Chennai Court September 1981 Judgments
The Thanjavur Leather and Autoliners Industrial Co-operative Society L ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-24-1981
Reported in: [1983]52STC343(Mad)
Sethuraman, J.1. These are appeals for the assessment years 1969-70 to 1974-75 against the order of the Board of Revenue dated 18th January, 1977. The assessee is a manufacturer of leather goods. During the relevant years, the assessee manufactured the materials which are used for the hoods of jeeps. The claim of the assessee was that these were automobile spare parts so as to come within the scope of the notification dated 18th March, 1970. Before the assessing authority, the assessee claimed also that it could be assessed only at the general rate of sales tax if at all it could be taxed. The assessing authority rejected these contentions and levied tax on the basis that these were automobile accessories taxable at 15 per cent under entry 3 to the First Schedule. The appeal of the assessee to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was successful and he accepted the assessee's claim that the tax livable was only 13 per cent on the basis of the said notification dated 18th March, 1970. Th...
Tag this Judgment!South India Viscose Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-23-1981
Reported in: (1982)29CTR(Mad)356; [1982]135ITR206(Mad)
Sethuraman, J. 1. This is a consolidated reference of three reference applications made before the Tribunal for the assessment year 1971-72. The following are the questions which have been referred : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to deduction of Rs. 36,983 of any portion thereof, representing the additional amount paid by it in respect of the instalments payable for the purchase of the machinery falling within the relevant previous year, on account of the fall in the value of the rupee due to fluctuation in the rate of exchange 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to deduction of Rs. 13,000 being the expenditure incurred by it, for providing coffee, etc., to its customers 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to deduction of Rs. 11,875 paid by it to the E.P.S. card-holders during the relevant previous year by way of compensati...
Tag this Judgment!Hamsammal Vs. P.V. Thakkar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-23-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Mad108
1. The defendant is the appellant. The respondent herein filed the suit for specific performance of the contract of sale D/- 20-10-1974, with the following averments: The appellant defendant is the owner of a house property situate at Oppannakara, St. Coimbatore town. On 20-10-1974, she entered into an agreement with the respondent herein, under which the former agreed to sell the property for a sum of Rs. 55,000/-. A written agreement Ex. A. 1 was duly executed between the parties incorporating all the terms and a sum of Rs. 2502/- was paid as advance. A tenant was in possession of the said property and therefore it was agreed that the balance amount has to be paid at the time of the sale deed and a time of 90 days was fixed for that purpose. It was also agreed that vacant possession has to be delivered within that time, after evicting the tenant. On 2-11-1974, the respondent herein paid another sum of Rs. 2,500/- to the appellant. However, the appellant could not recover possession f...
Tag this Judgment!Arasu Vs. State
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-22-1981
Reported in: 1982CriLJ1138
1. This is a petition under S. 438, Cr.P.C. In that, the petition itself is signed by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, wherein the grounds for releasing the petitioner on anticipatory bail are incorporated. It is admitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Santhanam, that there is no provision in the procedural law of the land namely the Criminal P.C. for an, affidavit being obtained from the person who is actually aggrieved and who wants the discretionary power vested with the Court under S. 438, Cr.P.C., to be exercised to swear an affidavit which will contain a first-hand knowledge in the language in which he is acquainted or in his own mother-tongue so that the Court may be having the first-hand information as to the circumstances under which he has been placed so as to come and have the remedy available for him under the provisions of S. 438, Cr.P.C., and as such this is of is course a matter, which is casually made not with a purpos...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hind Mercantile Corporation (In Liquida ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-22-1981
Reported in: [1989]177ITR149(Mad)
Sethuraman, J. 1. In the reference under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in pursuance of a direction of this court, the following are the questions that were directed to be, and have been, referred: '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in cancelling the penalty imposed under the provisions of section 271(1)(c) for the assessment year 1961-62, when the quantum assessment on the basis of which the penalty came to be imposed by the Department has been set aside by the Appellate Tribunal for being done de novo by the Income-tax Officer in accordance with law (2) Whether the Appellate Tribunal was within its jurisdiction in passing the order cancelling the penalty, having the effect of prohibiting the Income-tax Officer from initiating penalty proceedings, if called for, on the basis of the assessment directed to be made de novo ?' 2. The assessee, a private limited company, was carrying on business in mining an...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Tamil Nadu-ii Vs. V.S. Thyagaraja Mudaliar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-22-1981
Reported in: (1982)29CTR(Mad)353; [1983]140ITR128(Mad)
Sethuraman, J. 1. In pursuance of a direction of this court, the following questions of law has been referred under s. 256 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 remunerations paid to the karta of the family by M/s. Thiru Arooran Sugars Ltd. and M/s. Trichy Distilleries and Chemicals Ltd. and M/s. Venkatesa Thyagaraja Ltd., is not on account of the investment in these companies by the family, but due to the individual services rendered by Shri v. S. Thyagaraja Mudaliar and should not be taxed in the assessment of the assessee Hindu undivided family ?' 2. Shri Thyagaraja Mudaliar belongs to an affluent family in the Thanjavur District. There was an HUF consisting of himself, his wife, his sons and others. There was a partition in this family when his sons became separated and thereafter from the assessment year 1970-71 he had been assessed in the status of an HUF consisting of himse...
