Chennai Court April 1972 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
N.S. Pandaria Pillai Vs. the State of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-14-1972
Reported in: [1973]31STC108(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. The question that arises for consideration in this case is as to whether the collections to the extent of Rs. 5,817.41 made by the assessee as mahimai at the rate of half percent, of the net sale price from his purchasers will form part of his taxable turnover.2. It was contended by the assessee before the authorities below that the said mahimai collection has been made only from his selling agents, that it is a contribution by the purchasers only for renovation of a Vinayagar temple, and that the said sums collected as mahimai were not part of the sale proceeds. But his contention was overruled on the ground that the amounts collected were part of the sale consideration and that, therefore, they formed part of the taxable turnover, as there is no provision either in the Act or in the Rules giving a deduction for that amount. It is not in dispute that the amounts collected as mahimai formed part of the sale invoices issued by the assessee, though they were shown separat...
The Madras Metal Works Vs. the State of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-12-1972
Reported in: [1973]31STC566(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. On 15th May, 1964, there was a surprise inspection by the commercial tax authorities of the business premises of the assessee in this case, who was a manufacturer of certain aluminium and brass utensils. As a result of the said surprise inspection, certain anamath account books and slips were recovered from the premises. Out of the account books and slips so recovered, one book contained the details of certain transactions during the period 15th February, 1964, to 31st March, 1964 and it was found to be of the value of Rs. 27,794. This sum was treated by the assessing officer as the sale value of the utensils during the relevant period and, taking it as the basis, the suppressed turnover for the entire year on this account was calculated at Rs. 2,22,352. There were other account books and slips which showed transactions on certain dates which had been suppressed from the regular accounts. The assessee could not explain the entries in those account books and slips. There...
In Re: Union Services Private Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-11-1972
Reported in: [1973]45CompCas146(Mad)
N.S. Ramaswami, J.1. This is a petition under Sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, to sanction the scheme of arrangement and amalgamation of the petitioner-company, viz.. Union Services Private Ltd. with another company, viz., the Union Company (Motors) Private Ltd. The two companies are sister-companies and many of the shareholders are common to both the companies. There are 11 shareholders in the petitioner-company (which would be hereinafter referred to as the transferor-company), of which one shareholder is the Union Company (Motors) Private Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the transferee-company). The authorised capital of the transferor-company is Rs. 5 lakhs consisting of 5,000 equity shares of Rs. 100 each. The subscribed capital is Rs. 2,62,000 consisting of 2,620 equity shares of Rs. 100 each. Out of this, the transferee-company owns 1,000 shares. The transferor-company has been doing business as repairers, engineers, fitters, founders and painters of motor vehicl...
Dulichand Omraolal Vs. the State of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-11-1972
Reported in: [1973]30STC279(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. The disputed turnover in this case is a sum of Rs. 2,93,013.12 and that represents a portion of the purchases of groundnuts made by the assessee within the State and sold outside the State. It is not in dispute that the sales of groundnuts were inter-State and the assessee has paid the Central sales tax on the said sales. But the dispute here is, whether the disputed turnover is liable to be included in the taxable turnover of the assessee under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act. The assessing authority, the appellate authority as well as the Tribunal have taken the view that having regard to the definitions of 'turnover', 'total turnover' and 'taxable turnover' in the General Sales Tax Act, the disputed turnover being the value of the groundnuts purchased within the State would clearly come within the definition of 'taxable turnover'. It is on that basis, the disputed turnover has been brought to charge under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act.2. The learned couns...
The Revenue Divisional Officer and anr. Vs. V.K. Ramanathan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-11-1972
Reported in: (1972)2MLJ410
K. Veeraswami, C.J.1. Erumaipatti Panchayat Union Council consists of 29 members, of whom 25 are members by reason of their being Presidents of Panchayats and the remaining four have been co-opted. This is in accordance with the proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 12 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1958. On 5th May, 1966, the State Government by G.O. No. 1154, Rural Development and Local Administration, in purported exercise of their power under Section 155(1)(a), dissolved the Panchayat Union Council with effect from that date and directed that it would be re-constituted in terms of Sub-section (3) of that section with effect from 5th May, 1967. On 13th May, 1967, the Revenue Divisional Officer, who had acted as Special Officer in the interregnum, issued notices for the purpose of electing a Chairman. One of the co-opted members of the erstwhile Panchayat Union Council filed petitions on 25th May, 1967, under Article 226 of the Constitution for prohibition preventing the Revenue D...
R.M.V. Vellachi Achi Vs. R.M.A. Ramanathan Chettiar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-10-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Mad141
1. This appeal arises out of the order of the learned First Additional Subordinate Judge, Cuddalore, dismissing the petition, E. P. No. 201 of 1967 filed for executing the decree in O. S. No. 598 of 1966 of Singapore High Court.2. The plaintiff-petitioner who is the appellant filed the suit against the respondent for recovery of a very large sum on the basis of the alleged advances to the firm. of which he was a partner, in Singapore High Court. She obtained a decree against the respondent and sought to realize the decree amount of Rs. 3,90,432.01 with interest and costs, by attachment and sale of the immovable properties belonging to the respondent in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Cuddalore. The execution Petition was filed under Section 44-A, Civil Procedure Code since the decree of the High Court of Singapore is the decree of a reciprocating territory.3. The Execution Petition was resisted by the respondent on the following grounds, (a) that there was no reciprocating agreemen...
M.A. Rahim and anr. Vs. Sayari Bai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-10-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Mad83
1. This appeal has been preferred against the decision of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (hereinafter called 'the Tribunal') against the decision awarding a sum of Rs. 25,000/- as compensation payable to one Sayari Bai, the respondent in this appeal and the claimant before the Tribunal in M. O. P. 3 of 1968 on its file. Sayari Bai's only son Rupa alias Rupraj, aged about 12 years, met with his death as a result of a bus accident in the Bazar Road, Ambattur, opposite to the State Bank of India on 18-10-1967 at about 3-45 p.m. M. A. Rahim, the first respondent in the petitions, is the owner of the Bus No. MSW. 2471 involved in the fatal accident and Madras Motor and General Insurance Co., is the 2nd respondent. Sayari Bai, the mother of the unfortunate boy, made the claim for compensation under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). She claimed compensation of Rupees 70,000/- and Rs. 5,000/- for expenses, pain and suffering. The Tribunal awarde...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. P. Suryanarayana (Deceased) by L.R.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-10-1972
Reported in: [1973]88ITR321(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. The assessee, one Suryanarayana, owned a number of shares in India Cements Ltd., of the face value of Rs. 5 per share. Out of these, 30,000 shares were sold to strangers at the rate of Rs. 6 per share which happened to be the market value of those shares at that time. The assessee also transferred 15,000 shares to his three sons for Rs. 75,000 at the rate of Rs. 5 per share. In his return for the assessment year 1962-63, he included the capital gain in respect of the transfer of shares to the strangers but did not admit any income as capital gain in respect of the transfer of shares made by him in favour of his sons. The Income-tax Officer proposed to invoke Section 52 of the Income-tax Act in respect of the transfer of shares made by the assessee to his sons. But, the assessee contended that the object of the transfer was not the avoidance or reduction of tax, which was one of the essential requisites for the application of Section 52 and that the transfer was effected...
M.A. Rahim and anr. Vs. Sayani Bai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-10-1972
Reported in: (1972)2MLJ347
K.S. Ramamurthi, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the decision of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (hereinafter called 'the Tribunal') against its decision awarding a sum of Rs. 25,000 as compensation payable to one Sayari Bai, the respondent in this appeal and the claimant before the Tribunal in M.O.P. No. 3 of 1968 on its file. Sayari Bai's only son Rupa alias Rupraj, aged about 12 years, met with, his death as a result of a bus accident in the Bazaar Road, Ambattur, opposite to the State Bank of India on 18th October, 1967 at about 3-45 P.M. M.A. Rahim, the 1st respondent in the petition, is the owner of the bus MSW 2471 involved in the fatal accident and Madras Motor and General Insurance Co., is the 2nd respondent. Sayari Bai, the mother of the unfortunate boy, made the claim for compensation under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). She claimed compensation of Rs. 70,000 and Rs. 5,000 for expenses, pain and suffering. The Tr...
Krishnan Vs. Perumal Nadar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-07-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Mad81
1. The plaintiff in O. S. 13 of 1967 on the file of the District Munsif, Padhmanabhapuram, is the appellant. The above suit is for a declaration of the plaintiff's title and possession of the suit properties (S. Nos. 140-B and 165-B) charged for the performance of Dharmams, and for issue of a permanent injunction against defendants 2 to 4 restraining them from interfering with the plaintiff's possession. The suit properties along with S. No. 165-A, according to the plaint, stood charged for the performance of Dharmam in possession of the plaintiff's forefathers, that after them, the plaintiff has been in enjoyment of the same, that the plaintiff originally leased out to the first defendant in 1962 item (1) 140-B, 165-B and 165-A that the patta for the said lands stood in the name of the Ambalam that the plaintiff has been enjoying the aforesaid properties doing the Dharmams out of the income therefrom, that the fourth defendant claiming to be a heir of Kaliamma Valliamma created a numb...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »