Chennai Court December 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.
C. Hajee Abdul Subhan Sahib Vs. the Joint Commercial Tax Officer, Madr ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-12-1980
Reported in: [1982]50STC143(Mad)
1. In this writ petition, the petitioner, who was one of the parters of a firm, C. Hajee Jainulabdeen and Company, which is admittedly no longer in existence now, challenges the validity of orders of assessment passed by the first respondent for the years 1951-52, 1952-53, 1953-54, 1954-55, 1955-56 and 1958-59. The total amount of sales tax, after deducting certain amounts already paid, comes to Rs. 33,392.93.2. Mr. G. Narayanan, the learned counsel for the petitioner, takes two contentions before me : (1) for the years 1951-52 to 1954-55 the assessments were made under rule 16(2) of the Rules framed under the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1939. Mr. G. Narayanan submits that this rule has been struck down as ultra vires by this Court in A. Abdul Shukoor v. Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Madras (W.P. No. 1487 of 1964). Consequently, the learned counsel contends that the orders of assessment for the years 1951-52 to 1954-55, though passed earlier, became ab initio void by r...
Arulandu Udayar, K.S. Soosai Udayar, Iru Sowrimuthu Dayar and P.S. Sow ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-12-1980
Reported in: (1982)1MLJ257
V. Ramaswami, J.1. Ariyakudi, Idaiyaur and Vettiur were three villages forming part of the Sivaganga Zamindari. Sometime after the settlement of the Zamindari in 1801, the Zamindar granted in inam certain lands in these villages as a post-settlement dharmilla inam in favour of one Sadhananda Mudaliar. Though the original grant in favour of Sadhananda Mudaliar is not produced, it is evident from the later records that the entirety of the lands comprised in the grant or a major portion of it, were un-reclaimed waste lands and it was given to the grantee or the purpose of reclamation. The conditions of the cowl are not available, but we can safely presume from the subsequent records that Sadhananda Mudaliar was conferred only a kudiwaram interest, in the lands and the melwaram was still vested with the Zamindar. Subsequently, these three villages were granted to certain brahmins and Ariyakudi Sri Thiruvengada Mudayan Devasthanam (hereinafter referred to as the 'Devasthanam') the 14th defe...
Perumal and ors. Vs. Ramachandra Padayachi and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-12-1980
Reported in: (1982)1MLJ65
V. Balasubrahmanyan, J.1. These two civil revision petitions although heard at an interval of a week or two in between are disposed of by this common judgment, considering that both of them raise an identical point of limitation. Eachisa case where the holder of a money decree purchases a judgment-debtor's property in execution sale. After confirmation of the sale in his favour the decree-holder-purchaser applies to the executing Court for delivery. The application is filed within a period of one year from the date when the sale is made absolute. This is the prescribed period for an application of this kind under Article 134 of the Schedule to the Limitation Act, 1963. On this application by the decree-holder-purchaser, the Court orders delivery. But, for some reason or other, the purchaser does not succeed in obtaining actual delivery. The delivery warrant is returned unexecuted. In the one case, the judgment-debtor makes himself scarce, and the property is found under lock and key, a...
M.S.P. Rajah Vs. Commissioner of Gift-tax, Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-11-1980
Reported in: (1981)20CTR(Mad)336; [1982]134ITR1(Mad)
Ramaswami, J.1. One M. S. P. Rajah, the karta of an HUF consisting of himself, his wife and three daughters gifted certain jewellery, belonging to the HUF, to his wife on March 31, 1971. He filed a return admitting the gross value of the three items of jewellery which were gifted as Rs. 92,314, which represented actually the purchase value of the jewellery. Since there was an interval between the date of purchase and the date of gift, he was required to have the jewellery re-valued in order to take into account any fluctuations in the value of gold and diamonds. The assessee had substituted subsequently the value of the gifted jewellery on the basis of the valuation report and the value of the gift was taken as Rs. 1,01,364. He was assessed in the status of an HUF. The assessee had claimed, in addition to the statutory exemption of Rs. 5,000 under s. 5(2) of the G.T. Act, a deduction of Rs. 50,000 under s. 5(1)(viii). The GTO, in the view that the donor is the HUF and the donee is the ...
Bapalal and Co. Vs. Government of India and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-11-1980
Reported in: 1981(8)ELT587(Mad)
ORDER1. Messrs Bapalal and Co. (Manufacturing) is the petitioner herein. The petitioner firm has been registered as a partnership firm under the Indian Partnership Act in 1933, the registration number being No. 63 of 1933. In the same year another partnership firm was also registered under the name and style of M/s. Bapalal and Co. (Diamonds) with registration number 64 of 1933. The respective registration certificates were issued by the Registrar of firms as M/s. Bapalal and Co. (Manufacturing Department) and M/s. Bapalal and Co. (Diamonds Department). According to the petitioner excepting for the fact that certain partners are common, the partnership firms are two independent and distinct entities. Though both the firms are situate in the same premises, they function separately. M/s. Bapalal and Co. (Diamonds) supply raw materials such as diamonds and gold to the petitioner and the latter manufactures the jewellery by setting the diamonds in gold. It returns the diamonds and gold rec...
Sudarsan Trading Company Ltd. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-11-1980
Reported in: [1981]48STC366(Mad)
Ramaswami, J.1. The assessee is a manufacturer and dealer among others in mango juice. For the assessment year 1971-72 by an assessment order dated 26th October, 1972, the assessing officer determined the total and taxable turnover of Rs. 4,23.494 and Rs. 41,504 respectively. In determining this taxable turnover the assessing officer had allowed an exemption on a turnover of Rs. 3,81,990 on the ground that it represented export sales of mango juice to Russia, through the State Trading Corporation, in the light of the judgments then prevailing. Later the assessing officer initiated proceedings under section 16 on the ground that the export was by the State Trading Corporation and there was a local sale by the dealer in favour of the State Trading Corporation. After following the procedure prescribed by an order dated 6th August, 1973, the assessing officer revised the assessment by including the turnover of Rs. 3,81,990 also in the taxable turnover. The assessee preferred an appeal to t...
M. Velayutham Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-10-1980
Reported in: [1981]130ITR145(Mad)
Ramaswami, J.1. The assessee, an individual, was assessed in the status of a resident and ordinarily resident for the assessment year 1970-71. In the return submitted by him, he had disclosed a sum of Rs. 33,761 as foreign income accrued in Ceylon. While making the assessment order, the ITO converted this Ceylon income into Indian currency at Rs. 43,550 with reference to r. 115 of the I. T. Rules and made an assessment order on that basis. The assessee preferred an appeal contending that the ITO went wrong in coverting the Ceylon income into its equivalent in Indian money applying r. 115. He contended that there were certain restrictions imposed by the Ceylon Govt. in the matter of remittances of income from Ceylon and that under these restrictions before any money earned in Ceylon was repatriated to any other country a foreign exchange entitlement certificate would have to be obtained and only to the extent of the amount shown in the certificate, that amount could be remitted. Under t...
Management of Diocesan Press Vs. Labour Court, Madras and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-10-1980
Reported in: (1982)ILLJ451Mad
1. The short question arising for decision in this writ petition is whether an employee governed by the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) is eligible to receive wages as per the conditions of service for the period during which he was on sick leave without deduction of the sickness benefits that he has received under the Act from the wages payable to him by the employer. The facts leading to the filing of this writ petition may be set out as follows. The second respondent, Vithyaraj filed along with the other employees Claim Petition No. 1050 of 1970 on the file of the Labour Court, Madras under S. 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act for computation of certain benefits due to them in terms of money. We are not concerned in this writ petition with the claims made by the other two employees. The Second Respondent had made an additional claim for half salary for the period between 2-10-1969 and 4-11-1269 during which period he was on sick leave and...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Tamil Nadu-v Vs. V.L. Balakrishnan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-09-1980
Reported in: [1981]130ITR138(Mad)
V. Ramaswami, J. 1. The assessee was carrying on business in cotton and was running a ginning factory. For the assessment year 1962-63, corresponding to the accounting year ending December 31, 1961, he submitted originally a return on December 31, 1962, showing a total income of Rs. 77,236. Subsequently on June 15, 1963, a revised return was filed showing a total income of Rs. 38,452. The assessee had a key loan account with the central Bank of India, Coimbatore. The ITO made a detailed scrutiny of the accounts and found that there were certain discrepancies in the stock as shown in the assessee's books and as declared to its bankers. In these penalty proceedings, we are concerned only with the discrepancies in the key loan account. In the assessee's accounts, the closing stock of Karunganni kapas was shown as 33,273 lbs., whereas as per the statement given to the bank, the closing stock was 1,82,000 lbs., showing a difference of 1,48,727 lbs. On the ground that the assessee would not ...
Dunlop India Ltd. and India Tyre and Rubber Co. (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-1980
Reported in: 1981LC537D(Madras)
ORDERPadmanabhan, J.1. These Writ Petitions coming on for hearing on 29th day of October 1980 and Monday 3rd day of November, 1980 and on this day upon perusing the petitions and the respective affidavit filed in support thereof the order of the High Court, dated 29.3.1978 and 3.4.1878 and made herein, and the Counter affidavits filed herein and the records relating to the order in O.C. No. 382/78, O.C. No. 311/78, O.C. No. 383/78, O.C. No. 385/78, dated 23.3. 1978 and 27.3.1978 on the file of 2nd respondent herein and comprised in the return of the said respondent to the Writs made by the High Court, and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. V.P. Raman for Mr. V. Manivannan, advocate for the petitioner in all the petitions and of Mr. K.N. Balasubramanyan, Additional Central Govt. Standing Counsel on behalf of the respondent in all the petitions the Court made the following order:2. M/s. Dunlop India Limited, the petitioner herein, is a company incorporated under the Companies Act with its...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »