Chennai Court September 1967 Judgments
T.V. Sundaram Iyengar and Sons (P.) Ltd. Vs. the State of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-29-1967
Reported in: [1970]25STC160(Mad)
Veeraswami, J.1. In these tax cases filed by the assessee and relating to assessment years 1955-56 to 1957-58, the substantial question is whether the view of the Tribunal, agreeing with the department, that the supply by it of bus-bodies constructed and fitted on to chassis provided by customers amounted to sale of specific chattels as distinct units chargeable to sales tax, is correct. The turnover under this head was in the first instance, on the claim of the assessee, excluded from charge on the ground that it consisted of works contract. This was, however, included in the taxable turnover and the assessment to that extent was enhanced in disposing of an appeal filed by the assessee disputing the chargeability of certain other parts of the turnover which is not in question now. The second ground in these cases is that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, in enhancing the assessment, as aforesaid, acted in excess of his jurisdiction in the assessee's appeals confi...
Tag this Judgment!T. S. Rajam Vs. Controller of Estate Duty, Madras.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-29-1967
Reported in: [1968]69ITR342(Mad)
The propriety and legality of the exercise of jurisdiction by the revenue under section 62 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, is challenged in these proceedings. The relevant facts are as follows :T.V. Sundaram Iyengar, hereinafter referred to as the deceased, died on April 28, 1955. His son, T.S. Rajam, hereinafter referred to as the accountable person, filed the necessary returns. The Assistant Controller of Estate Duty, Madurai, originally assessed the estate of the deceased on February 28, 1957, determining the principle value of the estate at Rs. 3,84,066. Subsequently, by his order dated July 31, 1959, the Assistant Controller rectified the earlier assessment under section 62 of the Act and revised the principle value of the estate at Rs. 6,12,879. The main item of dispute in this tax relates to the 1,000 shares which the deceased held in Messrs. T.V. Sundaram Iyengar and Sons (Private) Limited. The deceased sold these 1,000 shares to his sons and grandsons on December 6, 1954, for a ...
Tag this Judgment!Southern India Tannery Vs. Industrial Tribunal and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-28-1967
Reported in: (1969)IILLJ157Mad
Ramakrishnan, J.1. On a reference by the Government of Madras, the Industrial tribunal, Madras, considered the issue whether the demand of the workers employed in certain tanneries in Tiruchirappalli for the introduction of a gratuity scheme is justified and if so to formulate a scheme, in Industrial Dispute No. 31 of 1964. There were nine tanneries concerned in the case. They were all respondents as against the secretary, Tiruchi Tannery Workers Union, Tiruchi, who was the claimant. The Southern India Tannery, Tiruchirappalli, the petitioner in this writ petition, was respondent 5 in the industrial dispute. The tribunal came to the conclusion that in respect of tanneries other than the petitioner herein, their financial position was so poor that the burden of a gratuity scheme, if imposed on them, would be 'the last straw that would break the camel's back.' But no such impediment arose in the case of the petitioner whose financial position was considered quite sound, and that justifie...
Tag this Judgment!P.K. Ramaswamy Vs. Municipality of Coimbatore, Represented by Its Comm ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-28-1967
Reported in: (1968)1MLJ199
ORDERP. Ramakrishnan, J.1. The petitioner is running a flour mill in No. 8/177, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Road, Coimbatore. He applied to the Municipality on 27th April, 1961, under Section 250 of the District Municipalities Act for permission to instal machinery for starting a flour mill in the abovesaid premises. No order was communicated by the Municipality within thirty days of the receipt of the application. Relying upon the provision in Section 321(11) of the District Municipalities Act, the petitioner assumed that his application had been allowed and put up the machinery. From 1961 onwards, he had been running his flour mill and applied for renewal of the licence in 1962, 1963 and 1964 paying the licence fee thereafter, but no orders were passed on those applications for renewal. But on 31st July, 1964, the Municipality passed orders rejecting his application relying on the circumstances that no installation of machinery could be allowed in the premises because it is situated in an ar...
Tag this Judgment!Southern India Tannery Vs. the Industrial Tribunal and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-28-1967
Reported in: (1969)1MLJ388
ORDERP. Ramakrishnan, J.1. On a reference by the Government of Madras, the Industrial Tribunal Madras, considered the issue whether the demand of the workers employed in certain tanneries in Tiruchirapalli for the introduction of a Gratuity Scheme is justified and if so to formulate a scheme, in I.D., No. 31 of 1964. There were nine tanneries concerned in this case. They were all respondents as against the Secretary, Tiruchi Tannery Workers Union, Tiruchi, who was the claimant. The Southern India Tannery, Tiruchirapalli, the petitioner in this writ petitions, was the fifth respondent in the industrial dispute. The Tribunal came to the conclusion that in respect of tanneries other than the petitioner herein, their financial position was so poor that the burden of a gratuity scheme, if imposed on them, would be ' the last straw that would break the camel's back.' But no such impediment arose in the case of the petitioner whose financial position was considered quite sound, and that justi...
Tag this Judgment!K. Mahesh and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-27-1967
Reported in: AIR1969Mad69; [1968]70ITR240(Mad)
Veeraswami, J.1. These tax cases raise a common question as to whether on the facts and in the circumstances, the claim for deduction of Wealth Tax paid by the assesses as an admissible expenditure is lawful. The Revenue as well as the tribunal negatived the claim and the references have come before us under Section 66 (1) of the Income-tax Act 1922 or under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act 1961. Each of the assessees as an Individual received dividend Income and interest in the relative previous year and paid Wealth Tax in a certain sum on his holding of stock. The sum paid as Wealth Tax was sought to be deducted from the income that comprised of dividends and interest as an allowable expenditure under Section 57(iii) of the Income-tax Act 1961, but unsuccessfully before the Revenue.The Tribunal relied on Kumbakonam Electric Supply Corporation Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax Madras. : [1963]50ITR809(Mad) and dismissed the aseessee's appeal in each case. That was of course a cas...
Tag this Judgment!C.D. Dhanaraj and anr. Vs. S. Nami Stella Sarojini and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-27-1967
Reported in: (1968)1MLJ390
K.S. Venkataraman, J.1. The revision petitions are connected and hence they are being disposed of together. The petitioners are the defendants in the suit O.S. No. 16 of 1963 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Tuticorin. The suit was filed by the four plaintiffs claiming an one-fourth share of the properties listed out in the four schedules to the plaint. The parties are Christians governed by the Indian Succession Act, 1925. The plaintiffs alleged that the properties belonged to their materna-grandfather, Gnana Doraiswami Nadar, who died intestate on 9th March, 1955. Their mother's mother Ratnamani Sellammal was the first wife of Gnana Doraiswami Nadar. The three defendants' are the sons of Gnana Doraiswami Nadar by his second wife Gnana Siromani Ammal. Ratnamani Sellammal, the first wife died during the lifetime of Gnana Doraiswami Nadar and the second wife died shortly after his death in November, 1955. The heading of the properties in Schedule II was Properties of Gnana ...
Tag this Judgment!K.M. Lakshmanan Vs. the State of Madras, Represented by the Collector ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-27-1967
Reported in: (1968)2MLJ208
ORDERP. Ramakrishnan, J. 1. The petitioner, K.M. Lakshmanan, obtained a lease for a period of four years from 12th October, 1960 of a rice mill belonging to the predecessor-in-title of the 2nd respondent Sanjeevi Mudaliar. Previously there was a licence to run that rice mill in the name of the predecessor of the and respondent. Consequent upon this lease the petitioner obtained a licence under the Rice Milling Industry (Regulation) Act, . 1958 for running the rice mill from 17th July, 1962. The petitioner however continued to have the licence for a period ending 31st March 1965, after renewal. In the meantime consequent on the fact that the lease in favour of the petitioner from the brother of the 2nd respondent had expired on nth October, 1964 disputes arose between the and respondent and the petitioner about the recovery of possession of the rice mill. According to the 2nd respondent, the petitioner filed a suit for injunction and the suit Was dismissed on 31st August, 1965 for defau...
Tag this Judgment!S. Seshachari Vs. the Srirangam Co-operative Building Society
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-27-1967
Reported in: (1969)2MLJ418
ORDERT. Ramaprasada Rao, J.1. The appellant in the lower Court is the petitioner in this civil revision petition. The learned District Judge, Tiruchirappalli, dismissed the appeal of the petitioner against an award of the Co-operative Sub-Registrar, Tiruchirappalli under Section 51 (1)(b) of the Madras Co-operative Societies Act (VI of 1932), hereinafter referred to as the old Act. The respondent raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the appeal under the new Act (LIII of 1961), when there was no provision for such appeal under the old Act. The learned District Judge upheld the preliminary objection. As against the said order, the present civil revision petition is filed.2. Sri R. Rangachari for the petitioner contends that under the new Act, a right of appeal is expressly provided to the Co-operative Tribunal, namely, the District Judge, Tiruchirappalli, in this case, against the award of the officer of the Co-operative Department and the award having been giv...
Tag this Judgment!Madras State Wakf Board Vs. Tajmul Hussain
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-26-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Mad332; (1968)1MLJ354
(1) This appeal has been preferred by the complainant, the Madras State Wakf Board, against the order of acquittal of the accused, Tajmul Hussain, by the Sixth Presidency Magistrate, Saidapet, Madras. The accused is the Mutavalli of the wakf known as Nabhi Khan Gatak mosque alias Kasab Kadai mosque at Courtalam road Tirunelveli town. The accused as the Mutavalli of the mosque is required under S. 32 of the Wakf Act, 1954 (hereinafter called 'the Act') to furnish statement of accounts to the complainant Board. But he failed to submit the accounts for the years 1956-57 to 1962-63. He was prosecuted under Sec. 41(1)(b) and (i) of the Act.(2) P.W. 1, the legal assistant to the Board, stated in evidence that the accused had not submitted accounts even though by notice dated 17-12-1964 he was asked to submit the accounts from 1956-57 to 1962-63. The accused also did not submit the budget estimates as required under S. 31 of the Act. Ex. P-3 is the notice issued by the complainant to the accu...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »