Chennai Court February 1973 Judgments
Velappa Gounder Vs. Nachimuthu Gounder and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-28-1973
Reported in: AIR1973Mad449; (1973)1MLJ465
ORDER1. This is a reference from the office as to whether the appeal is maintainable in this court against the order passed in C. C. 89 of 1970 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Erode. The said order was passed by the Subordinate Judge on a reference made under S. 30 of the Land Acquisition Act to apportion the compensation amount awarded to the claimants. The amount involved in the reference is Rs. 494.99. As per Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act an appeal shall lie in any proceedings under that Act to the High Court from an award or from any part of an award of the court. Thus, it is clear from this section that the appeal intended is from an award or from any part of the award passed by the Court. In Chengalvaraya v. Collector of Madras : AIR1965Mad376 a Bench of this court rejecting the contention that a civil revision petition lies held that only an appeal lies against an order of a court rejecting a reference made by the Collector under Sections 18 and 31 of the Land Acq...
Tag this Judgment!M. Ct. Muthiah Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-28-1973
Reported in: [1974]97ITR516(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. The assessee derived income from property as also from other sources. Besides, he was one of the two partners in a firm called 'S.Rm. M.Ct.M. Firm '. That firm carried on money-lending business and also derived income from its house properties. In respect of the years ending on April 12, 1958, April 12, 1960, and April 12, 1961, relevant for the assessment years 1958-59, 1960-61 and 1961-62, its income from various sources was determined thus by the Income-tax Officer :1958-591960-611961-62Income from propertyRs. 29,736Rs. 31,308Rs. 31,706BusinessRs. 5,455 (loss)Rs. 42,315 (profit)Rs. 53,163 (profit)Foreign incomeRs. 701Rs. 18,507Rs. 21,324Dividend......Rs. 4,6402. Thereafter, the Income-tax Officer allocated the income of the firm under each head as determined above among the two partners as follows:1958-591960-611961-62Income from propertyRs. 14,868Rs. 15,519Rs. 15,853BusinessRs. 2,723 (loss)Rs. 21,407Rs. 26,581Foreign incomeRs. 350Rs. 9,254Rs. 10,662Dividend......Rs....
Tag this Judgment!South India Viscose Ltd. Vs. Textiles Committee and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-28-1973
Reported in: [1973]91ITR595(Mad)
Raghavan, J. 1. This appeal arises out of W.P. No. 2191 of 1969 filed by the appellant for the issue of a writ of prohibition or any other appropriate writ, direction or order restraining the first and third respondents from taking any further steps in pursuance of Notice No. 55/405/68-AC, dated February 20, 1969, of the first respondent and Reference No. 11725/ 69-A5, dated July 14, 1969, of the third respondent from collecting the sum of Rs. 78,433 from the petitioner.2. The appellant is a public limited company and its objects, inter alia, as contained in its memorandum of association are : to carry on business of manufacturing, buying, selling, distributing, exchanging, converting, altering, importing, exporting, processing, twisting or otherwise handling ordealing in rayon yarn which includes artificial silk yarn and all synthetic fibres whatsoever for textile use, cellulose staple fibre and yarn also known as spun rayon synthetic fibres and yarns and other staple fibre or fibrous...
Tag this Judgment!A.R.K. Perumal Chettiar Vs. Joint Commercial Tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-28-1973
Reported in: [1974]34STC310(Mad)
ORDERRamaprasada Rao, J. 1. The petitioner is challenging the order of assessment by the original authority under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act dated 26th December, 1966, under the following circumstances. For the assessment year 1964-65, the petitioner did not file his usual return in time. As the return was not so forthcoming, the assessing authority initiated proceedings to assess the petitioner under the best judgment method under Section 12(2) of the Act. It is however common ground that for the assessment year, the petitioner did not keep any accounts in relation to his vast transactions relating to imports and exports which he effected under valid licences held by him for the purpose. The petitioner ushered in a return after proceedings were initiated against him by the assessing authority under Section 12(2) of the Act. As there were no account books which could be compared with the return so filed by the petitioner, the assessing authority gave the petitioner enough opp...
Tag this Judgment!S. Kannan and ors. Vs. the All India Sai Satnaj (Registered) by Its Pr ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-28-1973
Reported in: (1974)1MLJ174
Raghavan, J.1. The respondents in the Writ petition are the appellants. The appeal arises out of an order of Kailasam, J, in W.P. No. 4047 of 1965 quashing the order of the Deputy Commissioner for Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (Administration) Department, Madras-34, holding that 'Sri Sai Mandir situate at Mylapore is a 'temple' as defined in Section 6 (20) of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959, on the ground that there is no material before the Deputy Commissioner to come to the conclusion that ' Sai Mandir ' is a Hindu ' Religious Institution ' and that the order of the Deputy Commissioner is vitiated by material errors apparent on the face of the record. The present appeal is against the order of Kailasam, J.2. The petitioner in the writ petition is the President of the All India Sai Samaj, which was founded in 1941 and was registered in 1956 under the Societies Registration Act, 1865. The objects of the Samaj are the propagation of faith in God with ...
Tag this Judgment!M.J. Xavier Vs. N. Chidambaram and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-27-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Mad96
N.S. Ramaswami, J.1. This Civil miscellaneous appeal is agent the dismissal of a petition to set aside an award under Section 30 of the Arbitration Act. The appellant before us had entered into a contract with the President of India for collecting, conveying and delivering parcels etc., from or to madras Central Railway station goods shed and other places. Clause 22 of the contract provided that all matters in dispute between the parties shall be referred to arbitration as mentioned therein. The contract was terminated by the Union of India at a particular stage. The dispute between the parties related to amounts due to the appellant before us in respect of works already done and the claim of damages that he made on the ground that his contract has been wrongfully terminated by the Union of India. Admittedly, these matters were referred to arbitration, and the Arbitrator gave his award dated 14-8-1961.In that award, the Arbitrator said that the appellant is entitled to moneys at a part...
Tag this Judgment!K.A. Mathialagan Vs. P. Srinivasan and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-27-1973
Reported in: AIR1973Mad371
1. In these two writ petitions the petitioner is seeking a writ of Mandamus for a direction to the respondents 1 to 5 not to interfere in any manner with his right to continue to function as Speaker of the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly and also for a preventive injunction restraining the first respondent, the Deputy Speaker of the Assembly, from functioning as Speaker thereto, and by way of a consequential relief asks for the quashing of the notification published in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette Extraordinary No. 403 dated 2-12-1972 in Memo No. 22223/72-1 T. N. L.(B) Legislative Assembly III No. 676(a) of 1972, notifying the petitioner as having been removed from the Office of the Speaker of the Tamil Nadu legislative Assembly.2. Before the relevant facts as reflected in the affidavits filed by the parties are dealt with, certain events anterior to the controversial date, when the petitioner claims that his right to occupy the seat as Speaker of the Assembly has been taken away,...
Tag this Judgment!Sree Shanmugar Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-27-1973
Reported in: [1974]96ITR411(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. The assessee is a public limited company now under liquidation. It carried on business in the manufacture and sale of cotton yarn mostly 20's and 26's. It had 6,000 spindles. For the assessment years 1957-58, 1958-59 and 1959-60, the assessee submitted returns of its income. The income, the turnover, the gross profit returned, percentage of waste in cotton, the out-turn of yarn for the three years as disclosed in these returns and the assessee's books of account are as follows :31-7-1956.31-7-195731-7-1958Income or lossRs. 54,691 (loss)Rs. 4,054 (income)Rs. 1.31,673 (loss)TurnoverRs. 14,65,318 Rs. 16,66,038Rs. 3,63,475Gross profit rate 7.6%9.3% loss.Waste on cotton 23.8%25.1%28.2%Production of20's 5'7oz.4.72oz.3.57oz.yarn per Ib.26's 3-18,,3.12 '3.17 '2. In the course of assessment proceedings the Income-tax Officer felt that the waste claimed was excessive and that the standard of production was below normal.3. As the assessee had not maintained any record to show that...
Tag this Judgment!Vrajlal Parekh Vs. Assistant Commercial Tax Officer, Park Town Divisio ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-26-1973
Reported in: [1975]35STC223(Mad)
ORDERRamaprasada Rao, J.1. The petitioner is a dealer in toys. For the assessment year 1966-67, he submitted a return in form A but contemporaneously opted for payment of the local sales tax under Section 7 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act. The revenue accepted the request and caused a provisional assessment to be made under that section. Ultimately, the petitioner returned a total taxable turnover of Rs. 25,646.36 in form A-l for 1966-67 and he reiterated, the original stand taken by him regarding his option for the payment of the general sales tax under the local law under Section 7. After a check of the accounts, which the authorities are entitled to under Section 7(3) of the Act, it was discovered that the petitioner effected local purchases to the tune of Rs. 382.34 and the rest of the purchases were from outside the State, covered by the usual C form. Consequent upon this discovery on the scrutiny of the accounts, the revenue charged the petitioner under Section 7 of the T...
Tag this Judgment!Soma Veerappa Vs. Muthurasappa Chettiar and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-23-1973
Reported in: AIR1973Mad386; (1973)2MLJ58
ORDER1. The petitioner seeks to review the judgment of this Court dated 18-6-1970 on two grounds(1) that the sale of the shares in question is prohibited by the articles of association and (2) that the sale of the excessive shares than what is absolutely required to discharge the decree debt should be set aside. Before dealing with the merits of the petitioner's contention it is necessary to set out a few facts. There was a decree against the petitioner herein and in execution of that decree ten shares belonging to him in a private limited company were brought to sale. The actual amount outstanding under the decree on the date of sale was Rs. 5193-94. There was a sale of six shares for a sum of Rs. 9,000/- to the son of the decree-holder. The said sale was challenged by the petitioner on three grounds(1) that the value fetched by the shares in auction is too low having regard to the real value worth of the shares,(2) the sale of six shares was not justified and the decree amount could ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »