Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: rationale Court: kerala Year: 2002 Page 1 of about 13 results (0.050 seconds)

Jan 31 2002 (HC)

All Kerala Chartered Accountants Association Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jan-31-2002

Reported in : (2002)176CTR(Ker)268; [2002]258ITR679(Ker)

..... next contended that the levy is discriminative and hit by article 14. elaborating the contention, the learned counsel urged that there are several persons practising different professions. there is no rationale or reason why several other professionals are kept out of the tax net, and only certain professionals like practising chartered accountants, practising cost accountants etc. are subjected to levy of ..... of india (supra) observed:'47. but with all this latitude certain irreducible desiderata of equality shall govern classifications for differential treatment in taxation laws as well. the classification must be rationale and based on some qualities and characteristics which are to be found in all the persons grouped together and absent in the others left out of the nexus with the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 20 2002 (HC)

Association of Registration Plates Manufacturers of India Vs. Union of ...

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Nov-20-2002

Reported in : 2003(1)KLT895

..... . radhakrishnan. i find that the conditions highlighted by the petitioners in ext. p7 are incorporated without adequate justification, and only to ward off possible competition from others. they have no rationale with the real objectives of the project. 19. it may also be relevant that a state is not prohibited from giving contracts for supply of security plates in favour of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 11 2002 (HC)

Nabeesa Beevi Vs. State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jul-11-2002

Reported in : 2002(2)ALT(Cri)476

..... consequences that may entail the possession of illicit article under the ndps act. it appears to have been incorporated in me act keeping in view the severity of the punishment. the rationale behind the provision is even otherwise manifest. the search before a gazetted officer or a magistrate would impart much more authenticity and creditworthiness to the search and seizure proceedings. it .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 15 2002 (HC)

Azhagiri Vs. State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jul-15-2002

Reported in : 2003(1)KLT323

..... last grade service were also brought on a par with other government servants. therefore, the date 7.4.1970 cannot be said to be irrelevant or arbitrary. there is a rationale behind fixing 7.4.1970 as the cut-off date for granting the benefit of continuing in service till the age of 60 years. when the rules were amended to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 10 2002 (HC)

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Muneer

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Dec-10-2002

Reported in : 2003ACJ1102; 2003(1)KLT137

..... is the same ie. 8 and 5 respectively. for all other age groups the multiplier stipulated for permanent disability is higher than the multiplier accepted for death. to question the rationale, wisdom and the philosophy of the legislature is not certainly the function of the courts while interpreting statutory provisions. we make it clear that we are not attempting to subject .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 14 2002 (HC)

Victory Plywood Industries Vs. State of Kerala and ors.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Nov-14-2002

Reported in : [2003]132STC316(Ker)

sivarajan, j.1. the matter arises under the kerala general sales tax act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'). the petitioners in o.p. nos. 305 of 2000 reported in [2002] 128 stc 42 (chethana pharmaceuticals v. assistant commissioner of commercial taxes), 2774 of 2001 and 1180 of 2000 respectively are the appellants in the above writ appeals. the learned single judge by a common judgment in a batch of writ petitions o.p. nos. 25907 of 1999, 11405, 305, 1180, 27247 and 31253 of 2000, 29562, 2774, 16548 and 16591 of 2001 dismissed all the writ petitions. writ appeals are seen filed only in three cases. though the appellants in these three appeals are different since the issue raised is common in, all these appeals they are being disposed of together by a common judgment.2. we have heard learned counsel appearing for the appellants and the learned government pleader appearing for the respondents. the appellants are small-scale industrial units engaged in the manufacture and sale of various products. they are also registered dealers under the act.3. the government of kerala, in exercise of the powers vested under section 10 of the act, issued notification s.r.o. no. 1728 of1993 making a reduction in the rate of tax payable under the' act on certain goods and by persons or units specified in the various schedules to the notification. this notification has been subjected to various amendments by extending concessional rates of tax to different class of persons or units on .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 30 2002 (HC)

Selvam Broilers (P) Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner (Assmt.) and ors.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : May-30-2002

Reported in : [2003]129STC389(Ker)

kurian joseph, j.1. chicken has been on the tax table of this court for quite some time for the main reason that the state had not been finding it easy to prepare and promote kerala chicken. the state intends to support and promote poultry farmers in kerala ; but is unable to reach at them and that is the unfortunate story unfolded in these cases. to quote from the counter-affidavit of the respondents 'it is respectfully submitted that from the year 1967-68 onwards the intention of the government is to give special incentive to farmers in kerala. each time when notification is issued with the above intention clever dealers outside kerala could take advantage of the notification by adopting skilful means. but the government never intended to give any such benefit to outside kerala people, because the clear intention ever since 1967 was to encourage poultry industry in kerala'. the last of such attempts to encourage poultry farmers in kerala has given rise to the present litigation. the impugned notification is s.r.o. no. 7/2002 dated january 4, 2002, exhibit p4 in o.p. no. 2371 of 2002.2. section 10 of the kerala general sales tax act, 1963 provides for exemptions. it reads as follows :10. power of government to grant exemption and reduction in rate of tax.--(1) the government may, if they consider it necessary in the public interest, by notification in the gazette, make an exemption or reduction in rate, either prospectively or retrospectively in respect of any tax payable .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 11 2002 (HC)

Vijayan Vs. Sanalkumar

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Dec-11-2002

Reported in : 2003(1)KLT980

orderr. rajendra babu, j.1. the revision petitioners are accused nos. 1 and 3 in pending before the c.j.m. court, kollam. they filed crl. m.p. 6622/01 for dropping the proceedings as against them claiming protection under section 197(1) cr.p.c. the above crl.m.p. was dismissed by the court below. aggrieved by the above order, petitioners have come up in revision challenging the above order and praying for an order dropping the proceedings pending against them.2. heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the 1st respondent complainant and also the learned public prosecutor.3. the 1st petitioner was the circle inspector and the 2nd petitioner was the sub inspector of police, chavara police station during the relevant period. the 1st respondent herein filed a private complaint against the petitioners and four other police officials alleging the commission of different offences including offences under sections 307 and 305 read with section 34 ipc. the case of the 1st respondent was that he along with his friends were travelling in a car bearing no. kl 2/6615 by about 3.30 p.m. on 5th may, 1997 from puthenthura to kollam and when they reached the altharamoodu temple, they were taken to the chavara police station by the accused and the complainant and others were brutally assaulted and tortured in the police station. the complaint was originally filed before the j.f.c.m. court, karunagappally and from there it was transferred to the c.j.m. court as per the order .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 10 2002 (HC)

Usman Vs. State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Sep-10-2002

Reported in : 2003(1)KLT2

k. balakrishnan nair, j. 1. the petitioner, who is a government servant, challenges ext. p6 order dated 17.5.2002 of the competent authority, giving sanction under section 19(1)(c) of the prevention of corruption act, 1988 for prosecuting him for various offences under the prevention of corruption act, 1988 and the indian penal code. the brief facts, necessary for the disposal of the case are the following.2. the petitioner is an agricultural assistant working under the respondents. while he was working in the office of the krishi bhavan, adatt, thrissur, he was suspended from service alongwith others on 1.12.1999 by the 2nd respondent, director of agriculture, by ext. p1 order. the vigilance and anti corruption bureau, later, registered crime no. 2/00 on 14.3.2000 against the petitioner for offences under sections 13(1)(d) read with section 13(2) of the prevention of corruption act, 1988 and also under sections 420, 468, 471 and 120(b) of the indian penal code. the first information report is produced as ext. p2. the allegation against the petitioner and others is that they conspired with a lime merchant and obtained undue pecuniary advantage to them by defrauding the government.3. later, the petitioner was served with ext. p3 memo of charges and ext. p3(a) statement of allegations alleging serious misconducts of misappropriation of government money, forgery of official documents and cheating the government. the petitioner submitted ext. p4 reply. an enquiry officer was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 08 2002 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Siva Traders

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Mar-08-2002

Reported in : (2002)175CTR(Ker)285; [2002]255ITR77(Ker)

v.p. mohan kumar, j. 1. with respect to the decision rendered by the income-tax appellate tribunal, cochin bench in i. t. a. no. 10/(coch) of 1997, the revenue framed as many as ten questions for reference to this court under section 256 of the income-tax act, 1961. after considering all the aspects, the tribunal re-framed and formulated the following question for the answer by this court, viz :'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal is right in law and fact in holding that the reopening of the assessment after a lapse of four years under section 143(3) read with section 147(a) of the income-tax act, 1961, is invalid and illegal and therefore the addition made in the reassessment cannot be confirmed ?'2. the brief facts in this case are as under. the assessee is a firm doing business in toddy. the assessment for the year 1986-87 ending with march 31, 1986 is on a total income of rs. 5,51,700. in the course of assessment, the assessing officer had noticed that the following shortages were discovered by the sales tax authorities on the basis of a raid conducted by them on november 6, 1985.(1) shortage of 2,068.600 litres of arrack ; (2) difference of 1,223 litres in the stock of vinegar ; (3) unaccounted purchases of 60,230 litres of arrack from april 1, 1985, to october 30, 1985, from slips recovered. 3. the sales tax department had proceeded to add a sum of rs. 42,71,520 on account of suppressed sales being the sale value of the above 1,06, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //