Chennai Court August 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.
C. Krishnamurthi Vs. the Divisional Development Officer Chidambaram an ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-08-1979
Reported in: (1980)1MLJ149
T. Ramaprasada Rao, C.J.1. This writ appeal is against the order of Padmanabhan, J., who saw no merit in the writ petition filed by the appellant, who was a member and President of the Agaram Village Panchayat and who sought for a writ of certiorari to call for the records relating to the order of the District Munsif of Cuddalore, in O.P. No. 3 of 1976, which order he passed as a statutory functionary under the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), and to quash the same.2. The relevant facts are as follows: The Divisional Development Officer, Chidambaram, who is the first respondent herein, caused a memo. to be served on the appellant stating that under Section 28(1) and (2) of the Act the appellant had become disqualified to be a member, and in consequence to be the President, of the panchayat in question, since he had not paid the house tax and the vehicle tax for the years 1973-74 and 1974.75 within the time prescribed for such payment. The appellant ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Indian Auto Stores
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-07-1979
Reported in: (1980)14CTR(Mad)313; [1981]129ITR554(Mad)
Sethuraman, J.1. Under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961, the following questions have been referred in pursuance of the direction of this court in T.C.P. No. 118 of 1974, dated March 24. 1975.'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the Income-tax Officer had no power left with him to amend his original order because that order of penalty has been confirmed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellte Tribunal was right in holding that the provisions of Section 154(1A) would not apply to the assessee's case ? 3. Whether the Appellate Tribunal was right in upholding the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner on a ground not raised or argued before it ? 4. Whether the Appellate Tribunal was right in dismissing the departmental appeal without going into the main question raised beforeit? 2. The assessee is a firm and it filed its retur...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Vasantha Mills Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-07-1979
Reported in: [1979]120ITR321(Mad)
Sethuraman, J. 1. Under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, the following question has been referred for the opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the payment made by the assessee to the Textile Commissioner in pursuance of Clause 21C(1)(b) of the Cotton Textiles (Control) Order, 1948, was laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business within the meaning of Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The assessee runs a textile mill at Coimbatore. By a notification dated 2nd August, 1948, the Cotton Textiles (Control) Order, 1948, was promulgated. There were amendments to this order as and when circumstances required. Clause 21A was inserted in this Order by a notification dated 17th August, 1966. The relevant portion of the clause runs as follows:'(1) Where the Textile Commissioner has specified under paragraph (a) of Sub-clause (1) of Clause 22, the maximum price...
Controller of Estate Duty Vs. S. Sachidanandam and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-06-1979
Reported in: [1980]123ITR524(Mad)
1. In this reference under Section 64(1) of the E.D. Act, the following questions have been referred for the opinion of this court:' 1. Whether, in disposing of an appeal preferred against an assessment made under section 58(4) of the Estate Duty Act, it is open to the Appellate Controller to consider fresh evidence for the purpose of rectifying the estimate made by the Assistant Controller and if so, whether there are any limitations in the exercise of such power ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of the Appellate Controller has been rightly upheld ?' 2. The estate duty assessment came to be made on the death of one R. Kannan on 3rd March, 1963. The deceased was carrying on business under the name and style of ' Radhakrishna Service ' and ' Radhakrishna Mobile Service Station '. He owned lands and houses. He left behind him his only son, Anantharama Krishnan, two married daughters and an unmarried daughter. His wife had pre-deceased him on 7th J...
Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. M. Rm. K. Pl. Firm
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-06-1979
Reported in: [1980]124ITR340(Mad)
Sethuraman, J.1. In compliance with the direction of this court in T.C.P. No. 9 of 1973 dated 18th February, 1974, the following question has been referred under Section 256(2) 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 cost of acquisition of assets of the firm shall be their market value as on July 1, 1962 ?'2. The assesses is a firm composed of two partners, who are related to each other as father and son. They were members of an HUF which owned house properties, rubber garden, etc., in Rewang in Malaysia. These properties had been acquired prior to 1st January, 1954. There was a complete partition of the properties between the father and son on 1st July, 1962, under which the properties owned by the family were divided by metes and bounds and on the same day they entered into a partnership under which the properties allotted to them were brought into the firm as its assets. The partn...
Correspondent Hindu Girls High School Vs. Education Tribunal (Principa ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-06-1979
Reported in: (1980)1MLJ315
ORDERS. Padmanabhan, J.1. This writ petition has been filed to quash the order of the Education Tribunal, Ramanathapuram, dated 9th November, 1976. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are as follows:The petitioner is the Correspondent of the Hindu Girls High School, Watrap. The second respondent Subadra was at all material times employed as a teacher in the petitioner's school. For some irregularities, the petitioner terminated the services of the second respondent on 31st May, 1971. Against the said order of termination of her services, the second respondent preferred an appeal to the Inspectress of Girls' Schools, Madurai. The appellate authority allowed the appeal by the order dated 17th November, 1974 and directed reinstatement in service of the second respondent. The petitioner in turn filed a second appeal which by mistake was presented to the Chief Educational Officer instead of to the Director of School Education. The Chief Educational Officer therefore returne...
Abdul Kader Vs. Chinnaswarny Padayachi
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-03-1979
Reported in: AIR1980Mad116
1. C. M. P. No. 9821 of 1978, is a petition under Section 151 to Section 153 C.P. C. and O. 6, R. 17 C. P. C. to amend the cause title in S. A. S. R. No. 64744 of 1978, by changing the name of the appellant as Abdul Rader instead of sheik Rader and also to amend the cause title in the copies of the Printed orders and of the certified decretal order made In O. P. No. 152 of 1974 on the file of the Sub-Court, Chidambaram, in respect of the second claimant therein by changing the name Sheik Rader into Abdul Rader and also to amend the cause title in the copies of the printed Judgments and of the certified copy of the decree in A. S. No. 227 of 1016, on the file of the District Court , Cuddalore ,by making a similar change therein and to direct the Sub Court and the District Court to likewise amend the cause title in the respective copies of the Judgments and of the copies of the decretal order and dear" kept in their respective records and to pass such further or other orders as the Court...
V.S. Krishnaswami (Died) V.S.K.R. Transport and anr. Vs. M. Marappan a ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-03-1979
Reported in: (1980)2MLJ291
ORDERV. Ramaswami, J. 1. In pursuance of a notification dated 1st September, 1972, published under Section 57(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for the grant of a stage carriage permit to ply on a new short route from Kandili to Pernambut via. Tirupattur bus stand, eight applicants applied for the grant of the permit. One V.S. Krishnaswami, the petitioner in the civil revision petition and the first respondent herein were two among the applicants. By an order dated 15th February, 1974, the Regional Transport Authority, North Arcot, granted the permit to the first respondent herein. V.S. Krishnaswamy filed an appeal before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal raising various contentions. The State Transport Appellate Tribunal, however, confirmed the order in favour of the first respondent and dismissed the appeal. Thereafter V.S. Krishnaswamy preferred this civil revision petition. Pending the civil revision petition, V.S. Krishnaswamy died on 10th Octo...
Vedanayagam Vs. Janaki Ammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-03-1979
Reported in: (1980)1MLJ226
ORDERV. Ratnam, J.1. This is a petition to revise the order of the learned District Munsif, Kumbakonam, in E.A. No. 223 of 1978 in R.C.O.P. No. 10 of 1973 which was an application filed by the respondent herein under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure for directing the petitioner to pay to the respondent a sum of Rs. 2,690 69 with subsequent interest and costs. The question of maintainability of the application under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure, had been considered as a preliminary point and against the adjudication of that question, the present civil revision petition has been filed.2. Admittedly, the respondent is the owner of the building bearing door No. 24, Kasiviswanathan Koil Street, Kumbakonam. The petitioner was a tenant of that building on a monthly rental of Rs. 50 payable by first week of every Tamil month. The respondent purchased the property on 14th September, 1972, from the previous owner and the petitioner continued to remain in possession of the p...
Sheveroy Estates Ltd. Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-02-1979
Reported in: [1981]132ITR214(Mad)
Sethuraman, J. 1. These two revision petitions have been filed underSection 54(1) of the Tamil Nadu Agrl. I.T. Act, 1955, to revise the orders of theAgricultural Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras, dated 22nd March, 1975, and 1st July, 1976, respectively for the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75. The assessee is a public limited company owning an estate measuring 1,028.65 acres in Sheveroy Hills. In the estate coffee is grown. For the assessment year 1973-74, the assessee filed a return of loss of Rs. 52,289. The assessing authority found some inadmissible deductions having been claimed and after adjusting them the loss disappeared and an income of Rs. 32,82-8 was assessed to tax. In computing the income, the Agrl. ITO had not allowed deduction of Rs. 1,60,233 representing the estimated claim for gratuity. The assessee, in fact, did not make the claim for a deduction of the sum of Rs. 1,60,233 at the time of the filing of the return, nor had it debited the said amount in the prof...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »