Chennai Court April 1975 Judgments
Kaja Mian Wakf Estate Vs. Controller of Estate Duty
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-29-1975
Reported in: [1977]106ITR98(Mad)
V. Ramaswami, J. 1. This reference has been made under Section 64(1) of the Estate Duty Act and relates to the estate of the late N. M. Kaja Mian Rowther. The Deputy Controller of Estate Duty sought to include in the principal value of the estate passing on the death of the deceased, the properties comprised in Messrs. Kaja Mian Wakf Estate, Trichy. The muthavalli of that wakf, as the accountable person, contended that the deceased had no interest in the wakf properties and that Section 12 of the Estate Duty Act is not attracted. But the Deputy Controller of Estate Duty overruled this objection and included the wakf property also in the principal value of the estate passing. He also overruled another contention of the accountable person that the entire value of the share of Mohamed Mian Rowther & Co. (P.) Ltd. is not includible in the principal value of the estate passing, as the deceased had only 33 shares out of 495 and that it was not a controlled company attracting the provisions o...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. P. Nataraja Sastri
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-29-1975
Reported in: [1976]104ITR245(Mad)
Sethuraman, J. 1. The assessee was one of the seven directors of the United Industries (Pudukottai) Private Ltd., which was the managing agent of Cauvery Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. The company in which the assessee is a director closes its accounts on the 31st March every year. At the fifteenth annual general meeting of the company held on 29th September, 1962, a resolution was passed as follows :' Resolved that the following monthly remuneration be paid to the directors for the period from April 1, 1962, to March 31, 1963 : ...... P. Nataraja Sastri ...... Rs. 500 ...... '2. We are omitting the names of the other directors mentioned in the resolution with whom we are not concerned here. The company in which the assessee is a director consists of nine shareholders, seven of whom, as already' seen, are directors. The total remuneration payable to all the directors monthly would have involved an outlay of Rs. 68,400 per year, at the rate of Rs. 5,700 per mensem. The company appears ...
Tag this Judgment!Hindu Bank Karur Ltd. Vs. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-25-1975
Reported in: [1976]103ITR553(Mad)
Sethuraman, J.1. In this reference the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following questions to this court:'(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of the Commissioner under Section 263 of the Act directing the assessment of Rs. 25,045 as profits under Section 41(2) of the Act as upheld by the Tribunal was valid in law ? (ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in its conclusion on the scope of the Commissioner's powers under Section 263 of the Act, that there was any prejudice to the interests of the revenue in the instant case to justify interference ? (iii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the decision of the Tribunal adjudicating upon the nature of profit arising as taxable under Section 41(2) of the Act without adjudicating upon the nature of the losses arising from the same transaction, is valid and justified in law ?' 2. The facts are common to all the questio...
Tag this Judgment!Paranjothi Udyar and ors. Vs. State and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-25-1975
Reported in: 1976CriLJ598
ORDERKrishnaswamy Reddy, J.1. Cri. M. P. No. 2841 of 1974 has been filed by the petitioners, namely, accused 1 to 4, 7, 9, 10 to 14, 17, 18, 20, for transfer of S. C. No. 67 of 1974 from the file of Assistant Sessions Judge, Ramanathapuram at Devakottai to the file of any other court of competent jurisdiction within the District or at Madurai. Cr. M. P. No. 3130 of 1974 has been filed to quash the order of the committal made In P.R.C. No. 3 of 1974 on the file of the Court of Judicial Second Class Magistrate, Karaikudi.2. I shall first take up Cr. M. P. No. 3130 of 1974. This petition has been filed by the aforesaid accused to quash the committal proceedings on the main ground that the Judicial Second Class Magistrate, Karaikudi, has not followed the procedure laid down under new Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter called 'the Code') in cases of private complaints and, therefore, the committal; was illegal.3. The facts of the case are these: One Muthana Kone, the second respondent ...
Tag this Judgment!In Re Onthan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-23-1975
Reported in: 1976CriLJ402
Kailasam, J.1. The first accused in sessions case No. 22 of 1974 on the file of the Sessions Judge, East Thanjavur, who was found guilty of an offence punishable under Section 302, I. P.C. and sentenced to imprisonment for life, is the appellant before us.2. Before the learned Sessions Judge, 14 accused were charged for various offences, the main charge being against accused 1 to 3, for an offence under Section 302, I. P.C. for committing the murder of one Baluswami, the first accused stabbing him with a sulukki and the second and the third accused cutting him with aruvals, at about 3 p.m. on 9-10-1973, at Palavanakudi village. There were other charges against the accused persons under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 325 and 435 read with Section 149, I. P.C. The several accused were also charged individually for injuries caused to the various prosecution witnesses. As all the accused have been acquitted of all the charges, except the first accused who has been convicted of the offence un...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Onthan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-23-1975
Reported in: (1975)2MLJ318
P.S. Kailasam, J.1. The first accused in Sessions Case No. 22 of 1974 on the file of the Sessions Judge, East Thanjavuv, who was found guilty of an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to imprisonment for life, is the appellant before us.2. Before the learned Sessions Judge, fourteen accused were charged for various offences, the main charge being against accused 1 to 3 for an offence under Section 302, Indian Penal Code, for committing the murder of one Baluswami, the first accused stabbing him with a sulukki and the second and the third accused cutting him with aruvals, at about 3 p.m. on 9th October, 1973 at Palavanakudi Village. There were other charges against the accused persons under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 325 and 435 read with Section 149, Indian Penal Code. The several accused were also charged individually for injuries caused to the various prosecution witnesses. As all the accused have been acquitted of all the charges, except th...
Tag this Judgment!T. Saraswathi Achi Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-22-1975
Reported in: [1976]104ITR185(Mad)
V. Ramaswami, J. 1. This is .a reference under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. For the assessment year 1965-66, the relevant valuation date being June 30, 1964, the Wealth-tax Officer sought to include the value of a gift of 20,000 shares in Rajendra Mills made on July 22, 1960, by the assessee in favour of her two minor unmarried daughters under Section 4(1)(a)(ii) of the Act. The assessee contended that by virtue of the proviso to Section 4(1)(a) which was introduced by the Wealth-tax (Amendment) Act, 1964, which came into force with effect from April I, 1965, the value of the shares gifted to the two minor unmarried daughters are not liable to be included in the total wealth of the assessee. The Wealth-tax Officer, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Tribunal held that the proviso would apply to only those gifts which are chargeableto gift-tax in any assessment year commencing after the 31st day of March, 1964, under the Gift-tax Act and those gifts which are not...
Tag this Judgment!The Union Territory of Pondicherry, Represented by the Chief Secretary ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-22-1975
Reported in: (1976)2MLJ297
K. Veeraswami, C.J.1. The erstwhile French Establishments in India known as Pondicherry, Karaikkal, Mahe and Yanam, which by the Constitution (14th Amendment) Act, 1962, constitute the Pondicherry Union Territory, were divided by the French Government into 17 communes approximating to municipalities or local self government we are familier with. A French Decree dated 12th March, 1880 governed and regulated the municipal body of each commune. It provided for the setting up of the municipal body consisting of a Mayor and elected Municipal Council, their powers including powers of taxation for municipal purposes, budgets and procedure. With the de facto transfer under an agreement dated 21st October, 1954 of these French territories to the Indian Government, the Government of India, in exercise of powers conferred by Section 4 of the Foreign Jurisdiction Act, 1947, made on 1st November, 1954 the French Establishment (Application of Laws) Order, 1954 and The French Establishments (Administ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Coral Mills Workers Co-operative Stores ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-18-1975
Reported in: [1977]106ITR868(Mad)
Ramaswami, J.1. The assessee-respondent is a co-operative society registered under the Co-operative Societies Act and is dealing in grocery articles and piece-goods. For the assessment years 1960-61,1961-62 and 1962-63, the Income-tax Officer treated the business income of the assessee as exempt from taxation. During the assessment year 1964-65 a successor Income-tax Officer took the view that the assessee was not entitled to the exemption. In the view that the Income-tax Officer originally made a mistake in giving the exemption he reopened the assessments in respect of the assessment years 1960-61, 1961-62 and 1962-63 under Section 147(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the new Act'). In response to the notice issued, the society filed a return, but furnished the same particulars as was done in connection with the original assessment. Though the order of reassessment is not very clear, it may be taken that the Income-tax Officer considered that under Section 1...
Tag this Judgment!Sridharan (Minor) and ors. Vs. Murthi Brothers, by Partner C.S. Balasu ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-18-1975
Reported in: (1976)1MLJ100
T. Ramaprasada Rao, J.1. Defendants 2 to 4, who are the minor sons of the first defendant in the suit, O.S. No. 501 of 1967, on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore, are the appellants. The plaintiff is a trader. He sold and delivered goods on credit to the first defendant, who was carrying on business under the name and style of Coimbatore Cotton Company and was also running a ginning factory, known as the Rukmani Ginning Factory, at Sultanpet in Palladam Taluk. The plaintiff's case is that for a considerable length of time the first defendant, the father of the appellants herein, though an agriculturist, was also doing business in cotton. In the course of such business, which the first defendant claimed as his sole proprietory business, goods were supplied on credit to him by the plaintiff during the period from 6th August, 1966 to 30th September, 1967. In accordance, with the accounts regularly kept by the plaintiff, a sum of Rs. 45,907.11 was due by the first ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »