011.3. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE AND CUSTOMS, MINISTRY OF FINANCE (DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE), NEW DELHI-110011.4. THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CUSTOMS HOUSE, COCHIN-682009.5. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORTS), CUSTOM HOUSE, COCHIN-682009. BY ADV. SRI.JOHN VARGHESE,SC,CEN.BOARD OF CUSTOMS RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER & 4...
Tag this Judgment!