Chennai Court December 1977 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.
The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Board of Revenue, Madras Vs. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-05-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Mad242; (1978)1MLJ327
1. The question referred to us by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Board of Revenue, Madras 5, is as follows-"Whether in the circumstances and facts of the case the document dated 30-6-1963 (document No. P-37/73 of District Registrar's Office, Nagarcoil) executed by V. Daniel in favour of the Society of Trustees of Indigenous Churches in India represented by Brother Bakth Singh Chabra styled as a 'release deed' should be termed as a 'conveyance' as denned under Section 2(10) of the Act attracting stamp duty under Article 23 of Schedule I of the Stamp Act."2. By way of prefatory remarks, we make it clear that if the instrument in question which we are asked to interpret is to be understood as a conveyance, then it is not properly stamped, but if it is a release deed as it is styled and understood by the parties, then it has been so properly stamped.3. For the purpose of establishing a church and incidentally to acquire properties, both moveable and immoveable for the 'benefit of...
The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Madras Vs. P.A. Muthukumar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-05-1977
Reported in: AIR1979Mad5
1. The question involved in this reference made by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Board of Revenue, Madras is as follows :-"Whether in the circumstances and facts of the case, the document dated 2-7-1973 (Document No. 26 of 1973) of Sub Registrar Office, Kavandapadi, Erode, executed by the respondent in favour of his father P.N. Appaji Gounder herein styled as a document of trust should be treated as a settlement deed as defined under Section. 2(24) of the Act attracting stamp duty under Art. 58 of Schedule I of the Indian Stamp Act."or in the alternative, we add, whether the deed under reference is chargeable under Art. 64, Schedule I of the Indian Stamp Act.2. It is common ground that the deed has been duly stamped under Art. 64 of Schedule 1-B (sic) (1?) of the Stamp Act. Before considering the question posed to us, it is necessary to understand the recitals in the deed. It is common ground that the respondent and his two brothers and their father partitioned the family pr...
Chiranjilal Daga Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Tamil Nadu V, Madras, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-02-1977
Reported in: [1978]113ITR363(Mad)
RAMANUJAM J. - The petitioner herein is carrying on business in paints, steel, perforated sheets, etc., in Madras and speculation and commission trade in Calcutta. In respect of assessment year 1970-71, he did not file any return on the ground that he did not have taxable income. But the Income-tax Officer completed the assessment ex parte under section 144 and estimated the total income at Rs. 40,000 for the said assessment year. The petitioner as against the said order of assessment, filed an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The said appeal was rejected on the ground that it is time-barred by 28 days. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal as against the said appellate order. In preferring the appeal before the Tribunal there was also a delay. The Tribunal chose to condone the delay but ultimately upheld the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner rejecting the appeal as time-barred, after holding that the petitioner had not ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›