Chennai Court October 1981 Judgments
Dr. C. Kalyanam Vs. the Government of Tamil Nadu Represented by the Co ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-16-1981
Reported in: (1982)2MLJ93
ORDERS. Padmanabhan, J.1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition for the issue of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to quash the proceedings of the Director of Medical Services and Family Welfare, Madras in Ref. No. 77213/ESI/9C/2/77, dated 26th February, 1979, and to restrain the respondents from proceeding further against the petitioner pursuant to the impugned proceedings.2. The facts leading to the filing of this writ petition may be briefly set out as follows. In 1977 the petitioner was employed as a Superintendent of the Employees' State Insurance Hospital, Madras, On 11th December, 1977, a patient by name Vasudevan was found lying unconscious in the gardens of the E.S.I. Hospital at about 5 A.M. He was immediately taken to the Government General Hospital. On the way to the hospital the patient died. Thereafter the petitioner retired from service on 31st March, 1978. On 26th February, 1979, the charge memo, which is impugned in this proceeding was served on the petitioner. T...
Tag this Judgment!S. Moses Nadar Vs. State by Sub-inspector of Police, Panangudi
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-15-1981
Reported in: 1982CriLJ555
ORDER1. This is a petition filed under S. 482, Cri.P.C. to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 2168 of 1978 on the file of the J.S.C.M. Nanguneri. 2. The petitioner was a pawn broker carrying on business at No. 58 Railway Station Road, Nazarath, Tiruchendur. A charge-sheet under Section 414, I.P.C. was filed against him in C.C. No. 2168 of 1978 on the file of the J. S.C.M. Nanguneri on the allegation that in the last week of August 1977, on the pledge of stolen two small rings and one 'nali' (another ring) in all weighing about 8-1/2 grams of gold valued at Rs. 500/- one Velu the petitioner paid him. Rs. 165/-. In obedience to the summons, the petitioner appeared before the Magistrate pleaded not guilty to the offence under Section 414 I.P.C. and received documents under Section 173(5) Cr.P.C. In the charge-sheet, the respondent cited one Seethapiratti, the alleged owner of the rings in question, now (one ?) Chellasami Nadar and one A. P. Murugan, the two mahazar witnesses for the allege...
Tag this Judgment!Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Tiruchirapalli Vs. P.V. Perum ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-15-1981
Reported in: [1983]53STC221(Mad)
Sethuraman, J. 1. The only question that arises for consideration in this revision is whether horse gram flour falls within entry 80(b) of the First Schedule to the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, or within the exemption under a notification dated 4th March, 1974. The notification under section 17 of the Act, which confers exemption from levy of tax, runs as follows : 'In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 17 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (Tamil Nadu Act 1 of 1959), the Governor of Tamil Nadu hereby makes an exemption in respect of the tax payable by any dealer under the said Act on the sale of - (1) ................ (2) Cattle feed, namely, hay or straw or rice bran or wheat bran or husk and dust of pulses and grams, but excluding - (i) brokens of pulses and grams; (ii) oilcakes; and (iii) cotton seeds and (3) .....................' 2. It is, therefore, necessary first to examine whether the transaction comes within the scope of...
Tag this Judgment!Avon Plastics Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-15-1981
Reported in: [1982]49STC268(Mad)
Sethuraman, J.1. This is an appeal against the order of the Board of Revenue dated 11th March, 1977, in a suo motu revision of the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner dated 9th September, 1976. The assessee is a firm consisting of three partners, who are all ladies. The firm reported total and taxable turnovers of Rs. 6,36,374.34 and Rs. 5,98,609.52 respectively for the year 1974-75 under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act. The assessing officer issued summons to the dealers calling upon them to produce their accounts on three occasions, viz., 19th September, 1975, 17th October, 1975, and 10th December, 1975, respectively fixing the date for the production of he accounts after about a fortnight. The dealers failed to appear and did not produce the accounts. On 8th January, 1976, the assessing officer issued a notice calling for production of books on 20th January, 1976, and the communication contained also the usual warning that if they failed to produce the accounts, the t...
Tag this Judgment!Monsanto Chemicals of India (P.) Limited Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-15-1981
Reported in: [1982]51STC278(Mad)
Sethuraman, J.1. In this revision against the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal the only question that arises for consideration is whether the assessee's claim that the sale of a part of its business as a going concern fell within the language of rule 6(d) and therefore is exempt from tax is correct. The assessee is a company. By an agreement dated 16th July, 1973, the assessee sold to another company called 'Mindia Chemicals Limited' the business in (i) distribution and dealership in rubber chemicals; (ii) agency, indent and resale business relating to rubber chemicals; (iii) agency relating to other goods and products and services; and (iv) all other business of whatever nature (excluding the business of manufacture and distribution of or dealership in agro-chemicals then carried on in India by the assessee, the vendor) as a going concern together with all the assets, claims, debts and liabilities of the said business including the goodwill. The full benefit of pending contra...
Tag this Judgment!The Deputy Commissioner (C.T.), Coimbatore Division, Coimbatore Vs. Ka ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-15-1981
Reported in: [1982]51STC28(Mad)
Sethuraman, J.1. This revision petition has been filed by the State against the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Additional Bench), Coimbatore, dated 5th October, 1976. 2. The assessee was a printer and book-binder. The matter relates to the assessment year 1974-75. The assessee reported a turnover of Rs. 2,57,636.50 and claimed the whole of it was not liable to be taxed. The assessee claimed before the assessing authority that the orders placed by the customers consisted of two parts, one being for the supply of the required paper and boards and the other being for the printing of the ledgers and account books. As far as the first part was concerned, the assessee agreed that there were sales of goods but contended that those sales being second sales, were exempt from assessment. As far as the second part was concerned, the assessee's claim was that they were works contracts. The assessing authority held that the orders placed by the customers related only to the finished goo...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Gopal Nair and Sons
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-15-1981
Reported in: [1982]51STC257(Mad)
Sethuraman, J. 1. In this revision, the only point for consideration is whether the shaving cream sold by the assessee falls within entry 37 of the First Schedule to the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, for the assessment year 1972-73. The cream that is sold by the assessee is manufactured by M/s. Hindustan Lever Ltd. Entry 37 of the First Schedule as in force in the relevant year runs as follows : 'All kinds of soaps (excluding hand-made soaps), soap flakes, soap powders, detergent powders and liquids and metal polishing bars.' 2. The Tribunal has taken the view that it did fall within the scope of entry 37. At the relevant time, there was another entry, numbered 51, running as follows : 'Scents and perfumes, powders, snows (including all purpose creams and cold and vanishing creams) and scented hair oils.' 3. While, if the article fell within entry 37, the tax payable was 5 1/2 per cent at the point of first sale in the State. If it fell within item 51, the tax was 12 per cent...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Tamil Nadu Vs. P.M.A. Mathurai Veerasamy and Co.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-15-1981
Reported in: [1983]52STC131(Mad)
Sethuraman, J.1. This is a revision petition filed by the State against the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madurai, dated 16 August, 1976.2. The assessee is carrying on business in Madurai in jaggery. During the year 1973-74, the assessee purchased jaggery from agriculturists under bought notes and cane jaggery under pattials and statements of accounts. The assessing officer noticed that the assessee has collected surchage in respect of sales of cane jaggery, though it was not entitled to do so. He accordingly held that the assessee had contravened the provisions of Section 22(2) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act read with Sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax (Surcharge) Act, 1971. The collections came to Rs. 4,808.96. The assessing officer levied Rs. 6,213.44 as penalty. The assessee appealed to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, who confirmed the levy of penalty. The assessee thereafter appealed to the Tribunal. The Tribunal held that the coll...
Tag this Judgment!The Special Tahsildar (L.A.), Modernisation of Vaigai Channel Scheme V ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-15-1981
Reported in: (1982)2MLJ390
G. Ramanujam, J.1. An extent of 3.50 acres of land in S. Nos. 26, 27 and 30 in Virahanur Village, Madurai South Taluk was acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act for modernisation of Vaigai Channel Scheme. The relevant Section 4(1) notification was issued on 21st January, 1976. Before the Land Acquisition Officer, the respondent herein, the owner of the lands. acquired, claimed compensation at the rate of Rs. 500 per cent, of land, at Rs. 100 per cent, as severance, at Rs. 100 per cent, for the injurious affection and Rs. 60,000 as value for the 40 cocoanut trees which were on the acquired land. The Land Acquisition Officer, however, awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 72.72 per cent, for the thope lands of the extent of 3.22 acres and at Rs. SO per cent, for the dry lands of the extent of 28 cents. He has adopted the above market value for the thope lands based on a sale deed Exhibit B-3, dated 3rd September, 1972, under which ...
Tag this Judgment!Chettinad Corporation (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-14-1981
Reported in: [1983]141ITR693(Mad)
Sethuraman, J. 1. In this reference under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, the following question has been referred : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the penalty order passed is not barred by limitation under section 275 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. The assessee furnished an estimate for advance tax payable by it on March 14, 1970. The tax so estimated was Rs. 86,623. The assessment was completed on the total income of Rs. 16,26,990 and the tax payable thereon after adjustment of tax deducted at source and double income-tax relief due came to Rs. 2,35,091. As the estimate filed by the assessee was prima facie wrong, the ITO issued a notice under s. 274 to show cause why penalty should not be levied. The assessee's reply was that the penalty proceedings were time-barred as two years had elapsed after the assessment order was passed on January 20, 1971. The objection was overruled and the ITO levied Rs 1,09...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »