Chennai Court October 1982 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax, Coimbatore Vs. Coimbatore Cotton Mills Ltd ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-06-1982
Reported in: (1983)33CTR(Mad)301; [1983]140ITR562(Mad)
Balasubrahmanayan, J. 1. Two questions have been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal for our opinion in this case. They are: '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in view of the provisions contained in section 36(1)(v) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the claim of the assessee for allowance of provision of gratuity was liable to be deducted subject to the varification mentioned in its order for the year 1972-73 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the mahimai collection of Rs. 17,610 is not taxable in the assessment year 1972-73 ?' 2. The assessee in this case runs a textile mill, employing many workmen. In earlier years, the assessee was in the habit of paying gratuity to the workmen who retired from service or got discharged from employment. Whenever, gratuity was actually paid, the assessee claim the payment as a deduction or outgoing of the business in the computation of ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax, Tamil Nadu-i Vs. B. Nagi Reddy
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-05-1982
Reported in: (2009)34CTR(Mad)151; [1984]147ITR337(Mad)
Balasubrahmanyan, J.1. The assessee in this income-tax reference is one Nagi Reddy. He was, at the material time, the owner of two cinematograph film studios in Madras, by name Vijaya Studios and Vahini Studios. He leased them out on rent to a company called Vijaya Productions Private Limited. The rental income was assessable as part of the assessee's total income. The question, however, was under which head of income the lease amounts were to be assessed for purpose of computation. The ITO and the AAC rejected the assessee's claim. But the Income tax Appellate Tribunal accepted the assessee's contention and directed the assessment of the rental income as business income with all that it involved, including allowance of depreciation on buildings and machinery. The Tribunal, in their order, have set out the grounds for their determination. The Department's contention in these references is that the Tribunal's decision is erroneous in point of law. 2. As earlier indicated, the dispute in...
Tag this Judgment!M.R. Jayaram Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-05-1982
Reported in: [1984]147ITR807(Mad)
Balasubrahmanyan, J.1. The assessee in this income-tax reference was originally a partner of a registered firm called 'Sri Venkateswara Bus Union'. He had a 1/4th share in the firm. He retired from the partnership with effect from March 30, 1960. For the accounting year ended March 31, 1960, relevant to the assessment year 1960-61, the firm was subjected to assessment to income-tax. The assessment on the firm was made on October 10, 1960, on a total income of Rs. 49,040. Following the assessment of the firm, the assessment on the assessee as an individual partner of the firm was also completed for the same assessment year 1960-61. In that assessment, the assessee's share income was included as part of his total income. The amount included was Rs. 12,263. 2. Subsequent to the completion of this assessment, both on the firm and on the assessee as individual partner thereof, the income-tax authorities conducted a raid in the premises of the partnership firm and seized several documents th...
Tag this Judgment!M. Adaikalam (Detenu) Vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-01-1982
Reported in: 1983CriLJ1310
M.N. Moorthy, J.1. This is a petition filed by the brother under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India for issue of a writ of Habeas Corpus for releasing the detenu by name M. Adaikalam detained by the State of Tamil Nadu under section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974, (hereinafter referred to as the Act.) The order of the Government in G.O. No. SR/464-5/82 Public (SC) Dept. dt. 24-2-1982 reads as follows :- 'Whereas the Government of Tamil Nadu are satisfied with respect to the person known as Thiru M. Adaikalam, son of Thiru Murugan Servai, that with a view to prevent him from engaging in transporting smuggled goods, it is necessary to make the following order : Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3(1)(iii) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (Central Act 52 of 1974) the Governor of Tamil Nadu hereby directs that the said Thiru M. Adaikalam, be...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›