Chennai Court June 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Madras Motor and General Insurance Co. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-19-1974
Reported in: [1975]99ITR243(Mad)
Ramaswami, J.1. These two references relate to the same assessee but in respect of two different assessment years. The first reference relates to the assessment year 1963-64, and the second relates to the assessment year1964-65. The assessee is a public limited company carrying on business in motor and general insurance. The previous years relevant to the assessment years in question are calendar years 1962 and 1963, respectively. In respect of these assessment years the assessee filed the returns of income showing income from different sources separately. The total of such income for the assessment year 1963-64 came to Rs. 22,15,583. This income included a sum of Rs. 4,85,802 being the income from dividends from other companies. The assessee claimed that it is entitled to a rebate of Corporation tax at 45% on this dividend income as per the Finance Act, 1963. The Income-tax Officer was of the view that, since in the case of an insurance company the entire income is assessed as from bu...
Hepzibah Annathai Rengachari Vs. R. Ananthalakshmi Rangachari
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-18-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Mad342; (1975)2MLJ387; MANU/TN/0233/1975
Veeraswami, C.J.1. The appeal arises from an order of Paul, J., made in an application of the appellant for grant of letters of administration. She claimed that she was the wife of one S. Rangachariar, who died at Madras leaving a will dated 14-1-1964. He had an account No. 3188 in the United Commercial Bank, Purasawalkam, jointly with the appellant and her daughter one Rebecca. Also, she claimed the death benefit payable by the Arabian Oil Co. In respect of these two items, she applied for Letters of Administration valuing them together at Rs. 59,793.76. The respondent claiming to be the senior wife of the deceased, appeared on the scene at a later stage and contended that the assets left by Ranga-chari amounted to much more than the value mentioned in the affidavit of assets, and that all the assets of the deceased should be valued and brought into the affidavit of assets of the deceased in order that Letters of Administration might be granted subject to other conditions, if any. Thi...
Jayanthi Films (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-18-1974
Reported in: [1974]97ITR8(Mad)
Ramanujam, J. 1. The following question has been referred to us by the Tribunal under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 : 'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessee is not entitled to the deduction of the sum of Rs. 1,00,000 in the computation of its business income under Section 36(1)(vii) or Section 28 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1962-63 ?' 2. The assessee is a private limited company engaged in the financing of film production and in film distribution. Under an agreement dated 7th May, 1959, the assessee advanced a sum of Rs. 1,00,000 to one film producer, K. Munirathnam, hereinafter called 'the producer', carrying on business of film production under the name and style of 'Sivakami Pictures'. In consideration of this financial assistance, it was provided in the agreement that the assessee was to be paid interest at 12 per cent. and a share of six annas in the rupee from the net profits realised by exploitation of the picture...
A. Shanthi Nainar and Sons Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-17-1974
Reported in: [1974]97ITR356(Mad)
Ramanujam, J. 1. The assessee is a firm of two partners, A. Shanthi Nainar and A. Padmaraj, dealing in silk cloth. The partnership was constituted under a deed of partnership dated May 30, 1958. According to the said deed, the profits or losses are to be shared in the ratio of 13:5 between Shanthi Nainar and Padmaraj. The firm was registered under Section 26A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, for the year 1959-60, and, later, registration was renewed up to the assessment year 1961-62. On April 13, 1960, there was a partial partition in the family of one of the partners, i.e., Shanthi Nainar. That family, in addition to the I3/18ths share held by Shanthi Nainar in the assessee-firm, was having a separate wholesale business in handloom cloth. The said business as well as the interest of Shanthi Nainar in the assessee-firm were the subject-matter of the said partial partition. As per the said partition, the separate business in handloom cloth and the 13/18ths share in the assessee-firm ...
Employees' State Insurance Corporation Vs. Sri Sakthi Textiles (P) Lim ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-17-1974
Reported in: (1975)ILLJ388Mad
Kailasam, J.1. This appeal filed by the Employees' State Insurance Corporation against the judgment of the Employees' State Insurance Court and the District Judge, Coimbatore, holding that the workers engaged by the mills for putting up additional constructions are not employees within the definition of the term in the Act. 2. The short facts necessary are as follows : Sri Sakthi Textiles Private Limited was granted additional spindleage and it expanded its premises by putting up new buildings. For that purpose, it employed a large number of workers. The plea of the respondent-mills is that no muster roll was kept regarding these workers whose work was to last only till the building was completed and that the workers thus recruited were working on an ad hoc basis just when required. The Employees' State Insurance Corporation is of the view that the workmen thus employed fell within the ambit of the definition of the term in the Act and that the appellant is bound to pay the contributio...
The Board of Revenue, by the Commissioner of Land Revenue, Prohibition ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-17-1974
Reported in: (1975)1MLJ130
K. Veeraswami, C.J.1. This appeal raises a question of interpretation of Section 58 of Madras Act XXVI of 1948. That section was introduced by Madras Act XLIV of 1956, but had effect from 10th April, 1949. It is common ground that originally Perungarai constituted a whole village, within the limits of Sivaganga Zamindari. About 1754, parts of the village had been resumed and re-granted to a Chatram. In the Inam Settlement Proceedings, therefore the grants of such portions were not recognised as grants of whole villages and were not confirmed as such. The Sivaganga Zamin was notified and taken over with effect from 1st October, 1951, under Section 3 (b) of the Act. The State claimed to recover jodi, a sum of Rs. 630 per annum, as we are told, from the landholder, if we may use the expression in the context. But he resisted the demand on the ground that the State by virtue of the notification under Section 3 (b) of the Act and taking over of the Zamin of Sivaganga, did not acquire the ri...
Employees' State Insurance Corporation represented by the Regional Dir ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-17-1974
Reported in: (1975)1MLJ127
P.S. Kailasam, J.1. This appeal is filed by the-Employees' State Insurance Corporation against the judgment of the Employees. State Insurance Court and the District Judge, Coimbatore, holding that the-workers engaged by the Mills for putting up additional constructions are not employees within the definition of the term. in the Act.2. The short facts necessary are as follows. Sri Sakthi Textiles Private Limited was. granted additional spindlage and it extended its premises by putting up-new buildings. For that purpose, it employed a large number of workers. The plea of the respondent--Mills is that no muster roll was kept regarding these workers whose work was to last only till the building was completed and that the workers thus recruited were working on an ad hoc basis just when required. The Employees State Insurance Corporation is of the view that the workmen thus employed fall within the ambit of the definition of the term in the Act and that the appellant is bound to pay the cont...
In Re Selvi and anr. Vs. Assused 1 and 2
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-16-1974
Reported in: 1975CriLJ113
K. N. Mudaliyiar, J.1. The two petitioners were accused of an offence punishable under Section 6 (b) of the Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act, in that on 20-2-1973 at about 9-30 P.M., at Edward Elliots Road, Kalayani Hospital, the accused solicited one Raju and demanded Rs. 10 to have sexual intercourse with any one of the two accused and thereby caused annoyance and obstruction to Raju.2. The learned Sixth Presidency Magistrate (as he then was) questioned the accused-petitioners under Section 242, Cr.P.C., to show cause why they should not be convicted. The two petitioners denied the offence and pleaded not guilty. Thereafter, the statutory duty enjoined on the Magistrate is to proceed to hear the complainant and take all such evidence as may be produced in support of the prosecution and also to hear the accused and take all such evidence as they produce in their defence, under Section 244 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. If there is no admission on the part of t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›