Chennai Court November 1982 Judgments
Naina Trading Corporation Vs. the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Harbo ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-10-1982
Reported in: [1984]57STC134(Mad)
Balasubrahmanyan, J.1. These cases are that of a dealer in iron and steel goods. The records maintained by the dealer for transactions of these goods were such that there was no separate reckoning of the first sales in those goods on the one hand and the second or subsequent sales in those goods on the other. In the absence of any clear-cut accounts or other material distinguishing the first sales from other sales, the assessment was completed on the basis of an estimated reckoning of the first sales. On appeal, the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal confirmed the assessment. This pattern of assessment on estimate was followed for two assessment years 1971-72 and 1972-73 and both these assessments were confirmed in appeal, as stated above. 2. These revisions are against the combined orders of the Tribunal. We think that we should not interfere in revision in a matter of estimate of this kind, sitting in revision, because matters of estimate are matters of degree. In this very assessee's case...
Tag this Judgment!K.M. Mutusamy Vs. the Commissioner, Panchayat Union and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-10-1982
Reported in: (1983)2MLJ271
S. Nainar Sundaram, J.1. The petitioner in Writ Petition No. 796 of 1977 is the appellant in this writ appeal. He was working as a Junior Assistant in. Thockanaickanpalayam Panchayat Union Council on his transfer from Sathia mangalam panchayat Union. While he was so working, it is alleged that he committed serious irregularities and he was suspended pending enquiry. We do not feel obliged to go into the merits of the charges levelled against the appellant in view of the scope of the controversy raised in the writ appeal. Disciplinary action was taken against him by the first respondent in 1976 and it ended in an order of removal from service on 11th June, 1976, passed by the first respondent. The appellant preferred an appeal to the second respondent and the appellant succeeded only in getting the order of punishment modified into one of reversion as a Record Clerk. This order of the second respondent was passed on 23rd December, 1976. Challenging the proceedings of the respondents, th...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Duraisingam and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-09-1982
Reported in: 1983CriLJ1765
Natarajan, J.1. A reference having been made by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli, under S. 395(2) of the Criminal P.C., the reference has been posted before us for orders. 2. Notice was given to the Public Prosecutor and he has been heard. 3. In S.C. No. 109 of 1978 there are ten accused persons. While the first accused is in custody, the others had been enlarged on bail. After examination of two witnesses for the prosecution, the second accused who was on bail absconded. Subsequently he could not be traced and even after proclamation was made under S. 82, and attachment of immovable properties was effected under S. 83 of the Criminal P.C., he has not surrendered. In such circumstances, the learned Sessions Judge seeks clarification as to what is the procedure to be adopted by him. Apart from the outcome of the trial affecting the future of accused 1 and 3 to 10, the trial of a connected case in which all the accused in this case are prosecution witnesses is a...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Madras Vs. Indian Express (Madur ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-09-1982
Reported in: (1983)35CTR(Mad)150; [1983]140ITR705(Mad)
Balasubrahmanyan, J.1. This reference raises a point about the scope of the appellate jurisdiction of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. 2. The Tribunal came into being in January, 1941. In the forty years and more of its existence, this Tribunal has become probably the best-known quasi-judicial Tribunal in the country. What is more, other quasi-judicial appellate bodies are trying to model themselves on this Tribunal. 3. The chief function of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is to hear and determine appeals from orders passed by the AAC. Similar function has been assigned to the same Tribunal under either the Direct Taxes Act, such as the E.D. Act, 1953, the W.T. Act, 1957, the G.T. Act, 1958, and so on. Over the years, Benches of the Tribunal in far-flung parts of the country have disposed of hundreds of thousands of appeals from order of the AAC. Many questions have cropped up during this period touching the scope of the Tribunal's appellate jurisdiction. The Tribunal itself has de...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Tamilnadu - I Vs. B. Nagi Reddi
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-09-1982
Reported in: (1983)35CTR(Mad)132; [1983]144ITR63(Mad)
Bladubrahmanyam, J.1. The question of law referred for our opinion in this income-tax reference is as follows : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the reassessment made by the Income-tax Officer to bring to tax the capital gains which were said to have accrued to the assessee, on the sale of his business, M/s. Chandamama Publications in favour of M/s. Sarada Binding Works, for the assessment year 1959-60 under section 147(a) of the Income-tax Act was valid?' 2. The assessee was assessed to income-tax under the original assessment for the year 1959-60 on June 14, 1960, on a total income of Rs. 71,555. This assessment was subsequently rectified when a mistake which appeared in the record was found out. That, however, need not concern us in this reference. Subsequently, on November 11, 1963, a notice under s. 148 of the I. T. Act was issued by the ITO to the assessee on the score that a part of the income had escaped assessment when the assessment was originally ...
Tag this Judgment!Britannia Biscuit Co. Ltd. Employees' Union Vs. Assistant Commissioner ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-05-1982
Reported in: (1983)ILLJ181Mad
1. The petitioner in this writ petition is the Britannia Biscuit Company Ltd. Employees Union (for short the petitioner-union). It has prayed for the issue of a writ declaration that the settlement, dated 14th October, 1981, entered into between the Britannia Industries Employees' Union, the third respondent, (for short the recognized union) and the Britannia Industries Ltd., the second respondent (for short management) is null and void. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition may be set out as follows : 2. The management is engaged in the manufacture of biscuits and breads. It has been declared to be a public utility service within the meaning of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short the Act). It employs about 950 workmen. It is an admitted fact that the third respondent was recognized as the proper bargaining agent of the workmen by the management as per the recommendations of the State evaluation and implementation committee. It is also an admitted fact that some...
Tag this Judgment!C.P. Mathew Vs. the Union of India
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-05-1982
Reported in: (1983)ILLJ84Mad
1. The petitioner joined the services of the second respondent, Hindustan Photo Films Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (for short the Management) as early as in 1961 as a Technical officer. In 1976 he was promoted as Works Manager. He was in charge of the two factories of the Management, one at Ooty and the other at Ambattur. On 27.10.1980 the Management informed the petitioner that his services stood terminated under Clause 13.1 of the Hindustan Photo Films Services Rules for Officers (for short Service Rules). A Cheque for Rs. 5,000 being two months basic salary was enclosed. Against the said order the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Board of Directors on 29-12-1980. The Appeal was rejected by the Board on 10-4-1981. It is, in these circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ petition to quash the order passed by the Management terminating his services.2. The communication dated 27.10.1980 states : 'Pursuant to the resolution of the Board of Directors dated 25th October, 1980 a...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India Vs. Indo-french Pharmaceutical Company
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-04-1982
Reported in: 1984(2)ECC237; 1983LC41D(Madras); 1983(12)ELT725(Mad)
ORDERPadmanabhan, J.1. This writ appeal has been filed by the Union of India against the order of a learned single Judge of this court in W.P. No. 2967 of 1973. 2. The question to be decided in the writ appeal centres round the fact whether the respondent Messrs Indo-French Pharmaceutical Company can be said to have used a mark, symbol, monogram or label in marketing its medicinal preparations. The respondent is a manufacturer of pharmaceutical products, some of which are liable to excise duty, and others not. The respondent has admittedly taken out a licence for the manufacture of those pharmaceutical products in respect of which they are bound to pay excise duty. They manufactured three Indian Pharmacopoeia products, viz. (1) Sulphagunidire tablets, (2) Sulpha Dimidine tablets and (3) Calcium Gluconets tablets. These items had been classified as non-excisable, and the respondent has been clearing the items without payment of excise duty with the approval of the Central Excise authori...
Tag this Judgment!The Management of Kalpana Textiles Vs. the Additional Commissioner for ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-04-1982
Reported in: (1984)1MLJ74
ORDERG. Ramanujam, J.1. The 2nd respondent herein was working as the Assistant Accountant in the petitioner's establishment. By a notice, dated 7th September, 1977 he was informed that consequent on the reduction of work in the accounts section, it bad been decided to retrench the Assistant Accountant and that as such his services would stand retrenched with effect from 10th September, 1977. He was also paid one month's salary in lieu of notice and retrenchment compensation as laid down under Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act.2 The 2nd respondent took the matter for conciliation under the Industrial Disputes Act. But however, he did not pursue those proceedings but filed an appeal under Section 41 of the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishments Act, before the 1st respondent. The Additional Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Madurai, questioning the validity of the said order of retrenchment. The following were the grounds of appeal set out in his memorandum of appeal before...
Tag this Judgment!Sarojini Ammal and anr. Vs. Anbazhagan and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-04-1982
Reported in: (1984)2MLJ313
P. Venugopal, J.1. A.S. No. 235 of 1978 is the appeal filed by the first defendant and A.S. No. 354 of 1978 is the appeal filed by the second defendant. The plaintiff is the respondent in both the appeals. Since both the appeals arise out of the same judgment, they are consolidated for the purpose of convenience and disposed of by a common judgment.2. The suit properties originally belonged to one Chinnathu Padayachi. His wife is Visalakshi. He had a son by name Ranganathan and the first defendant is the wife of the said Ranganathan, Chinnathu Padayachi has two daughters, the second defendant, the mother of the plaintiff. The plaintiff's case is that after the death of Chinnathu Padayachi, his widow was entitled to a half share belonging to her husband and after the death of his son Ranganathan, Visalakshi became entitled to 3/4th share in the suit properties and by virtue of a Will Ex.A-3 executed by her, she bequeathed her 3/4th interest in the suit properties in favour of the plaint...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »