Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
Vellangallur Peoples Welfare Co-Operative Society Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India, Represented By Its Secretary To The Government, Ministry Of Finance – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. constitutional challenge to tds on cooperative societies. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments raised by petitioners regarding impact of tds. (Para 4) |
| 3. income tax department's defenses against petitioners’ claims. (Para 5) |
| 4. legal representation and proceedings overview. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 5. examination of statutory provisions. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 6. criteria for legislative competence in taxation statutes. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 7. challenges concerning unreasonable classification. (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 8. interpretation of legislative provisions and statements. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 9. purpose and implications of the highlighted proviso. (Para 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 10. constitutional protection for cooperative movements. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 11. final decision overview and outcomes. (Para 34) |
JUDGMENT :
ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A., J.
In all these cases, the petitioners are Co-operative Societies registered under the provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 and are classified as Primary Agricultural Credit Societies under the said Act and the Rules. In all these cases, the challenge is raised against the Constitutional validity of the proviso to section
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
