Chennai Court November 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.
Tiruvalargal Krishnados Kikani Cotton, Cloth, Yarn and Textiles Dyes V ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-19-1975
Reported in: (1976)2MLJ238
V. Ramaswami, J.1. The assessee in this batch of cases are dealers in cloth, cotton yarn, dyes and chemicals carrying on business at Coimbatore. They are also: exporters and importers of cotton, cotton yarn, dyes and chemicals. In the returns for the assessment years 1960-61 to 1965-66 in respect of a portion of turnover relating to sales of dyes and chemicals they contended that the sales are exempt as import sales. They contended that the sales were effected on forward or afloat basis, that the importation of those goods were made by the Radha Dyeing Factory, hereinafter called as the purchasers, by paying the value of the goods including customs duty and that the assessees acted only as agents of the purchasers to whom the goods were sold. In this connection, they relied on a preliminary agreement between them and the purchasers as evidenced by their letter, dated 15th March, 1960 and a later formal agreement, dated 7th of April, 1961. The facts relating to these turnovers as eviden...
S.M. Mohamed Ibraim and Co. and Kalaiman Tobacco Factory Vs. the Super ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-18-1975
Reported in: 1979(4)ELT166(Mad)
1. The only point which calls for decision in this case is whether, where the firm has to furnish security to secure the proper working of a warehouse stocking tobacco to the value of Rs. 50,000/-, it should be executed by the firm or in that event, each partner should produce a solvency certificate individually.2. It seems to us that having regard to the purpose of the bond, it will be more than ample if the firm executes a bond to secure the proper working of the warehouse to the value of Rs. 50,000/-the security being tested. Such security may be offered by the firm itself on the basis of its assets and if these assets of the firm will suffice to secure that amount, there is no need whatever to ask for solvency certificate of each of the partners separately. The Department could proceed on those lines. There will be a direction accordingly.3. The appeal is allowed in those terms. No. costs....
Madurai-devakottai Transport Private Limited Vs. Labour Court and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-17-1975
Reported in: (1976)IILLJ257Mad
1. The petitioner is engaged in motor transport business and in the course of the said business the 2nd respondent was employed as a time-keeper-cum-stand agent, his place of duty being Central Bus Stand, Madurai. On 16th October, 1972, one Pappammal, a girl aged about 20 preferred a complaint to the management that the 2nd respondent indecently assaulted her by pulling her hands with prurient intention. A report was also received from Mr. Guruswamy, another employee who was also employed as a time-keeper along with the 2nd respondent about the said incident. On the basis of the complaint of the said Pappammal and also of the co-employee Guruswamy, a show-cause notice was issued to the 2nd respondent on 21st October, 1972, charging him with drunkenness and indecent assault upon a girl. The 2nd respondent submitted his explanation.2. Thereafter a domestic enquiry followed. An advocate was appointed as the enquiry officer and he conducted the enquiry on 29th January, 1973, 14th February,...
Ramaswamy Reddiar Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu Represented by Divisiona ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-17-1975
Reported in: (1976)1MLJ321
V. Ramaswami, J.1. This is an appeal against the decision in W.P. No. 6583 of 1975. The appellant was the President of Malayaperumal Agaram Panchayat within Cuddalore Panchayat Union Council. In his proceedings dated 2nd January, 1975 the Divisional Development Officer, Chidambaram, intimated the appellant that he had ceased to hold office of President, as he had been disqualified under Section 26(1) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1958 (hereinafter called the 'Act,' for nonpayment of house-tax for the assessment years 1973-74 and, 1974-75 within the time prescribed. But the same proceedings the appellant was informed that he could apply to the prescribed judicial authority under Section 28 of the Act on the question as to whether he had become disqualified. Thereafter the appellant filed O.P. No. 5 of 1975 on the file of the District Munsif's Court, Cuddalore, for a declaration that the appellant was not disqualified and for cancellation of the order of the Divisional Development Of...
Sherija Bi Vs. Vedanayakam Pillai and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-17-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Mad262; (1976)1MLJ319
A. Varadarajan, J.1. The third defendant is the appellant. The first respondent--plaintiff, the son of the first defendant and one Ramaswami, filed the suit for cancellation of a mortgage decree obtained by the second defendant against himself and his mother in O.S. No. 195 of 1951 on the file of the Sub-Court, Salem, declaration of his title to the suit properties which are 78 acres of lands and an injunction restraining the fourth defendant (third respondent herein) from interfering with his possession of the suit properties. According to the first respondent, his father Ramaswami left 40 acres of ancestral lands and they were sold by the second respondent and with the sale proceeds she purchased the suit lands from the second defendant (whose legal representatives are respondents 4 to 11 herein) under Exhibit B-4 in 1942 for Rs. 8,750 in the names of herself and the first respondent and executed a mortgage under Exhibit B-1 for Rs. 4,000 in favour of the second defendant and it is n...
D. Padmanabhan Vs. the State of Tamilnadu Represented by the Secretary ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-14-1975
Reported in: (1976)IILLJ83Mad
V. Ramaswami, J.1. Among the employees of the Public Works Department of the Government of Tamil Nadu, is a section designed as Work Charged employees of 'Work Charged Establishment.' The members of the Work Charged Establishment are employed upon the actual execution of a specific work, or sub-work of a specific project, or upon the supervision of departmental labour, stores and machineries, in connection with such a work or sub-work. Their pay and allowances are paid from the estimate amount of the concerned work. As such, the members are classified under Work Charged Establishment, and they are governed by the Tamil Nadu Public Works Department Code.2. The employees recruited by the Department were originally intended for the duration of the particular work, but in practice, except in very rare instances, the work charged employees on completion of the specified project or work were employed in another work without any break. These members of the Work Charged Establishment were paid...
D. Padmanabhan Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu Represented by the Secretar ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-14-1975
Reported in: (1976)1MLJ311
ORDERV. Ramaswami, J.1. Among the employees of the Public Works Department of the Government of Tamil Nadu, is a section designated as Work Charged Employees of 'Work Charged Establishment'. The members of the Work Charged Establishment are employed upon the actual execution of a specific work, or sub-work of a specific project, or upon the supervision of departmental labour, stores and machineries, in connection with such a work or sub-work. Their pay and allowances are paid from the estimate amount of the concerned work. As such, the members are classified under Work Charged Establishment, and they are governed by the Tamil Nadu Public Works Department Code.2. The employees recruited by the Department were originally intended for the duration of the particular work, but in practice, except in very rare instances, the work charged employees on completion of the specified project or work were employed in another work without any break. These members of the Work Charged Establishment we...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. M.P.V. Sundaramier and Co.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-13-1975
Reported in: [1977]107ITR417(Mad)
Ramanujam, J. 1. The assessee is a firm carrying on business in Indian and foreign yarn. In the assessment year 1954-55, the assessee filed its return showing an income of Rs. 14,806 consisting of income from dividends of Rs. 1,425 and income from business of Rs. 13,381, on the basis of its books of account. The Income-tax Officer, however, did not accept the said return, but proceeded to make the following three additions to the income returned: (1) Rs. 58,000 being the discrepancy in stock of Japanese yarn between book figures and bank records ; (2) Rs. 15,000 being the discrepancy in art silk yarn between book figures and bank figures; and (3) Rs. 47,675 being the under-valuation of closing stock of silk yarn. The result was that the business income of the assessee was determined at Rs. 1,31,599.2. There was an appeal against the said assessment. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner agreed with the Income-tax Officer that there was a case for making additions in view of the discrepa...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Tuttapullam Estates
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-13-1975
Reported in: [1976]104ITR418(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. The asseesee-firm purchased an estate comprising of tea and coffee plantations from one Tuttapullam Tea and Coffee Plantations Private Ltd. on August 21, 1958. The said Tuttapullam Tea and Coffee Plantations Private Ltd. had earlier in its turn purchased the plantations from one M/s. Bhavani Tea Produce Company on December 22, 1947. After the purchase of the estate by the assessee-firm the workers raised a dispute regarding the gratuity payable to them in respect of the period of their service with the earlier employer, M/s. Bhavani Tea Produce Company. The said dispute was referred to the Industrial Tribunal, Madras. On December 27, 1958, the Industrial Tribunal passed an order directing the assessee to pay to the. workers Rs. 28,206 as gratuity in respect of the period during which the employees had served M/s. Bhavani Tea Produce Company.2. In the account year ended March 31, 1961, the assessee-firm debited the said sum of Rs. 28,206 in its accounts under the head 'W...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Udayakumar Rajah
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-13-1975
Reported in: [1976]105ITR624(Mad)
V. Ramaswami, J.1. One H.D. Rajah, father of the assessee, entered into an agreement with M/s, Essen (P.) Ltd., under which he agreed to render assistance in the promotion and formation of a cement company known as India Cements Ltd., and canvassed and obtained subscriptions for shares of the face value of at least Rs. 12 1/2 lakhs. Essen (P.) Ltd. were the managing agents of India Cements Ltd. In consideration of the assistance to be rendered by the said H. D. Rajah, Essen (P.) Ltd. agreed to give a share of the managing agent's commission to H. D. Rajah. The right to receive this commission was assigned on August 11, 1956, by H. D. Rajah in favour of his son, the assessee. During the assessment years 1959-60, 1961-62 and 1962-63, the assessee received Rs. 29,350, Rs. 34,845 and Rs. 20,083, respectively, from the managing agents as per the agreement entered into by them with H. D. Rajah. The Income-tax Officer treated this as the income of the assessee during the said assessment years...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »