Reported in : RLW2009(3)Raj2193
.....proceedings under section 125 of the code. it is to be noted that when the respondent does not dispute the paternity of the child and accepts the fact that marriage ceremony was performed though not 'legally perfect, it would hardly lie in his mouth to contend in proceedings under section 125 of the code that there was no valid marriage as essential rites were not performed at the time of the said marriage. the provision under section 125 cannot be utilized for defeating the rights conferred by the legislature on the destitute women, children or parents who are victims of social environment. the provision is a measure of social justice and as noted above, specially enacted to protect women and children and falls within the constitutional sweep of article 15(3) reinforced by article 39 of the constitution.to support his case further he has also placed reliance upon a judgment delivered in the case of amina v. hassn koya reported in : (2003) 6 scc 93.6. in view of above, the criminal revision filed by the petitioner is allowed and the judgment dated 19.5.2008 passed by the judge, family court, kota in criminal case no. 860/2002, is quashed and set-aside and to remand the case to.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : (2009)221CTR(Mad)371
.....the income tax act, 1961. ('the act for short). the petitioner, a partnership firm, is engaged in the business of exploration, exploitation, manufacture, process and production of polished and dressed granite in assorted dimensions and a 100% export oriented unit by virtue of approval granted by the ministry of commerce under section 14 of the industries (development and regulations) act, 1951. while filing its return of income for the assessment year 2003-04 on 26.02.2004 the petitioner claimed deduction under section 80hhc of the act for the period from 01.04.2002 to 22.09.2002 and deduction under section 10b of the act for the period from 23.09.2002 to 31.03.2003. the case had been taken up for scrutiny and notice under section 143(2) of the act was issued and the petitioner was heard through the representative. subsequently, on 30.12.2005 a show cause notice was issued. in the show cause notice referring to section 10b, it was stated as follows:as is evident from the foregoing provision of sub section 2(i) and (ii) of the section 10b and explanation 2 of section 80ia, you are not eligible for deduction under section 10b as your concern -1. has been formed by splitting up,.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : (2009)22VST544(Mad)
.....3b was introduced. but for the prior years, i.e., before the amendment act was enacted, there can be no levy of penalty. he submitted that the fact that the india carbon case : air1997sc3054 or j.k. synthetics : 1994ecr329(sc) arose in respect of the cst act made no difference to the legal position. he relied on the following:(i) deputy commissioner (c.t.), coimbatore division, coimbatore v. m. murugesan and bros. [1985] 58 stc 143 (mad).(ii) j.k. synthetics ltd. v. commercial taxes officer : 1994ecr329(sc) .(iii) india carbon ltd. v. state of assam : air1997sc3054 .13. now we will take up each decision, one by one.(a)s. kodar v. state of kerala : [1975]1scr121 dealt with the validity of the ast act. it was upheld. 'entry 54 in list ii authorises the state legislature to impose a tax on the sale or purchase of goods. so, the contention of the appellants that the additional sales tax is not a tax on sales but on the income of the dealer is without any basis.' but the validity is not challenged here. so it is not necessary to dwell on this case any further.(b) manickam and co. v. state of tamil nadu : [1977]1scr950 .in this, the assessee claimed refund of tax in accordance.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2009(241)ELT338(Mad)
.....to be quashed. 3. the following are the main grounds raised by the petitioners:(1) the impugned notification has failed to take into account the fact that betel nut is imported in substantial quantities from south east asian countries more particularly indonesia and thailand and prohibiting the ports in the east cost of india from receiving betel nut is arbitrary, which violates article 14 of the constitution of india. (2) there is no rational nexus between the impugned notification and the object sought to be achieved inasmuch as there is no evidence on the face of the record to show that restricting imports to the port of mangalore would achieve any of the objects sought to be achieved under the foreign trade (development and regulation) act, 1992 or paragraphs 2.6 of the exim policy. (3) the restrictions imposed by means of the impugned notification are deliberately designed to increase the costs to the petitioners and to delay their import consignments and in order to give illegal advantage to a few select entities. (4) while trade and commerce throughout the territory of india is free and when under the exim policy imports of betel nuts are free, the impugned.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : (2009)221CTR(Mad)742; [2009]309ITR15(Mad); [2009]177TAXMAN499(Mad)
.....illegally by production of bogus tds certificates by the assessee could under no circumstances be the income of the assessee?2. whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in holding that amounts earned fraudulently cannot be treated as income and taxed?factual matrix:2. the asessment relates to the years 1987-88 and 1988-89. the assessee is engaged in tax consultancy and audit work. in a search conducted in the residential premises as well as in the office of the assessee on 14.3.1989, certain incriminating documents were seized. from the documents so seized by the income tax department, it was revealed that the assessee had been claiming and receiving income tax refunds by filing bogus tds certificates along with return of income prepared by him even in the names of non-existent persons. the assessee has filed his return of income for the assessment year 1987-88 originally on 30.11.1987 reporting an income of rs. 29,700/-. however on the basis of the information available after the search of his premises, the assessment was reopened under section 147 of the income tax act and after considering the explanation submitted by the assessee, a sum.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : (2009)21VST245(Mad)
.....regard to the sale to chettinad granites. the tribunal allowed this appeal. so, the revenue has filed w.p. no. 22939 of 2004. we will deal with the facts separately and then with the submissions and the legal points together.2. m/s. chettinad granites is a 100% export oriented unit. according to the assessee, the rough granite blocks purchased by them are cut in standard sizes through sawing machines. thus, there is no chemical process involved and there is no change in the chemical or physical composition of the goods purchased and sold.3. learned senior counsel mr. r.l. ramani appearing for the assessee submitted that the granite blocks are merely cut to size for export and only the end-users shape them to their specific requirement. therefore, the process employed by the exporter does not change the nature or identity of the goods.4. we have seen the abstract of form-h sales of the assessee for the assessment year 1994-95 and the sale to chettinad granites. it is seen that what was sold under the sale bills were rough blocks. but the description of the goods exported under the documents referred to in form-h would show that those were polished slabs and were exported, and the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : [2009]315ITR293(Mad)
.....assessment number and year gi: 4227p/2002-03.2. the following are the substantial questions of law raised for our consideration:(1) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal erred in confirming the disallowance of the deduction under the opening capital account for 2002-03 when the returns filed for 1996-97 to 2001-02 were accepted by the department?2. whether the opening capital account for 2002-03 can be rejected without rejecting the closing balance declared for 2001-02 in the respective return?3. whether the tribunal has considered the fact that the appellant is a physically handicapped person and, therefore, he was eligible for a flat deduction of rs. 40,000 per year under section 80u of the income-tax act and, therefore, he has sufficient source to build up his capital account?4. whether the tribunal had considered the fact that the net profit compared by the first appellate authority is of district headquarters dealers and not dealers in mannargudi which is a taluk headquarters?5. whether the tribunal had considered the fact that the first appellate authority had not considered the comparable datas given by the appellant who are all doing.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....to the appellant in terms of it. that was challenged by the first respondent by filing a petition under sections 30 and 33 of the arbitration act, 1940 (`act' for short). the trial court rejected the objections raised by the first respondent in the said petition and made the award, the rule of the court. the first respondent challenged it before the high court and the high court (by its majority decision) set aside the interim award and directed the arbitrator to decide the application under section 27 of the act for interim award, afresh after giving due opportunity to the parties. the appellant has filed these appeals by special leave, challenging the said decision.3. in the meantime, the arbitrator (second respondent) died and a fresh arbitrator has been appointed. the appointment of the new arbitrator has been stayed.4. in this background, the parties, after arguing this matter for sometime on the last date, felt that instead of again spending time and energy on the issue of interim award, they may as well proceed with and complete the process of arbitration in regard to the main disputes by referring the dispute to a mutually agreeable sole arbitrator. on their.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....at paragraphs 6 and 8 of the judgment reported in : ilr1993kar2715 in the case of kodava samaj v. district registrar, is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case on hand and is of no assistance to him in this petition, in view of the well settled law laid down by the division bench of this court in the case of a.s. kupparaju v. general secretary, raju kshatriya welfare association and ors. reported in 1990 (2) k.l.j. 403 wherein it is held that, 'when the registrar acts suo motu or on his own upon whatever material available other than a complaint by members of the society or the governing body without the requisite majority prescribed to him to exercise his power under section 25(1) of the act, he must do so only after due application of mind and disclosure of material upon which he is acting and that must be explicit in the order he is required to make. such an order cannot be capricious or without proper examination and investigation of the material upon which he proposes to at lest such action becomes arbitrary' (underlined by me). further, the full bench of this court also, in the case of bangalore grain merchants association v. the district registrar.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....if it is assumed for the sake of argument that his clients had knowledge of the subsequent agreement of the plaintiff with the defendant no. 1, such fact was of no consequence as the suit was liable to be dismissed on the ground that his clients purchased the said property on the basis of a prior agreement.13. mr. banerjee next contends that in this case the plaintiff had failed to prove that he had sufficient means to purchase the property immediately after the execution of the alleged agreement. mr. banerjee points out that in crossexamination, the plaintiff admitted that he had not filed any document to show that he had the requisite amount of rs. 3 lakh to purchase the property at all relevant time. according to mr. banerjee, the suit is liable to be dismissed on that ground alone.14. mr. banerjee next points out that the alleged agreement for sale between the plaintiff and defendant no. 1 was not a bilateral document but was only signed by the plaintiff. mr. banerjee contends that in order to constitute a valid written agreement for sale, such document must be a bilateral one and in support of such contention, mr. banerjee relies upon the decision of the supreme court in the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT