Chennai Court July 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.
W.S. Insulators of India Ltd. Vs. Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Govt ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-14-1977
Reported in: 1978(2)ELT160(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. The petitioner is a public limited company manufacturing electrical goods like high tension insulators, lightning arresters etc. with technical collaboration with M/s. Westinghouse Electric International Co., U.S.A. The petitioner is also licensed under the Central Excise Act for the manufacture of China ware, and porcelain ware which are excisable under the Central Excise Tariff item 23-B of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Act and the rules framed thereunder. The lightning arresters manufactured by the petitioner have, as one of their components, a shell made of porcelain. On the ground , that the lightning arresters which are articles manufactured by the petitioner-company contain a shell made of porcelain as their component, the Central Excise authorities proposed to levy Central Excise Duty on the porcelain portion of the integral unit, namely, the lightning arresters. This was objected to by the petitioner. However, the excise authorities levied excise dut...
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Vs. Larsen and Toubro Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-11-1977
Reported in: [1978]42STC63(Mad)
Sethuraman, J.1. The defendant is the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board and the plaintiff, Messrs. Larsen and Toubro Ltd., filed against it O. S. No. 3999 of 1969 in the City Civil Court, Madras, on the following facts : The plaintiff carrying on business as engineers entered into a contract with the defendant for the supply of materials and for erection of induced drought cooling tower of 18,00,000 G. P. H. capacity specification C962. The price quoted by the plaintiff was Rs. 13,53,600 and this was accepted by the defendant. There was subsequently a modification of the price to Rs. 14,10,400 and this was also agreed to. As regards sales tax, it was provided that it was to be paid for the materials including timber components but excluding all other construction materials for civil works, by reimbursement, if applicable, on production of duly certified documents by the company's auditors showing the actual payment to the Government. The defendant agreed also to furnish C forms provided und...
The Madras Aluminium Co. Ltd. Vs. the Joint Secretary, Ministry of Fin ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-08-1977
Reported in: 1979CENCUS91D
ORDERMohan, J.1. This writ petition coming on for hearing on Monday, the 20th day of June, 1977 upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof the order of the High Court dated 19.2.1974 and made herein and the counter affidavit filed herein and the records relating to the order in F. 199/27/73/CX. VA dated 11.12.73 on the file of the respondent herein and comprised in the re turn of the respondent herein to the writ made by the High Court and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. V.K. Thiruvenkatachari for M/s. Subbaraya Aiyar and Padmanabhan, Advocates for the petitioner and of Mr. T. Chengalvarayan, Senior Central Government Standing Counsel on behalf of the respondent, and having stood over for consideration, till this day, the court made the following order:This writ petition is for certiorari to quash the order of the respondent made in F. 199/27/73/CX. VA dt. 11.12.73.The facts leading to the writ petition are as follows:The Madras Aluminium Company, Limited, ...
Viswanathan Vs. Muthuswamy Gounder and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-06-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Mad221
ORDER1. This is a revision petition against the order of the learned Principal District Munsif, Gobichettipalayam, made in E. A. No. 2307 of 1973 in E. P. R. 1945 of 1972 in O. S. No. 1528 of 1969 cancelling the order to issue cheque in favour of the revision petitioner.2. Viswanathan, the revision petitioner herein, obtained a decree against Sel-lammal and her minor children in O. S. No. 579 of 1970 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Gobichettipalayam, on the foot of a promissory note. The properties of the second respondent, viz. Sellammal, were brought to sale by another decree-holder in O. S. No. 1528 of 1969, in pursuance of a money decree. The properties were sold in court auction and after the decree-holder in the said O. S. No. 1528 of 1869 realised the amounts due to him, a sum of Rupees 4,785.16 was available as surplus sale proceeds to the credit of the judgment-debtors in the District Munsif Court Gobichettipalayam. A sum of Rs. 3,500 out of this was attached by the ...
Madras Industrial Linings Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-05-1977
Reported in: [1977]110ITR256(Mad)
P. Govindan Nair, C.J.1. The question raised by the assessee in this writ petition relates to the validity of Rule 19A(3) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. The assessment of the petitioner for the year 1972-73 was made by applying Rule 19A(3) of the Rules.2. Shortly stated the point raised is that Rule 19A(3) has taken away the benefit conferred by Section 80J of the Act. We shall extract Section 80J as well as Rule 19A(2) and (3):' 80J. Deduction in respect of profits and gains from newly established industrial undertakings or ships or hotel business in certain cases.--(1) Where the gross total income of an assessee includes any profits and gains derived from an industrial undertaking or a ship or the business of a hotel, to which this section applies, there shall, in accordance with and subject to the provisions of this section, be allowed, in computing the total income of the assessee, a deduction from such profits and gains (reduced by the deduction, if any, admissible to the assessee...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›