Chennai Court May 1978 Judgments
M.A.R. Arunachalam Chettiar and Co Vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-21-1978
Reported in: [1979]44STC8(Mad)
Ramaprasada Rao, C.J. 1. The Board of Revenue in exercise of its powers of revision suo motu took up the file of the appellant-assessee, who escaped the levy of penalty because of the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, who cancelled the penalty levied on the transaction in question, which we shall presently refer to, by the assessing officer under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. During the year 1973-74, the appellant, who is a registered dealer at the time when he sold jaggery which attracted tax at the point of purchase and not at the point of sale, collected such tax and admittedly disclosed the same in the bills issued by him. The assessing officer therefore was satisfied that the appellant as a registered dealer not only contravened the provisions of Section 22(1) of the Act, but also that such contravention attracted the penal provision under Section 22(2) of the Act. On appeal by the assessee, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner cancelled the penalty. The...
Tag this Judgment!Venugopala Pillai Vs. Thayyanayaki Ammal and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-17-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Mad124
1. The first defendant in O. S. No. 61 of 1966 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Chidambaram is the appellant. In order to appreciate the relevant facts in this Letters Patent appeal, a summary of events that took place long ago is necessary.2. One Sarangapani Pillai married Arumbu Ammal and had a daughter Valliammal by name through her. Sarangapani had a brother Balakrishna by name. Under Ex. A. 1, dated 10-2-1921, Sarangapani executed an unregistered Will conferring a life estate over the suit properties in favour of his wife, Arumbu Ammal and after her death, his properties were to be divided equally between his daughter and his brother Balakrishna. The Will also provided for a contingency that if Valliammal died without leaving any issue, then Balakrishna would be entitled to the entire properties. After the death of Sarangapani Pillai, one of his creditors filed a money suit against Arumbu Ammal, Valliammal and Balakrishna. Balakrishna having been impleaded as a party to that ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›