Chennai Court October 1979 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.
M.V. Krishnamoorthy and anr. Vs. Tmt. Anandalakshmi and Two ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-13-1979
Reported in: (1980)2MLJ321
T. Sathiadev, J.1. Defendants 1 and 2 are the appellants. The first respondent herein filed the suit claiming that she is entitled to the Provident Fund amount of Rs. 9,151 due from the respondents 2 and 3 herein, who were defendants 3 and 4 in the trial Court, on the ground that she is the heir and dependant of deceased K. Subramanian, who was working as an Assistant in the Life Insurance Corporation at Coimbatore. Subramanian died on 28th January, 1970, leaving behind his wife, the plaintiff, without any children. Defendants 1 and 2 are his father and mother. Plaintiff' claimed that though 3rd defendant admitted her claim in some letters and agreed to pay the provident fund amount to her, later on refused to pay stating that first defendant has been nominated by her late husband. In the alternative, she claimed that she will be entitled to share the amount along with the second defendant. Hence the present suit.2. The first defendant, father of late Subramanian claimed that he had be...
Commissioner of Gift-tax Vs. T.S. Krishna (by Legal Representatives)
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-12-1979
Reported in: [1984]149ITR99(Mad)
Sethuraman, J. 1. This is a reference under Section 26(1) of the G.T. Act, 1958. The following question has been referred at the instance of the Commissioner of Gift-tax. ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is not entitled to the rebate under Section 18 of the Gift-tax Act, 1958, on the entire amount of advance gift-tax paid by him for the assessment year 1970-71 ?' 2. The assessee made gifts in the course of the accounting year 1969-70, aggregating to Rs. 2,04,557. The gifts fell on two dates, viz., March 25, 1970, and March 26, 1970. The gifts made on March 25, 1970, amount to Rs. 1,50,000 and they arc by way of cash. The balance of the gifts made on March 26, 1970, represent (a) shares held by the assessee in companies, (b) payment of insurance premium by the assessee for a policy taken under the Married Women's Property Act, and (c) a small quantity of gold valued at Rs. 260. The GTO in making the assessment made two additions to the amounts o...
R.V.R. Nallasivam Vs. Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-12-1979
Reported in: (1980)16CTR(Mad)243; [1982]133ITR184(Mad)
Sethuraman, J.1. The assessee is borne in the registers of the Agrl. ITO, Srivilliputtur. For the assessment years 1968-69 to 1972-73, he applied for compounding the agrl. income-tax payable by him. The compounding application made under Section 65 of the Tamil Nadu Agrl. I.T. Act, 1955, was accepted and the tax due under that provision was collected from the assessee. Subsequently, during the course of audit, the staff of the Accountant-General noticed that the lands contained valuable teak trees and reported that these lands also should be taken into account as tope for computation of tax under Section 65 of the Act. There would be a difference in the assessment if the lands are, classified as topes as the computation of standard acres would differ. In pursuance of the observation of the Accountant-General, the Agrl. ITO took action under Section 65A(3) and classified the land as 'tope'.2. During the course of the, proceedings taken by him for revising the earlier compounding, he ins...
L.Ar. Arunachalam Pillai and Sons Vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-12-1979
Reported in: [1980]45STC109(Mad)
Venugopal, J.1. The petitioner is a partnership firm with the father and son as partners, dealing in mundy goods. For the assessment year 1969-70, the petitioner reported a total turnover of Rs. 5,96,668.64, of which Rs. 3,48,320.10 was the taxable turnover. For the assessment year 1970-71, the petitioner reported a turnover of Rs. 3,42,991.64, The taxable turnover was Rs. 1,79,013.96. The petitioner failed to produce the accounts for purposes of final assessment in spite of several notices issued by the assessing officer. The assessing officer made the best judgment assessment fixing the total turnover at Rs. 7,23,083.66 and the taxable turnover at Rs. 4,81.848.24 for each one of the assessment years 1969-70 and 1970-71. Appeals were filed before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Tiruchy, after a delay of 694 days for the first assessment year, and a delay of 433 days for the second assessment year. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner dismissed both the appeals on the ground that...
K. Andalammal Vs. Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, Madras-5.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-12-1979
Reported in: (1981)16CTR(Mad)241; [1981]132ITR349(Mad)
SETHURAMAN J. - The assessee, by name, Thirumathi Andalammal, is borne on the file of the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Tiruchirapalli She holds lands measuring 17.73 acres. For the assessment year 1971-72, the Agrl. ITO passed an order on the basis that she held a total extent of 36.09 acres. There was an objection to the assessment on the ground that the 17.73 ordinary acres were recalled in trust by her under two settlement deeds execute by her and the they ought to be excluded and she could be assessed only on the income from the 18.36 ordinary acres. This objection was overruled and the Agrl. ITO assessed her on the bias of her ownership of 36.09 acres. Against the order of the Agrl. ITO the assessees preferred an appeal to the Assistant Commissioner which was not successful and thereafter to the Tribunal. The Tribunal remanded the appeal to the Assistant Commissioner and, on remand, the Assistant Commissioner confirmed the original order without excluding the trust lands. Again,...
Durairaj Vs. Shanmugham and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-12-1979
Reported in: (1980)1MLJ291
T. Sathiadev, J.1. This appeal is preferred against a cryptic order of remand made by the District Judge, Pudukottai in A.S. No. 28 of 1979 directing the trial Court to dispose of the suit afresh after giving opportunity to the plaintiff to amend the plaint suitably for the relief of declaration of title and 'giving opportunities to the defendant to put forth his evidence.'2. The plaintiff, who is the appellant herein, filed a suit for permanent injunction claiming that he had purchased the property from one Ramaswamy Chettiar on 24th December, 1973, under a registered sale deed, and he has been in possession thereof by paying kist. Defendants, who are brothers, are having lands south of the suit property and since they started obstructing the plaintiff from ploughing the land, he has filed the suit for the relief of permanent injunction.3. Defendants claim that the sale deed dated 24th December, 1973 is a concocted document and there has been no valid sub-division of the property. The...
Mrs. Helen Jayaraj Vs. Sub-registrar of Mylapore and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-11-1979
Reported in: [1983]139ITR942(Mad)
Varadarajan, J.1. These two writ petitions have been filed by the same individual, Mrs. Helen Jayaraj, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, W.P. No. 623 of 1976, being for the issue of a writ of certiorari calling for the records of the Sub-Registrar, Mylapore, Madras, the first respondent, relating to Enquiry No. 1 of 1975, and for quashing the order dated November 26., 1975, passed by him in that enquiry as confirmed by the order of the Inspector General of Registration, Madras, the second respondent, dated January 5, 1976, and W.P. No. 832 of 1976, being for the issue of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate direction or order directing the Second ITO, City Circle, 11(2), Madras-34, the fourth respondent and the Commissioner of Income-tax, III Circle, Madras-34, the fifth respondent, to issue an I.T. Clearance Certificate under Section 230A of the I.T. Act, 1961, in relation to the third respondent in respect of income tax and other taxes specified in this section f...
English Electric Company of India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-11-1979
Reported in: [1981]132ITR251(Mad)
Sethuraman, J.1. This reference is at the instance of the assessee-company under Section 18 of the C.(P.)S.T. Act, 1964, read with Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961.2. The following questions have been referred :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the Income-tax Officer had jurisdiction to rectify the assessment under Section 13 of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 , 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the depreciation provided in the accounts of the company in excess of the amount allowed as a deduction in the computation of its income for purposes of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was not a reserve for the purposes of Surtax Act ?' 3. The reference relates to the assessment years 1964-65, 1965-66 and 1966-67. The assessee filed returns for each of these years. For instance, for the assessment year 1964-65, in the return filed on 1st February, 1965,...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Surya Prabha Mills (P.) Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-11-1979
Reported in: [1980]123ITR654(Mad)
Sethuraman, J.1. The Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the sum of Rs. 34,100 paid by the assessee to the Indian Cotton Mills Federation is a business expenditure and should be allowed while computing the income of the assessee ?'2. The assessee is a limited company running a textile mill at Coimbatore. The Indian Cotton Mills Federation, of which the assessee is a member, makes allotment of foreign cotton to the member mills spinning higher yarn counts. The allotment is on the basis of the number of spindles working on higher counts. The mills have to give a guarantee at the rate of Rs. 100 per bale of the quantity of cotton which theyagreed to accept. As and when quotas of foreign cotton are announced, the cotton would be distributed to individual mills in ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Royal Textiles
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-11-1979
Reported in: (1980)14CTR(Mad)291; [1979]120ITR506(Mad)
Sethuraman, J.1. The Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Act'), at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax : ' Whether it is open to the department to treat the return filed by the assessee on March 10, 1968, as invalid for the purpose of charging interest under Section 139(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, after having made a provisional assessment thereon, despite the fact that the said return was not in the prescribed form and was not accompanied by the prescribed statements '2. The assessee is a firm consisting of three partners which filed a return in Form No. 3 on March 10, 1968, disclosing an income of Rs. 1,90,000 for the assessment year 1967-68. The ITO made a provisional assessment under Section 141 of the Act on May 20, 1968, and issued a demand requiring the assessee to pay Rs. 21,516 by way of tax. On August 20, 1968, the ITO sent to the assessee a letter stating that he should file...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »