Chennai Court April 1983 Judgments
Sahul Hameed Vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-28-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Mad91; (1984)1MLJ272
K.B.N. Singh, C.J. 1. All these writ appeals and petitions raise . a common question regarding the validity Of. G. 0. Ms. 200 Home, Dt. 16-8-1976 and have been heard together and are being disposed of by a common order. The said Government order which is under challenge. has been passed by the Government in the exercise of power conferred under S. 29 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) exempting all the buildings owned by Hindu,, Christian and Muslim religious Public Trusts and Public Charitable Trusts from all the provisions of the said Act. Earlier to the said Government Order G. 0. Ms. No. 1998 Home dated 12-8-1974, under Section 29, (exempting all the buildings owned by the Hindu, Christian and Muslim Religious Trusts and Charitable institutions from all the provisions of the said Act was passed. But, in supersession of the Government Order, the impugned Government Order was passed.2. Learned counsel for the appellant i...
Tag this Judgment!White Field Ice-cream, Bakery and Coffee House Vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-28-1983
Reported in: [1990]76STC332(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. This revision is directed against the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal rejecting the claim of the assessee that bread and cakes sold by him were not 'tinned, canned, bottled or packed' and as such they cannot come within the scope of item 103 of the First Schedule to the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959.2. The assessee carries on business in ice cream, bakery and coffee in Purasawalkam, Madras-7. They are also dealing in drugs. It reported a total taxable turnover of Rs. 2,08,123.15, for the year 1974-75. The assessing authority, however, determined the taxable turnover at Rs. 2,11,225.03, after a check of the assessee's account. Out of such turnover, he levied tax at 7 per cent and 8 per cent in respect of the turnover, relating to bread, cakes and biscuits which came to Rs. 1,75,212.90 treating those items as coming under item 103 of the First Schedule to the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, after rejecting the assessee's contention that the sales of t...
Tag this Judgment!V.R. Margachari and anr. Vs. M.R. Krishnaswami Mudaliar and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-28-1983
Reported in: (1984)2MLJ285
S. Padmanabhan, J.1. This Letters Patent Appeal has been filed by the judgment-debtors against the order of the learned Single Judge of this Court, dismissing A.A.O. No. 183 of 1976. A.A.O. No. 183 of 1976 had been filed by the appellants against the dismissal of an application filed by the appellants before the executing Court for a declaration that the Court sale held on 7-7-1975, in execution of the decree in O.S. No. 295 of 1972, on the file of the Subordinate Court, Vellore was void and inoperative.2. The facts necessary for the disposal of the appeal may be set out as follows:3. The appellants had executed three mortgages in favour of the respondents on three different dates for a total sum of. Rs. 12,300/-. The respondents filed O.S. No. 295 of 1972 on the file of the Sub-Court, Vellore on the foot of the mortgages on 16-12-1972. The appellants filed a written statement claiming benefits under the Tamil Nadu Debt Relief Act 38 of 1972. A preliminary decree was passed on 20-10-19...
Tag this Judgment!The Centre for Action of Law Rep. by Its Secretary Vs. the State of Ta ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-28-1983
Reported in: (1984)2MLJ414
S. Nainar Sundaram, J.1. The appellant in this writ appeal is the Centre for Action of Law, represented by its Secretary. The appellant preferred a writ petition, which did not pass the stage of objection regarding maintainability. The prayer in the writ petition is for the issue of a writ of mandamus, directing respondents 1 and 2 to implement the mandate as laid down by the Supreme Court in S u n i l Batra v. The Delhi Administration : 1978CriLJ1741 , and Prem Shankar Shukla v. The Delhi Administration : 1980CriLJ930 .2. V. Ramaswami, J., who heard the matter on the question of maintainability, held by order dated 1-9-1982 that the Writ petition, as it stands laid, is not maintainable. The reasoning of the learned Judge has been expressed as follows:The law laid down by the Supreme Court is the law of the land and there is no need for this Court to again state that the mandate laid down by the Supreme Court in the two decisions stated above, has to be implemented. The petitioner can ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax (Central) Madras Vs. Buhari Sons Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-27-1983
Reported in: (1984)38CTR(Mad)88; [1983]144ITR12(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. The following two common questions have been referred to this court for its opinion by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras, in relation to the assessments for the assessment years 1965-66, 1966-67, 1967-68 and 1968-69 : ' (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, it has been rightly held by the Tribunal that the assessee is an 'industrial company' within the meaning of section 2(7) (d) of the Finance Act, 1966? (2) Whether the Tribunal's view that the assessee-company which is running a group of hotels is engaged in 'the manufacturing or processing of goods' within the meaning of section 2(7) (d) of the Finance Act is sustainable in law and on the materials on record?' 2. The assessee-company is running a group of hotels in the city of Madras. In the course of the assessment for the first three years, the assesse-company claimed that it should be treated as an industrial company and assessed at 55% of its income and not at 65% applicable to a...
Tag this Judgment!Orwo Films Eastern Unit Vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-27-1983
Reported in: [1984]55STC182(Mad)
Fakkir Mohammed, J.1. These revision petitions have been filed by the assessee against the common order passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras, dated 9th April, 1975, dismissing the appeals. The assessee is the Orwo Films dealing in import and sale of raw films. As against the total and taxable turnovers reported by the assessee for the assessment year 1969-70 as Rs. 1,32,16,137.40 and Rs. 1,08,96,732.95 and for the assessment year 1970-71 as Rs. 2,03,36,503.04 and Rs. 1,69,51,635.43, the assessing authority determined the taxable turnover slightly less than the reported taxable turnover because the assessee preferred its claim for higher exemption towards export sale. Subsequently during the overcheck of accounts it was noticed that the assessee had collected Rs. 60 to Rs. 70 per roll of raw films in the first instance and at the later stage at Rs. 20 per roll towards air freight charges in respect of sales of imported films. Therefore the assessing authority felt that the...
Tag this Judgment!The Nilgiris Co-operative Marketing Society Limited, Represented by It ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-26-1983
Reported in: (1984)1MLJ7
ORDERT. Sathiadev, J.1. Petitioner seeks to set aside order of first respondent, dated 13th March, 1979, informing petitioner that it may got registered as a factory by applying for registration and grant of licence under Factories Act, 1948; and the order of second respondent, dated 11th January, 1979, informing that on an inspection made on 23rd December, 1978, it was found that certain provisions of Factories Act and Rules framed thereunder were not being followed.2. Petitioner is a Co-operative Marketing Society, which has been in existence during the past 4 decades helping potato growers to grow potato by supplying fertilizers, seed potatoes and extending such advance to all those who are members of the Society. As and when potato crop is harvested, they are delivered by the grower members at the godown of the petitioner, at Mettupalayam, where the potatoes are unloaded; spread over and spoilt potatoes are removed; they are cleaned and sorted not according to size heaped in units ...
Tag this Judgment!S. Pazhamalai Vs. Aruna Sugars Ltd. and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-23-1983
Reported in: [1984]55CompCas500(Mad)
1. The applicant in both the applications is a shareholder of the public limited company, Aruna Sugars Ltd. 2. The relief claimed in the former is to declare that the election of the second respondent as director of the first respondent company as void, while that in the latter is to restrain the second respondent from functioning as director pending disposal of the former. 3. The undisputed facts, in brief, are given below : At the annual general meeting of the company held on March 30, 1983, at Hotel Dasaprakash, Madras, the second respondent was elected as director. The statutory notice dated February 16, 1983, issued under s. 171 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), did not contain any reference to the election of the second respondent as director. The company received three notices, one from K. R. Sevugan Chetty, while the rest from S. Thiagarajan and S. Venugopalan. The details of the first notice are not necessary for the present occasion as it has ...
Tag this Judgment!Gordon Woodroffe and Co. (Madras) Private Ltd. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-23-1983
Reported in: [1984]55STC222(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. The two items of turnover which are disputed in this appeal are (1) the sales turnover of empties (packing materials) to the extent of Rs. 48,179 and (ii) the proportionate local purchases of raw hides and skins attributable to inter-State sales of tanned hides amounting to Rs. 2,73,092. The assessee is a dealer in hides and skins. During the course of the assessment under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Act, for the assessment year 1970-71, the assessee disputed the liability to pay tax on the above two items of turnover. The assessing authority, however, brought the above two items of turnover to charge rejecting the assessee's claim. On appeal the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, however, upheld the assessee's claim and held that these two items of turnover cannot be brought to charge. Thereafter the Board of Revenue, in exercise of its suo motu revisional power issued a show cause notice to the assessee to show cause why the order of the appellate authority so far as ...
Tag this Judgment!Dhanakodi Ammal Vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-21-1983
Reported in: 1984(2)ECC23
Nainar Sundaram, J.1. In this writ petition, one Dhanakodi Ammal prays for the issue of a writ of habeas corpus to secure the liberty of her son one Parirajan, who is detained under S. 3(1)(i) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974, which will hereinafter be referred to as COFEPOSA if occasion arises therefor. This writ petition has the support of an affidavit filed by one K. An-barasu, who is stated to be the brother-in-law of the detenu. We do not propose to delineate and dwell upon the facts and circumstances which led to the detention of the detenu under COFEPOSA for Mr. B. Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, has successfully advanced before us a contention which is based upon a post-detention factor. The order of detention is dt. 22-10-1982. The grounds of detention were served on the detenu. According to the detenu, he was informed on 27-11-1982 that the Advisory Board will afford him a personal hearing on 2-12-1982. The de...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »