Chennai Court October 1974 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.
The Secretary, Palani Co-operative Sales Society, Palani and anr. Vs. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-14-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Mad241
Ramaprasada Rao, J.1. The petitioner is the Secretary of the Palani Co-operative Sales Society. Dindigul Road. Palani. The second respondent was appointed as one of its salesman. On charges of misconduct, to wit making false entries in the books of account of the Society and distributing to card-holders rations far in excess of those permitted to them, the second respondent was placed under suspension pending disciplinary action. The order of suspension was dated 5-12-1967 and it was to take effect from 6-12-1967. The petitioner's case is that such suspension is possible under its bye-laws. It transpires that later on the enquiry was completed and ultimately the second respondent was dismissed from service. We are not however concerned with the order of dismissal. The second respondent during the pendency of the enquiry filed a claim petition on the file of the first respondent under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act claiming a sum of Rs. 700 made up of a sum of Rs. 640 to...
The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Board of Revenue Vs. M. Hamid ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-14-1974
Reported in: (1975)2MLJ36
K. Veeraswami, C.J.1. This is a reference under Section 57 of the Stamp Act, the question being whether in the circumstances and facts of the case, the document dated 16th February, 1968 executed by one Mumtaz Begum in favour of her husband styled as a release deed should be stamped as a conveyance under the Stamp Act.2. When a question arises under which Article a document should be chageable, the first thing to be looked into is the document itself in order to determine the character thereof. The deeds covering the properties were in the name of the wife. But the wife admitted in the recitals that the entire consideration for the sale in her favour proceeded from her husband, and that she was only a name lender. Also, it is significant that there is a recital that the documents were with the husband. On a question whether a given transaction is a benami transaction, which is familiar in our country, usually the tests applied are source of purchase money, custody of title deeds, posse...
Kandaswami Chettiar and ors. Vs. Gopal Chettiar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-11-1974
Reported in: (1975)2MLJ184
T. Ramaprasada Rao, J.1. Defendants 2, 5, 6 and 7 in O.S. No. 109 of 1963 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Chingleput, are the appellants. The suit was laid for partition and allotment of plaintiff's one-fourth share in the properties described in schedules B to G in the plaint.2. The plaintiff's case is as follows : One Devaraja Chettiar had four sons, the plaintiff and defendants 1 to 3. He is said to have carried on a business in coconuts and plantains in Tiruvallur town, with the income from the family properties. The plaintiff : has set out in schedule B to the plaint all such joint family properties in which the appellants and respondents 1 to 3 as members of the same, are entitled to a share. It is not disputed that Devaraja Chettiar, by himself inherited certain properties, which became joint family properties, of the plaintiff and respondents 1 to 3 after the demise of Devaraja Chettiar. It is also said that certain properties were bequeathed to plaintiff and...
Chinnathambi Rowther and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-09-1974
Reported in: [1975]99ITR490(Mad)
Ramanujam, J. 1. The assesses is a partnership firm consisting of four partners. The firm commenced its business on July 21, 1959, and it was formed for the specific purpose of selling a particular quantity of cinder, purchased from the South Indian Railways, on June 21, 1959, in the name of one of the partners, Chinnathambi Rowther, for Rs. 85,600. Each of the partners advanced a sum of Rs. 22,500 as capital. The books of the firm were closed for the period from July 21, 1959, to March 31, 1963, and the net income was determined at Rs. 27,972. The assessee itself filed a return admitting the said amount of Rs. 27,972 as the income for the assessment year 1963-64. The Income-tax Officer completed the assessment accepting the return filed by the assessee.2. The assessee, however, filed an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner challenging the assessment on the ground that the sum of Rs. 27,972 should be taken as the income for the period of 3 years and 8 months pertaining to...
imperium Traders Vs. State of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-09-1974
Reported in: [1975]36STC6(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. The assessee is a dealer in watches and time-pieces. He was taxed on a turnover of Rs. 18,207.50 at 7 per cent representing sales of wrist-watches and Rs. 40 at 3 per cent being sales of pens for 1960-61. The assessee objected to the said assessment on the ground that his sales are not first sales as contemplated in items 2 and 22 respectively of the First Schedule to the General Sales Tax Act, 1959. But this objection was overruled by the assessing authority. An appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner also failed. There was a further appeal to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. Before the Tribunal, it was contended by the assessee that the watches and pens, which were the subject-matter of his sales, had been sold by Murray & Co., as auctioneers, on behalf of the customs authorities, that the said auctioneers have themselves collected sales tax from him and that, therefore, the auctioneers should be taken to be earlier sellers. It was further contended that in an...
In Re: Gopinathan and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-08-1974
Reported in: 1975CriLJ1217
ORDERK.N. Mudaliyar, J.1. The two petitioners were convicted of the offence punishable under Section 3 of the S. S. R. read with Section 7 (1) of the Essential Commodities Act. The accusation against them is that on 17-10-1971 at 1 A, M., at Thittankinavilaikulappuram road-junction, the two petitioners were found transporting 63 bags of boiled rice, each bag containing 70 kgs., in lorry, MDK 3057 in the belt area to Kerala without licence or permit. The submission of Mr. Alagiriswami is that this lorry was stopped at a distance of one and a half miles away from the Kerala-Tamil Nadu State-border and therefore, the two petitioners could not be said to export or attempt to export or abet the export of rice from any place within the State of Madras to a place outside the State, for the two petitioners could be actuated by locus paenitentiae before they reached the border of Kerala. In view of the rationale found in the judgments of the Supreme Court in Jacco v. State Crl. R. C. No. 887 of...
In Re: M. Lal and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-08-1974
Reported in: 1975CriLJ1719
ORDERPaul, J.1. In C. C. No. 13971 of 1972 on the file of the Eighth Presidency Magistrate, George Town, Madras, the revision petitioners in Cri. R, C. No. 1040 of 1973 have been convicted of an offence under Section 49-A (1) (a) (i) of the Madras City Police Act and have been each sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 100, in default to undergo S. I. for one month and in C. C. 13972 of 1972 on the file of the Eighth Presidency Magistrate, George Town, Madras, the revision petitioners in Cri. R. C. No. 1041 of 1973, have been convicted of an offence under Section 49-A (1) (a) (i) of the City Police Act and revision petitioners 1 and 2 have been each sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 100, in default to undergo S. I. for one month and revision petitioners 3 to 8 have been each sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 50 in default to undergo S. I. for one month and the revision petitioners in both these cases now challenge their convictions and sentences.2. The accusation against the revision petitioners in...
Seth Kushiram Beharilal Represented by Its Partner Sri Tirathdas and a ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-07-1974
Reported in: (1975)1MLJ367
K. Veeraswami, C.J.1. The only point raised in these two appeals is that, after the expiry of Madras Act XVIII of 1970, the notices issued under Section 18 of the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1959 on 14th October, 1970 and on 15th October, 1970 demanding, or proposing to assess, tax by way of cess thereunder were without jurisdiction. This Court struck down the validity of Section 18 of the parent Act, in so far as it related to charge of sales tax by way of cess on declared goods. Ordinances Nos. 2 and 3 of 1970 followed and they were replaced by Madras Acts XVIII and XIX of 1970. Those Acts were enacted and published on 29th September, 1970. Sub-section (2) of Section 1 of Act XVIII of 1970 is rather unusual inasmuch as it says that Section 2 shall be deemed to have come into force on 22nd October, 1962 and shall remain in force till such date as the State Government may, by notification, appoint. The purpose of the Act appears to be to recast Section 18 as it stood b...
Kishenlal Roopchand and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-01-1974
Reported in: [1976]104ITR422(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. The assessee in this case is a firm called 'Kishenlal Roopchand and Company', its place of business being 27, Godown Street, Madras-1. It is engaged in cloth trade as also money-lending. The partners are Misrilal Lunia and Jayanthraj Lunia.2. The assessee was originally assessed on a total income of Rs. 66,209 for the assessment year 1951-52, Later, action under Section 34(1)(a) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, was taken on the basis that certain credit entries were found in the accounts of one Pattu Padmanabha Chetty in the name of Champalal Jayanthraj and Kishenlal Roopchand. Based on the credit entries the assessee's assessment was revised by adding Rs. 28,211 to the income as originally assessed. The revised assessment was challenged in appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner but without success. Thereafter, the assessee went in appeal to the Tribunal and the Tribunal sustained the addition to the extent of Rs. 10,000 alone. At the instance of the asse...
S. Srinivasan (Deceased) (by Legal Representatives) Vs. Commissioner o ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-01-1974
Reported in: [1975]101ITR94(Mad)
Ramaswami, J.1. The assessee is the managing director of a private limited company called Anjaneya Motor Transports (Private) Ltd., Erode. The assessment for the previous year ending on September 30, 1961, relevant to the accounting year 1962-63, was completed on January 15, 1963, on an income of Rs. 51,935.2. In the assessment of the private limited company for the previous year ending on September 30, 1961, the company claimed a sum of Rs, 745 as mess expenses. Considering that the expenses related to that of the directors during their trips to Madras, the Income-tax Officer disallowed a sum of Rs. 200. In respect of another sum of Rs. 3,489 claimed by the company as travelling expenses incurred in respect of the visit of the managing director to Russia, the Income-tax Officer was not prepared to consider it as a business expenditure and accordingly disallowed that item as well. When the business which was originally a partnership was converted into a private limited company all the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›