Tag this Judgment!Associated Publishers (Madras) Ltd. Vs. Govt. of Tamil Nadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-22-1981
Reported in: (1982)IILLJ107Mad
1. W.P. Nos. 3797 of 1978, 2316/79 and 1991 of 1980 are the three writ petitions filed by the Associated Publishers, who print and publish the English Daily 'The Mail' W.P. No. 3980/78, 2555 of 1979 and 260 of 1981 are the petitions filed by the Wheel & Rim Co. of India. In all these writ petitions same point relating to the refusal to grant exemption applied for under S. 36 of the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965, hereinafter referred to as the Act, arises for consideration. 2. In W.P. No. 3797 of 1978, in the supporting affidavit, it is stated that the operations of the petitioner have become uneconomic and all the efforts taken to reorganise the work force and increase its profitablility had proved to be a failure due to various reasons including non-co-operation from labour and high labour cost. The company has been sustaining losses from the year 1964 and from 1970 upto 31-1-1977, the total accumulated loss, has amounted to Rs. 67,00,000. The loss for the year ending 31-1-1978 was about...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Tamil Nadu-iii Vs. Katpadi Co-operative Ti ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-22-1981
Reported in: (1981)25CTR(Mad)312; [1982]135ITR287(Mad)
SETHURAMAN J. - This is a reference under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, on the following question :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the deduction under section 80p should be allowed before set off of unadsorbed loss and unabsorbed depreciation of the earlier years ?'The assessee in a co-operative society. For the assessment year 1969-70 and 1970-71, assessments were made on March 20, 1971. For the assessment year 1969-70, as against the loss of Rs. 20,050 shown by the assessee, the actual amount arrived at as loss was Rs. 22,650 and the depreciation for that year as determined at Rs. 3,316. Thus, the aggregate deficit for that year was Rs. 25,966. For the assessment year 1970-71, the assessee had shown an income of Rs. 26,580. The ITO determined the income at Rs. 29,584. He set off the deficit of Rs. 25,966 relation to the earlier year and arrived at a net income of Rs. 3,618. It appears that this fig...
Tag this Judgment!E. Joseph and anr. Vs. the Assistant Collector of Customs, Tuticorin
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-21-1981
Reported in: 1982CriLJ559; 1984(15)ELT84(Mad)
ORDER1. The Customs Act, 1962, is an enactment which contains provisions like Sections 106-A to 110, the underlying principles of which are somewhat not having features, which may be akin to to provisions imbedded in Part IV of the Constitution (Fundamental rights), viz., against the testimonial compulsion contemplated under Art. 20 clause (3), which imbibes in itself the principle that an accused person cannot be compelled to be a witness against himself, and as such starting from In re Swarna Lingam Chettiar's case (Swarnalingam Chettiar v. Asst. Labour Inspector, Karaikudi AIR 1956 Mad 165 : : AIR1954Mad785 , (with respect to our agency bus transport he was plying from Devakottai Rly. Station to the town proper) dealt with by Rajamannar C.J. and Rajagopala Iyengar J. which had been followed in a number of cases and subsequently, culminating in decisions of the Supreme Court, dealing about this testimonial compulsion, the decisions held that Art. 20 is not applicable to the procedure...
Tag this Judgment!Collector of Central Excise, Madras Vs. R. Seshammal and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-21-1981
Reported in: 1983LC209D(Madras); 1982(10)ELT404(Mad)
ORDERVenugopal, J.1. The first respondent's husband Rathinaswamy Chettiar was carrying on business in gold and gold jewellery under the name and style of Sri Nataraja Vilas Jewellery Hall at Chidambaram. He died on 7-11-1971, and thereafter the business was being carried on by his legal heir and the first respondent. On 3-9-1972, the intelligence wing of the Income-tax department searched the residence and business premises of the first respondent and seized 21 Kgs of old and new gold jewellery and primary gold worth about Rs. 4,48,319. The Income tax Officer passed a summary assessment order under S. 132(5) of the Income tax Act, determining the total income at Rs. 6,90,390 and the tax liability at Rs 6,30,775. On 3-10-1975, the President of India promulgated the Voluntary Disclosure of Income and Wealth Ordinance, 1975 and the Ordinance was subsequently repealed by the Voluntary Disclosure of Income and Wealth Act (Act No. 8 of 1976). The first respondent filed voluntary returns as p...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »