Chennai Court January 1980 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax, Tamil Nadu-i, Madras Vs. V. Shanmugham
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-23-1980
Reported in: [1984]147ITR692(Mad)
Sethuraman, J.1. The following question has been referred in pursuance of the directions of this court : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the income derived by assessee from letting out of 'Vinayaka Lodge' should be assessed as business income but not income from property ?' 2. The assessee was carrying on business in groceries. He constructed a building between November, 1965, and September, 1967. The building consisted of 68 rooms, some of which had attached bath-rooms. The rooms were separately furnished and let out for varying durations. He employed a manager, a supervisor, scavengers, room boys and watchmen for the purpose of looking after the building and its amenities. He provided also the facility of telephone, electricity and water supply at his expense. He realised Rs. 15,545 and Rs. 39,331 as gross income from the tenants by, letting out the rooms in this property, which was known as 'Vinayaka Lodge...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Tamil Nadu-v Vs. Kamala Ganapathi Subraman ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-23-1980
Reported in: (1980)19CTR(Mad)209; [1981]127ITR175(Mad)
Sethuraman, J.1. The Appellate Tribunal has referred to following question under s. 27(1) of the W.T. Act : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the provisions of section 35 of the Wealth-tax Act could not be invoked to apply the amended provisions of section 5(1)(viii) of the Wealth-tax Act for the assessment years 1968-69 and 1969-70 on the ground that the application of the said amended provision involved a debatable question of law ?' 2. The assessee, a lady, filed returns under the W.T. Act for the assessment years 1968-69 and 1969-70. Before the WTO, she claimed exemption on the value of certain jewellery, relying on the decision of the Gujarat High Court in CWT v. Mrs. Arundhati Balkrishan : [1968]70ITR203(Guj) . The WTO relied on another decision of the Patna High Court in Pandit Lakshmikant Jha v. CWT : [1968]69ITR545(Patna) and held that the value of the jewellery was liable to be assessed. He took Rs. 69,705 as the value of the jewellery in each of th...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Tamil Nadu-v Vs. Puthuthotam Estates Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-23-1980
Reported in: [1981]127ITR481(Mad)
Sethuraman, J. 1. The Appellate Tribunal has under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, referred the following two questions : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the reopening of the assessments for the years 1969-70 to 1972-73 was invalid 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee was not entitled to the grant of development allowance under section 33A of the Income-ta x Act, 1961, for each of the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75 ?' 2. Of the above two questions, the first has been referred at the instance of the Commissioner and the second at the instance of the assessee. We shall first deal with the first question before taking up the second. 3. The assessee is the owner of a tea estate. It submitted returns of income for the assessment years 1969-70 to 1972-73, in which there was a claim for development allowance, as provided by s. 33A of the I....
Controller of Estate Duty, Madras Vs. M.i. Syed Ibrahim
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-23-1980
Reported in: [1981]129ITR18(Mad)
Sethuraman, J.1. Under s. 64(1) of the E. D. Act, the following two questions have been referred : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the sum of Rs. 84,000, being the amount gifted by the deceased to his sons, should not be included in the estate of the deceased by invoking section 10 of the Estate Duty Act 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the sum of Rs. 18,000, being 2/5ths share of the goodwill referable to the share of the sons of the deceased in the partnership firm, could not be included in the estate of the deceased by invoking section 10 of the Estate Duty Act ?' 2. The estate duty assessment, which has led to this reference, came to be made on the death of one S. M. Mohamed Ibrahim on 25th January, 1965. Till 1st November, 1957, he was carrying on a proprietary business in hardware under the name and style of M/s. S. M. Mohamed Ibra...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Tamil Nadu-i Vs. Standard Motor Products o ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-22-1980
Reported in: (1980)17CTR(Mad)317; [1981]131ITR300(Mad)
Sethuraman, J.1. The Appellate Tribunal has referred the following questions under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is entitled to the rebate of 35% on the profits attributable to the manufacture and sale of the internal combustion engine, automobile ancillaries and gears for the assessment year 1965-66 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is entitled to the rebate under the provisions of section 80E/80I for the assessment years 1966-67, 1968-69 and 1969-70 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee should be allowed the relief under section 80I being worked out without setting off the brought forward loss from the earlier years for the assessment year 1968-69 4. Whether, on the facts and in the circ...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Tamil Nadu-iv Vs. V. Varadarajan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-22-1980
Reported in: [1980]122ITR1014(Mad)
Sethuraman, J.1. The following question had been referred under s. 27(1) of the W.T. Act : 'Whether action can be initiated and penalty levied on onthe legal representative of a deceased-assessee for the belated filing of the return by the latter for any assessment year under section 18(1)(a) of the Wealth- tax Act, 1957 ?' 2. One Venkateswara Iyer should have filed the wealth-tax returns for the assessment years 1963-64 to 1968-69 on or before the June 30 of each of those years. He had not done so. Therefore, notices were issued to him under s. 17 of the W.T. Act for the years 1963-64 to 1967-68 and under s. 14(2) for the assessment year 1967-69, requiring him to file the returns within 30 days from the date of receipt of the notices. He filed the returns on March 31, 1969, disclosing various amountu as his net wealth as on the relevant dates. The tax due on the basis of the said returns was also paid. 3. The WTO initiated penalty proceedings for the delay in finding the returns and r...
S.V. Venkatarama Reddiar Vs. Abdul Ghani Rowther and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-22-1980
Reported in: AIR1980Mad276
Natarajan, J.1. This Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred against the Judgment of Ismail, J., (as he then was) in App. No. 647 of 1970. The appeal originally came up for hearing before a Division Bench of this court, consisting of Ramanujam and Sengottuvelan, JJ. The Division Bench -felt that the question which arose for consideration in the appeal, viz, whether a tenant inducted into possession by an usufructuary mortgagee can claim the benefits of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, as against the mortgagor, after the redemption of the mortgage, warranted consideration by a Full Bench, in view of the importance of the question and the conflict of authorities. Accordingly, this Bench has been constituted to consider the appeal and that is how the matter is before us.2. One P. V. J. Vella Batcha Rowther, who was the plaintiff in the suit, was the owner of the suit property, viz., a non-residential building bearing door No. 55 in Jawahar Bazar in Karur town....
The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by the District Collector Vs. the ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-22-1980
Reported in: (1980)2MLJ327
ORDERV. Ratnam, J.1. An interesting question involving the interpretation of Article 131 of the Constitution of India arises in this civil revision petition. The suit, S.C.S. No. 75 of 1976, Sub-Court, Tiruchirapalli, was instituted by the petitioner, the State of Tamil Nadu, against the Union of India, represented by the General Manager, Southern Railway, Madras, for recovery of damages in a sum of Rs. 1,588.71. According to the case of the petitioner, the consignment of 585 bags of wheat weighing 506.03 quintals was sent by the Regional Director of Food Corporation of India in November, 1967 to Tiruchirapalli under railway receipt No. 870954 dated 7th November, 1967. A shortage of 10 full bags weighing 25.90 quintals was noticed at the time of unloading, which was brought to the notice of the respondent. In answer to a claim made by the petitioner on 7th January, 1968, the respondent took up the position that the railway receipt was clear and unqualified about the loading and therefo...
Kalavathi B. Java Vs. the Life Insurance Corporation of India and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-21-1980
Reported in: AIR1980Mad316
ORDER1. An interesting point on the interpretation of Life Insurance Corporation of India (Agents) Regulations, 1972, arises for consideration in this writ petition. The petitioner was working as an insurance agent of the General Assurance Society Ltd., Madras, with effect from 13-9-1947. On the nationalisation of the. Life insurance business, it appears, originally ladies were not permitted to be the agents. When the rules were relaxed relating to the appointment of women as, agents, the petitioner applied for appointment as an agent. By an order of appointment dated 7-9-1962, she was appointed as an agent with effect from 20-8-1962. On the ground that she had not completed sufficient amount of business as required under Regulation 9 (3), her services were sought to be terminated under Regulation 13 (1). The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner's services were terminated on the ground that as required under Regulation 9 (3) (d), the petitioner had not intro...
Kalavathi B. Java Vs. the Life Insurance Corporation of India, Represe ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-21-1980
Reported in: (1980)2MLJ13
ORDERV. Ramaswami, J.1. An interesting point on the interpretation of Life Insurance Corporation of India (Agents) Regulations, 1972 arises for consideration in this writ petition. The petitioner was ! working as in insurance agent of the General Assurance Society Limited, Madras with effect from 13th September, 1947. On the nationalisation of the Life Insurance business, it appears, originally ladies were not permitted to be agents. When the rules were relaxed relating to the appointment of women as agents, the petitioner applied for appointment as agent. By an order of appointment dated 7th September, 1962, she was appointed as an agent with effect from 26th August, 1962. On the ground that she had not completed sufficient amount of business as required under Regulation 9(3), her services were sought to be terminated under Regulation 13(1). The learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner's services were terminated on the ground that as required under Regulation 9...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »