Chennai Court April 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.
Orient Pharma Private Ltd. Vs. the Government of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-10-1975
Reported in: [1976]37STC437(Mad)
V. Ramaswami, J.1. The petitioners in these cases are the manufacturers of Woodward's Gripe Water, Williams After Shave Lotion, Williams Lectic Shave, Metalin Oral, and allied products. They are carrying on business in the State of Tamil Nadu. For the assessment years 1961-62 to 1967-68, they submitted their returns under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Sales Tax Act). They had collected the tax payable on the taxable turnover. Their returns were accepted and the assessment orders were made on various dates.2. Prior to 1st June, 1961, the excise duty on medicinal and toilet preparations was levied under the Medicinal and Toilet Preparations (Excise Duties) Act, 1955, on only the alcoholic contents of the preparations. But, with effect from 1st June, 1961, by a Government notification, the excise duty became payable ad valorem on the entire quantity of the goods and not merely on the alcoholic contents. On 12th July, 1968, on an appeal preferre...
State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Calcutta Chemical Co. Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-10-1975
Reported in: [1976]37STC443(Mad)
V. Ramaswami, J.1. Tax Cases (Revisions) Nos. 120 and 381 of 1970 arise out of orders made under Section 16 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and Tax Cases (Revisions) Nos. 382 and 454 of 1970 arise out of orders made under Section 12 of the Act. The assessment years in question are 1962-63, 1963-64, 1964-65 and 1966-67. The respondent in these petitions is the Calcutta Chemical Company Limited, which is a public limited company with its head office and factory in Calcutta and branch office in Arcot Road, Kodambakkam, Madras. They are manufacturers of eau-de-cologne, lavender water and tincture preparations. The disputed turnover related to the sales of these items. They claimed exemption on the ground that they are goods falling under item 3 of Schedule III, which are exempted by Section 8 of the Act. The assessing officer rejected this claim on two grounds. Firstly, the excise duty on these goods was levied only on alcoholic contents a...
State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Voltas Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-10-1975
Reported in: [1976]37STC445(Mad)
V. Ramaswami, J.1. In this revision petition, two points are involved. One is the right of the assessee to claim exemption on a turnover of Rs. 45,325.77 relating to the sale of medicinal preparations containing alcohol under Section 8 read with item 3 of the Third Schedule to the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The other is the claim of exclusion from the taxable turnover of a sum of Rs. 33,360 representing the Bombay sales tax paid in Maharashtra State by the assessee on their purchase of tractors. For the assessment year 1966-67, the respondent-assessee submitted a total taxable turnover of Rs. 4,18,58,543.98 and Rs. 2,68,03,833.90, respectively, and had claimed exemption to an extent of Rs. 4,97,450.74 on the ground that they represented sales of medicinal preparations containing alcohol and, therefore, under Section 8 read with item 3 of the Third Schedule, they are exempt. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner gave a relief except to ...
Orient Pharma Private Ltd. Vs. the Government of Tamil Nadu Represente ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-10-1975
Reported in: (1976)1MLJ80
ORDERV. Ramaswami, J.1. The petitioners in these cases are the manufacturers of Woodward's Gripe Water, Williams After Shave Lotion, Williams Electric Shave, Metalin Oral and allied products. They are carrying on business in the State of Tamil Nadu. For the Assessment years 1961-62 to 1967-68, they submitted their returns under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Sales Tax Act). They had collected the tax payable on the taxable turnover. Their returns were accepted and assessment orders were made on various dates.2. Prior to 1st June, 1961, the excise duty on medicinal and toilet preparations was levied under the Medicinal and Toilet Preparations (Excise Duties) Act, 1955 on only the alcoholic contents of the preparations. But, with effect from 1st June, 1961 by a Government Notification, the Excise Duty became payable ad valorem on the entire quantity of the goods and not merely on the alcoholic contents. On 12th July, 1968, on an appeal preferre...
Smt. Surumbayi Ammal Vs. Controller of Estate Duty
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-09-1975
Reported in: [1976]103ITR358(Mad)
Ramaswami, J.1. This reference is made under Section 64(1) of the Estate Duty Act relating to the estate of one Ramaswami Chettiar, who died on April 2, 1963. The widow filed a return which, among others, included a sum of Rs. 4,23,943 as the value of the one-sixth share which the deceased held in six firms. The Assistant Controller of Estate Duty considered that the firms in which the deceased was a partner had goodwill and that the value of his share in the goodwill should also be includedin the total value of the estate. He, accordingly, proceeded to value the goodwill in each of the firms on the super-profits basis and added a sum of Rs, 53,700 on this account. The Appellate Controller of Estate Duty and the Tribunal confirmed this order of the Assistant Controller.2. At the instance of the accountable person, the following question is referred:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the valuation of goodwill at Rs. 53,700 in respect of the six firms at Coimbat...
K. Appa Rao and anr. Vs. P. Balasubramania Gramani and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-07-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Mad70; (1976)1MLJ96
K. Veeraswami, C.J.1. These are appeals by the legal representatives of the plaintiff under the Letters Patent. The plaintiff or his legal representatives as the case may be, had failed in all the Courts below to get specific performance of the three agreements, all executed on 28th October, 1957 to sell certain shares, which the executants of the agreements had in certain joint family properties. The three agreements put together had undertaken an obligation to convey to the plaintiff a total of 3/5 share in those properties. At the time the agreements were entered into, O.S. No. 150 of 1952, which was a suit for partition by two of the coparceners, was pending, and in fact, a preliminary decree had been passed in 1954. Defendants 3 to 7 forming one unit, defendants 8 and 9 forming another unit and defendant 10 in that suit for partition, who held each 1/5 share, were the executants. On 18th April, 1958, the plaintiff -ought to get himself impleaded as a party defendant in the partiti...
Bhagavathy Pillai (Died) and anr. Vs. Savarimuthu and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-04-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Mad124; (1976)1MLJ34
V. Sethuraman, J.1. The plaintiffs are the appellants. They instituted a suit against the defendants for eviction and for removal of buildings and delivery of vacant possession of the property and for costs. The plaintiffs belong to a tarwad, which became divided on 2nd August, 1907 under which the karnavan one Velayudhan Narayanan got the entire property. The branch of the plaintiffs, who were the Seshakars of the said Velayudhan Narayanan, divided the property in 1926. The property devolved on the first plaintiff and her mother, and on the death of her mother, the first plaintiff became entitled to the property. There was a partition between the first plaintiff and her children on 17th December, 1953 and in the said partition the property set out in the schedule, comprising about 8 cents, fell to the share of the plaintiffs. Having traced title to the said property in the aforesaid manner, the plaintiffs alleged that the defendants had put up small buildings with the permission of th...
S. Gopalsami Vs. A.B.M. Nagamiah and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-03-1975
Reported in: (1979)1MLJ201
V. Ramaswami, J.1. The defendant is the appellant. The suit was filed by the respondents herein for recovery of possession of 1 acre and 12,837 sq, feet of land comprised in S. No. 1013/2 with trees, pond, well etc., and for damages for use and occupation. The damages were claimed at Rs. 1,500 per year for three years prior to the suit and at the same rate from the date of the suit till the date of delivery. The plaintiffs' case was that the suit properties were leased to the-defendant for a long time and the defendant was executing lease deeds and the last of such lease deeds was executed on 2nd December, 1952. That deed was for a year and after that deed, the defendant was continuing to be the lessee under the same terms and conditions and was paying paghuthi. The further case of the plaintiffs was that the defendant was indifferent in paying the paghuthi and therefore, by a notice dated 27th June, 1966, they called upon the defendant to pay the arrears and vacate and surrender posse...
Parvathiyammal Vs. Sivathanu Pillai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-03-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Mad339; (1976)2MLJ64
K. Veeraswami, C.J.1. The third defendant is the appellant. The only question in this-appeal is whether the 3rd defendant would be entitled to the benefits of Section 17 of the Travancore Cochin Compensation for Tenants Improvements Act, 1956. There is a small history which has to be briefly-stated to appreciate the question. Originally, two items of properties, one of an. extent of 161/2 acres waste land and the other a building site, belonged to the Sastha temple of Esthamozhy village. The trustees entrusted those items to one Arumukam Pillai for improving the property and converting the same into a, garden land or paddy land Improvements were subsequently effected by Arumukam Pillai. In consideration of claiming and planting trees on the land and putting up a certain construction for keeping a watchman, Arumukam Pillai was enjoying the usufruct therefrom. The trustees in O.S. No. 10 of 1123 on the file on the Subordinate Judge, Nagercoil, sought to recover possession. But the suit e...
T.P. Chandra Vs. the Presiding Officer, Labour Court and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-03-1975
Reported in: (1975)2MLJ371
ORDERG. Ramanujam, J.1. The petitioner was employed as the Regional Superintendent by an order of appointment dated 5th July, 1962 of the second respondent company, hereinafter referred to as the Management. His salary at the time of the appointment was Rs. 400 per month and on his work being found to be satisfactory, the salary was raised subsequently to Rs. 450. In or about 1965, the management made certain allegations of inefficiency against the petitioner and sent its officers to check the working of the office at Madras, and after receipt of the report from them, it terminated the petitioner's service with effect from 1st December, 1965 without holding any sort of enquiry.2. As against the order of termination, the petitioner filed an appeal under Section 41 of the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishments Act, 1947 hereinafter referred to as the Shops Act, to the Additional Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation. In the said appeal the .management raised a preliminary objection to the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »