Chennai Court March 1973 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ajax Products Ltd. (In Voluntary Liquid ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-08-1973
Reported in: [1976]104ITR375(Mad)
Ramanujam J.1. The assessee is a private limited company which went into voluntary liquidation on October 30, 1954. In 1955, the liquidator sold the factory premises and machinery to another company for a consideration of Rs. 10 lakhs. For the previous year ending on December 31, 1955, corresponding to the assessment year 1956-57, an assessment was made by the Income-tax Officer on the assessee in July, 1956, computing a profit of Rs. 5,36,034 under the second proviso to Section 10(2)(vii) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), and in this assessment the corporation tax was assessed at six annas and nine pies per rupee and rebate at the rate of four annas was given as per the provisions of Part II-D of Schedule I of the Finance Act of 1956. There were appeals and thereafter a reference to this court. This court on December 7, 1960, held in Ajax Products Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax : [1961]42ITR141(Mad) , that no portion of the profit was assessable u...
A.P. Dorairaj Vs. the State of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-07-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Mad252
1. These two civil miscellaneous appeals are out of O. P. No. 153 of 1967 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Madras. The appellant in C. M. A. 332 of 1971 by name Dorairaj filed the claim petition under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, for compensation in respect of injuries sustained by him in a motor accident which occurred on the Mount Road on 19-11-1966 at about 8-50 a.m. Originally he claimed a total sum of Rs. 48,000 towards compensation but later he was allowed to amend the petition making a claim of total compensation of Rs. 1,30,000. The respondent to the petition is the State of Madras by Commissioner of Police, Madras, the Motor Vehicle involved in the accident being a Police van. The Tribunal below awarded a total sum of Rs. 10,000 in favour of the claimant, Rs. 4,000 towards moneys spent by the claimant for treatment etc., Rs. 1,000 towards moneys spent by him in respect of his betrothel ceremony which took place sometime prior to the accident and ...
E.A.E.T. Sundararaj Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-06-1973
Reported in: [1974]95ITR454(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. The following question has been referred to this court under Section 66(2) of the Income-tax Act at the instance of the assessee :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal had material before it to come to the conclusion that the firm of E.A.E.T. Sundararaj and Co. is not a genuine firm, but is only a benami firm for the Hindu undivided family 'The circumstances under which the above reference has been made are these : The assessee is a Hindu undivided family represented by its karta, E. A. E. T. Sundararaj. The Hindu undivided family is carrying on business both in the purchase and sale of raw materials and in the manufacture and sale of fire-works under the name and style of Prithivi Fire Works Industries. For the previous year ending on February 6, 1960, relevant for the assessment year 1960-61, the assessee returned an income of Rs. 15,853 from the said business. A return of income for the same assessment year for which the previous y...
Dhala Tanning Company, Gemini Studios, Madras, Vijaya Productions (P.) ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-06-1973
Reported in: (1974)1MLJ71
ORDERRamaswami, J.1. These three Civil Miscellaneous Appeals arise out of three different petitions before the Employees' State Insurance Court, Madras. C.M. A. No. 12 of 1968 arises out of E.I.O.P. No. 36 of 1965 in which the Employees' State Insurance Corporation (hereinafter mentioned as the Corporation) claimed employees' contribution to the extent of RS. 3,593 for the period 1st April, 1961 to 27th March, 1965 against Messrs. Dhala Tanning Company, a company which was engaged in running a tannery. C.M.A. No. 191 of 1968 arises out of E.I.O.P. No. 6 of 1965 in which the Corporation claimed a total sum of Rs. 59,145 against Messrs. Gemini Studios by its proprietor, S.S. Vasan, as employees' contribution for the period 20th November, 1955 to 31st December, 1964. C.M.A. No. 192 of 1968 arises out of E.I.O.P. No. 35 of 1965 filed by the Corporation claiming a sum of Rs. 58,84.2 towards employees' contribution for the period 20th November, 1955 to 31st August, 1963 against Messrs. Vijay...
The Karur Vysia Bank Ltd., Coimbatore Vs. Ramachandra C. Oza and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-02-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Mad209
1. This is an appeal against the order of the learned Subordinate Judge of Coimbatore, directing the plaint in O. S. No. 155 of 1966 on his file to be returned for presentation to the appropriate court, on the ground that the Sub-Court, Coimbatore, has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the suit. The plaintiff attacks the order of the court below in this appeal.2. In order to understand the basis of the lower court's order, it is necessary to set forth a few facts.3. The Karur Vysia Bank, the appellant before me was the plaintiff in the court below, and it sued Ramachandra C. Oza (first defendant). The International Trading Co., Bombay (second defendant), Devakaran Nanjee Banking Co., Bombay (third defendant) and the Kanara Bank Ltd., Bombay (fourth defendant) for the recovery of Rs. 14,987-97 p, with future interest and costs upon the following averments-4. On 13-12-1965, the first defendant applied to the plaintiff's bank at Coimbatore for a demand draft on the Bombay Bank in f...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. G. Venkataraman
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-01-1973
Reported in: [1975]101ITR673(Mad)
V. Kamaswami, J.1. For the assessment year 1960-61, the Income-tax Officer treated a sum of Rs. 3,21,173 as dividend within the meaning of Section 2(6A)(e)of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, hereinafter called 'the Act', and included the sarna in the assessee's total income. The assessee is the karta of a Hindu undivided family. One .Rudrappan was the karta of the Hindu undivided family prior to the present assessee. He was the managing partner in a firm called R. Guruswamy Naidu & Co. with six annas share. This firm was the managing agent of a public limited company called Vijayakumar Mills Ltd., hereinafter called 'the company'. The company had a share capital of Rs. 20 lakhs divided into 8,000 preference shares of Rs. 100 each and 12,000 equity shares of Rs. 100 each. According to one of the articles of association of the company, the regulations contained in Table 'A' of the First Schedule of the Companies Act governedthe company. According to regulation 60 of Table 'A' every membe...
Hotchand Chattaram Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-01-1973
Reported in: [1974]96ITR586(Mad)
Ramaswami, J.1. One Hotchand Chattaram, his son, Bherumal, and the three sons of Bherumal, namely, Kishoredas, Harishchand and Hashmat-raj, constituted a Hindu undivided family. They migrated from Pakistan at the time of partition of India and had settled down in Madras. 'They brought with them only the available cash of Rs. 30,000 when they left Pakistan out of which a sum of Rs. 13,000 belonged to Muli Bai, the wife of Bherumal. Bherumal had also preferred a claim to the Evacuee Settlement Officer for a sum of Rs. 33,832 in respect of the movable and immovable properties left in Pakistan. There was a business by name 'Hotchand Chattaram, Madras'. Bherumal had been contending that this business belonged to him individually but the department did not accept it and assessed the income from the business as a Hindu undivided family consisting of Hotchand, his son, Bherumal, and Bherumal's sons.Muli Bai had advanced her money of Rs. 13,000 as a loan in the name of her minor son, Harischand...
S. Padmanabhan Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-01-1973
Reported in: [1974]95ITR519(Mad)
Ramaswami, J.1. The assessee was the owner of two house properties--Door Nos. 5-A and 5-B, Rajaji Street, Tambaram, and a vacant site adjoining the said properties. The two houses were separately assessed to panchayat tax. The assessee sold away these three items of properties during the year of account relevant to the assessment year 1962-63 to three different persons under three separate sale deeds on different dates. The house properties were sold for Rs. 14,000 each and the land for Rs. 6,000, thus realising a total consideration of Rs. 34,000. In addition, the assessee obtained a sum of Rs. 500 by way of forfeiture of deposit in respect of one of the transactions. Thus in all the assessee got a sum of Rs. 34,500 by the sale of these properties. Adopting the value of these properties as on January 1, 1954, at Rs. 20,000 the assessee returned an income of Rs. 14,500 under capital gains and claimed exemption under Section 53 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ' the Act '...
Khetty Traders and anr. Vs. Deputy Commercial Tax Officer Ii, Inspecti ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-01-1973
Reported in: [1973]32STC484(Mad)
ORDERRamaprasada Rao, J.1. The petitioners are aggrieved by a notice issued by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer II, Inspection Wing, Madras-2, in and by which they were called upon to pay a compounding fee of Rs. 50 or face a prosecution if they are not inclined to suffer the compounding fee, for having violated Rules 26(9) and 26(14) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Rules, 1959. It appears that the inspection wing of the commercial taxes department inspected the business premises of the petitioners on 20th April, 1971, at about 7 p. m. The salesman in one case and the accountant in another were the persons who were in-charge of the business premises. When they were asked to produce the stock account and the production account, which every dealer has to maintain under the provisions of the Act and the Rules made thereunder, the persons in-charge of the firm categorically stated that there were no such books kept by them in regular course. The persons in custody of the place gave st...
The Nadar Mahajana Sangam by Its General Secretary, V.P.R Gangaram Dor ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-01-1973
Reported in: (1974)1MLJ328
G. Ramanujam, J.1. The plaintiff, Nadar Mahajana Sangam is the appellant herein. It filed a suit against the defendant, the Madurai Municipality for a declaration that the enhancement of property tax from Rs. 1,426-50 to Rs. 3,282-39 per half year made in 1968 was invalid and for a permanent injunction restraining the Municipality from collecting the enhanced tax. Its case was that it was running a boarding and lodging house in East Masi Street, Madurai Town from 1965, that it is collecting a rent of Rs. 1 for a single room and Rs. 2 for a double room per day, that the Municipality originally levied and collected tax at Rs. 1,426-70 per half year based on the said rentals, that in 1968 the Municipality suddenly enhanced the tax to Rs. 4,416-08 for a half year, Which was however reduced by the Municipal Council to Rs. 3,282-39 and that the enhancement in tax from Rs. 1,426-50 to Rs. 3,282-39 is illegal and arbitrary. The plaintiff also questioned the validity of the assessment proceedin...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »