Chennai Court December 1956 Judgments
Gordon Woodroffe Leather Manufacturing Co. Ltd. by Managing Agents, Go ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-20-1956
Reported in: AIR1957Mad347
1. Under Section 66 (1) of the Income-tax Act, the Appellate Tribunal referred the following question to this Court: "Whether the sum of Rs. 40,000 paid to Mr. J. H. Philips on his retirement from the service of the company was not an admissible deduction under Section 10 (2) (xv), Income-tax Act, 1922?"2. The facts were never in dispute. The assessee which was a private limited company, was incorporated in 1928 to carry on business in the manufacture of leather. Gordon Woodroffe & Co. Ltd., was the parent company, and after the incorporation of the asses see-company Gordon Woodroffe Co. Ltd., were the managing agents. Mr. Philips was employed in the parent company from 1922 to 1935, and thereafter he was employed in the assessee-company. He was manager of the assessee-company and also one of its directors from 1940.Mr. Philips decided to retire from service with effect from 4-4-1949. He resigned his directorship. At the meeting of the Board of Directors dated 24-3-1949 it was resolved...
Tag this Judgment!Gordon Woodroffe Leather Manufacturing Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of In ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-20-1956
Reported in: [1957]31ITR438(Mad)
RAJAGOPALAN, J. - Under section 66 (1) of the Income-tax Act, the Appellate Tribunal referred the following question to this Court;'Whether the sum of Rs. 40,000 paid to Mr. J. H. Phillips on his retirement from the service of the company was not an admissible deduction under section 10 (2) (XV) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 ?'The facts were never in dispute. The assessee, which was a private limited company, was incorporated in 1928 to carry on business in the manufacture of leather. Gordon Woodroffe & Co., Ltd., was the parent company, and after the incorporation of the assessee-company Gordon Woodroffe & Co., Ltd., were the managing agents. Mr. Phillips was employed in the parent company from 1922 to 1935, and thereafter he was employed in the assessee-company. He was manager of the assessee-company and also one of its directors from 1940. Mr. Philips decided to retire from service with effect from 4th April, 1949. He resigned his directorship. At the meeting of the board of directors...
Tag this Judgment!East India Industries (Madras) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Ma ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-19-1956
Reported in: AIR1957Mad357
1. The assessee is a private limited company with 21 share-holders, and a fully subscribed capital of one lakh of rupees. The company carries on business in the manufacture and sale of water proof paper, roofing felt, tarpaulins etc. In view of some large orders it received from the military authorities, the company required further money for its business.There was a statutory restriction in 1944 on any further increase of the capital issue of companies. The only alternative was to borrow the required amount. At the General body meeting of the share-holders of the company held on 31-12-1944 the company resolved that"..... in view of the large sums required for the business the Managing Agent he authorised to borrow money from the shareholders of the company who are willing to advance as loan to the extent of the paid-up value of the holdings by two Instalments, i. e., 50 per cent. by the end of February 1945 and 50 per cent. by the end of March 1845 which will bear a minimum interest o...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Palanisamy Chettiar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-19-1956
Reported in: AIR1957Mad351; 1957CriLJ642
1. This revision is posted before this Bench as it was considered that grounds 6 and 7 taken in the Memorandum of the Criminal Revision Petition raised important questions. The petitioner was convicted by the Sub-Magistrate of Kumbakonam on a charge under Section 323, I. P. C., and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 15. There was an appeal as against that conviction and sentence, heard by the District Magistrate, Kumbakonam, as Assistant Sessions Judge, and dismissed by him.This revision is filed against that order of dismissal, confirming the conviction and sentence pass-ed by the Sub-Magistrate. Under the old Section 407, CR. P. C., any person convicted on a trial held by any Magistrate, II or III class, was allowed to appeal to the District Magistrate; but, by the amending Act XXVI of 1955, which came into force from 1-1-1956, that section was deleted and the old Section 408 amended, providing that any person convicted on a trial by a District Magistrate or any other Magistrate may appeal t...
Tag this Judgment!East India Industries (Madras) Ltd. Vs. Commissoner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-19-1956
Reported in: (1957)2MLJ110
Rajagopalan, J.1. The assessee is a private limited company with twenty-one shareholders, and a fully subscribed capital of one lakh of rupees. The company carries on business in the manufacture and sale of waterproof paper, roofing felt, tarpaulins, etc. In view of some large orders it received from the military authorities the company required further money for its business. There was a statutory restriction in 1944 on any further increase of the capital issue of companies. The only alternative was to borrow the required amount. At the General Body meeting of the shareholders of the company held on 31st December, 1944, the company resolved that.in view of the large sums required for the business the Managing Agent be authorised to borrow money from the share-holders of the company who are willing to advance as loan to the extent of the paid up value of the holding by two instalments, i.e., 50 per cent. by the end of February, 1945 and 50 per cent. by the end of March, 1945 which will...
Tag this Judgment!Hindustan Materials Vs. Railway Rates Tribunal and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-19-1956
Reported in: (1957)2MLJ363
ORDERRajagopala Ayyangar, J.1. The Hindustan Materials, Bombay, call in question by these petitions the legality of certain orders passed by the Railway Rates Tribunal, Madras. There has been some antecedent history preceding these petitions, which it is necessary to state, in order to understand in its proper perspective the questions raised in these petitions.2. The Hindustan Materials, Bombay, as well as another firm, ,the Engineering Supplies and Co., Bombay, were engaged in' the purchase and transport of cast iron pipes from Bhadravathi to Ambarnath and Kalyan during the yeais 1951 to 1953. The transport between these stations involved the carrying of the goods both by the Southern Railway and the Central Railway. The Engineering Supplies Company complained there were station-to-station rates available between Bhadravathi to Bombay, a distance longer than that between Bhadravathi to Ambarnath and Kalyan, while there was no such favourable rate available to them when their goods mo...
Tag this Judgment!Nachiappa Chettiar Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-19-1956
Reported in: AIR1957Mad788
Rajagopala Ayyangar, J. 1. K. M. N. S. P. N. Nachiappa Chettiar was thekarta of an undivided Hindu family. In that capacity he was carrying on extensive money lendingbusiness in Ceylon. In the course of his moneylending business moneys had been lent to oneO. L. M. Abdul Majith, totaling nearly two lakhsof rupees upto the beginning of March 1930 andand on 3rd March 1930, the debtor executed adeed purporting to convey absolutely to the creditor by way of sale certain houses and lands for aprice of Rs. 2,03,300. The deed recited that the 'said vendor doth hereby sell, assign, transfer, set over and assure unto the said vendee, his heirs, executors, administrators and assigns the aforesaid several lands and that the purchaser should hold the said several lands and premises conveyed to him with the appurtenances thereof absolutely. The consideration for the sale was made up of the principal amount of Rs. 1,88,950 due on 23 pronotes bearing dates between 2nd April 1925 and 31st January 1930,...
Tag this Judgment!Dominion of India, Owning S.i. Rly., Represented by General Manager S. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-18-1956
Reported in: AIR1957Mad356
Rajamannar, C.J.1. This is an appeal against the decree and judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge of Tiruchirapalll in O. S. No. 134 of 1950 on his file That was a suit filed by the respondent against the appellant, the Dominion of India owning the South Indian Railway represented by its General Manager, for a declaration that the order dated 24-12-1948 dismissing the plaintiff, was void, wrongful and illegal and for the recovery of Rs. 8000,as comperisation for injuries suffered fay the plaintiff.2. The plaintiff was employed as a fitter in the mechanical department in the Golden-rock workshop of the South Indian Railway on and from the 13th October 1941. On 3rd November 1948 the following charges were framed against him, viz., that he extracted four pears (worth two annas) from a consignment from Kodaikanal Road to Pondlcherry in the course of transit at Villupuram at about 9-35 p. m. on 28th August 1948, when the consignment was lying on the platform and that he gave wrong infor...
Tag this Judgment!C. Dhanalakshmi Ammal Vs. Income-tax Officer, Ii Additional City Circl ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-18-1956
Reported in: AIR1957Mad376
Rajamannar, C.J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a direction in the nature of a writ of mandamus to the Income-tax Office, Second Additional City Circle Madras, the Collector of Nilgiris Nilgiris district and the Tahsildar of Coonoor, Coonoor taluk, Nilgiris district, restraining them from proceeding to attach, or to bring to sale, the petitioner's properties for the realisation of the alleged income-tax arrears of her husband, Tharanisingh Gramani and in particular from proceeding with the sale of the Benhutty estate, Kulifcai village, Coonoor taluk, Nilgiris district.2. For the recovery of arrears of income-tax due from the petitioner's husband; Tharani Singh Gramani, a certificate was issued by the Income-tax Officer, the first respondent, to the Collector of Nilgiris (the second respondent) under Section 46(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act The Collector, in pursuance of this certificate,' proceeded under Sec. 27 of the Madras Revenue Recov...
Tag this Judgment!Oriental Government Security Life Assurance Co. Ltd., Bombay, with Its ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-18-1956
Reported in: AIR1957Mad449
1. This is said to be a test case to get a ruling on a point not covered by rulings so far. This is a petition originally filed by the Oriental Government Security Life Assurance Co. Ltd, whose place has been taken now by the Life Insurance Corporation of India on nationalisation.-for revising and setting aside the decree and judgment of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Tiruchirapalli, in S. C. S. No. 420 of 1953, granting a decree for Rs. 385 alleged to be the percentage commission due to the plaintiff Krishnamurthi, an insurance agent, from the petitioner in respect of the renewal premia on policies effected through his agency between 21st April 1944 and 14th December 1950, under S, 44 (1) (b) of the Indian Insurance Act.2. The facts are briefly these : The plaintiff Krishnamurthi was an insurance agent under the Oriental Government Security Life Assurance Co., for more than five years and less than ten years and , ceased to be such agent on 14th December 1950. According to him, he ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »