Chennai Court January 1975 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.
M. Kaliappa Gounder Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-08-1975
Reported in: [1975]101ITR535(Mad)
Ramaswami, J.1. The assessee is the managing director of V. C. K. Bus Service (Private) Ltd., Coimbatore. He was also plying one taxi and one lorry. In response to the notice under Section 22(2) of the Income-tax Act, the assessee filed a return of income on August 19, 1960, in respect of the assessment year 1960-61, corresponding to the accounting year ending March 31, 1960, admitting a total income of Rs. 13,507. In the course of the examination of the accounts, it was found that the assessee had introduced cash amounting to Rs. 50,000 on April 1, 1959. The assessee explained that the amount was cash available on hand as on that date. The assessee was required to prove the existence of the cash of Rs. 50,000 as on April 1,1959. He stated that during 1958, there were credits in the accounts of three individuals as under :Rs.1.V. P. Velliangiri Gounder30,0002.Ramana Gounder19,0003.Champa Gounder12,0002. In the year ending March 31, 1959, it was the explanation given bythe assessee, tha...
K. M. Mammen Vs. Wealth-tax Officer, City Circle-ii (1) Madras.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-08-1975
Reported in: [1983]139ITR357(Mad)
K. VEERASWAMI C.J. - Though an appeal has been filed against the assessment and it is pending disposal, this petition under art. 226 of the Constitution is brought up on the ground that r. 1D of the Rules framed under the W.T. Act is not valid, because it is unreasonable or arbitrary. Section 7 of the W.T. Act provides for the procedure for assessing the value of the assets to be charged to wealth-tax. By an amendment of the section, the market value should be estimated to be the price which, in the opinion of the WTO, would fetch if sold in the open market on the valuation date, but this is subject to any rule made in this behalf. The Rule is merely enabling, the governing purpose thereof being to determine the market value. Rule 1D applies to a case where the equity share is not quoted in the share market and is of a company other than investment companies or managing agency companies. In such a case, the value of the liability as shown in the balance-sheet of the company shall be de...
Permatha (Died) and anr. Vs. Ramaswami and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-08-1975
Reported in: (1975)2MLJ216
K. Veeraswami, C.J.1. appeal arises under the Letters Patent from the judgment of Alagiriswami, J., who, concurring with the first appellate Court, dismissed the second appeal by the appellant who was the plaintiff. Her husband died intestate on 14th July, 1952. She was the second wife and had two sons by him. Years back, as a result of misunderstanding between her and her husband, the appellant instituted maintenance proceedings under the Code of Criminal Procedure and obtained a maintenance order. A suit brought by the husband to have that order cancelled, ended in a compromise which resulted in what we regard as a family settlement dated 24th December, 1930. The substance of this document was that the husband and his son by his first wife should take certain properties and live as joint Hindu family and the second wife and the two stons by her represented by their mother as guardian should take certain properties mentioned in the Schedule to the document and live as a separate famil...
Abraham Nadar and ors. Vs. the Special Deputy Collector (Land Acquisit ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-07-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Mad25; (1975)2MLJ84
K. Veeraswami, C.J.1. This batch of petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution and the writ appeals are directed against the notifications under Section 4(1) as well as the declarations under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, the first made in 1962 and the second in 1968 and January, 1969. The public purpose mentioned in Section 4 (1) notifications was the development of Tuticorin Port or Tuticorin Harbour, establishment of industries, industrial estates, training centre and construction of residential quarters. But in the declarations under Section 6 the purpose described was industrial development of Tuticorin area connected with Tuticorin Harbour Project. The land sought to be acquired extended to several thousands of acres. The short grounds on which the validity of the notifications as well as the declarations are challenged, are that the public purpose mentioned in the notifications under Section 4 (1) was vague and lacked in particulars so as to enable the owners of la...
In Re: N. Narasimhan and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-06-1975
Reported in: AIR1975Mad330
1. Mohan J., having found a conflict between Komalangiammal v. Sowbagiammal, 59 Mad LJ 529 = (AIR 1931 Mad 37) decided by a Division Bench and Jayakumar v. Ramarathnam, , of a singleJudge, has referred the particular question, whether in a petition for probate a caveator can properly claim title in himself in conflict with that of the testator or testatrix.2. The scope of a probate petition is confined to an enquiry as to the disposing state of the mind of the testator or testatrix and the disposition of his or her property by will. Any caveat entered into will also be confined to the scope of the petition. A person who claims interest in the estate of the testatrix will have the locus standi to maintain the caveat, the scope of caveat enquiry being no more than what it is in that of the probate proceedings themselves. This proposition, which is elementary, is long since established, both on principle and by practice, of this Court on the probate side. Section 283 of the Indian Success...
K.S. Ardanareeswara Gounder Vs. Tahsildar, Bhavani and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-03-1975
Reported in: (1976)1MLJ52
ORDERG. Ramanujam, J.1. The petitioner owns lands in Singampatti Village, Bhavani Taluk, Coimbatore District and the lands are comprised, in patta numbers 18, 30. 413 and 416. The land revenue payable for the lands comprised in the said patta numbers is Rs. 1.94, Rs. 2.93, Rs. 22.17 and Rs. 2.10 respectively and the water cess payable on them under the Madras Irrigation Cess Act, 1865 is Rs. 19.90, Rs. 32.10, Rs. 256.25 and Rs. 22.95 respectively.2. By Government Order Ms. No. 1475, Rural Development and Local Administration, dated 1st August, 1970 the rate of levy of local cess surcharge under Section 116 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1958 was made subject to a maximum of Rs. 1.50 on every rupee of land revenue. On the basis of the said Government Order the respondent had claimed a sum of Rs. 702.77 from the petitioner under the provisions of Section 115 and 116 of the said Act. The petitioner questions the validity of the said demand in the writ petition on the ground that the wa...
Bright Brothers (Private) Limited Vs. J.K. Sayani
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-02-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Mad55; (1975)2MLJ257
M.M. Ismail, J.1. The defendants in O.S. No. 4905 of 1968 on the file of the City Civil Court, Madras, are the appellants herein. Since the appeal was argued before me within a very narrow compass, it is unnecessary to refer to the facts of this case in great detail. The respondent is a wholesale dealer in plastic goods doing business at Madras, while the appellants herein are manufacturers of plastic goods, having their office and business premises at Bombay, In or about 1952 there was an arrangement between the appellants and the respondent under which the respondent became the sole selling agent of the appellants with regard to specified areas. The terms of that arrangement admittedly had not been reduced to writing. The respondent had been purchasing the goods of the appellants as well as booking orders for the sale of the appellants' goods and forwarding those orders to the appellants for being executed. A commission of 6 1/4 per cent. was being paid by the appellants to the respo...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›