Chennai Court June 1983 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Controller of Estate Duty Vs. Dr. Rajah Sir M.A. Muthiah Chettiar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-15-1983
Reported in: [1984]149ITR510(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. The following five questions of law, the first two at the instance of the Revenue and the other three at the instance of the accountable person, have been referred to this court under Section 64(1) of the E.D. Act, 1953 :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, exemptions under Sections 33(1)(n) and 33(1)(c) were admissible in computing the share of the deceased in the joint family properties ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 13,785 or any part thereof could be added as accrued interest on deposits ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, deduction towards foreign exchange entitlement charges was admissible in valuing the fixed deposits lying in Ceylon ? 4. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the estate duty payable is deductible in computing the principal value of the estate of the deceased ? 5. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case,...
S. Chandra Mohan Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-14-1983
Reported in: 1984(3)ECC159
Gokulakrishnan, J.1. The petitioner herein, who is the son of the detenu N. Subbaraja Nadar, has filed this petition for the issue of a writ of habeus corpus with a direction to the respondents to produce the detenu N. Subbaraja Nadar before this court and to set him at liberty for the reasons stated by him in the supporting affidavit filed along with the petition. 2. The detention order in effect makes out two incidents for detention of the detenu under the COFEPOSA Act 1974, for the reason that the detenu is prone to smuggling activities. The order of detention of the detenu was made on 7-12-1982. Detention of the detenu as such was made on 10-12-1982. The grounds of detention were served on the detenu on 14-12-1982. 3. According to the authorities concerned, on 12-4-1982, the officials of Madurai Customs and Central Excise conducted parol at the outskirt of Tanjore in Tanjore-Nagapattinam road pursuant to a specific information. During the course of the parol, they intercepted a lor...
Lakshmi Card Clothing Mfg. Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-ta ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-14-1983
Reported in: [1984]149ITR717(Mad)
Ramanujam, J. 1. The assessee-company had entered into a collaboration agreement dated February 23, 1961, with one M/s. Graf Sales of Switzerland (hereinafter referred to as the 'foreign company'). As per clause 9 of the said agreement, the assessee has to make certain annual payments to the foreign company which for the sake of convenience, may be called 'know-how payments'. For the assessment years 1965-66 and 1967-68, the assessee had made payments of Rs. 6,666 and Rs. 10,526 respectively to the foreign company. The ITO had disallowed the claim for deduction of the said amounts holding that for the previous years, such amounts have been disallowed and the same has been accepted by the assessee without any demur. The said disallowance was challenged before the AAC who, however, held that the claim for deduction was admissible. The Revenue contested the decision of the AAC before the Tribunal. The Tribunal upheld the allowance of the claim. Against the orders of the Tribunal, the Reve...
Rajkumari Mathuramba Rajayee Vs. Controller of Estate Duty
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-14-1983
Reported in: [1985]152ITR726(Mad)
Ramanujam, J. 1. The following two questions of law have been referred to this court under the provisions of the E.D. Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the first at the instance of the accountable person and the second at the instance of the Revenue : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the shares in Shanthi Theatres Private Limited could be valued at Rs. 1,500 per share resulting in an inclusion of Rs. 3,37,500 in the value of the estate passing (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 2,55,000 was a proper deduction in the computation of the principal value of the estate of the deceased ?' 2. The late D. Shanmuga Raja, Raja of Sivaganga, died on March 1, 1963. He owned 225 shares of Rs. 1,000 each in the Shanthi Theatres Private Ltd., hereinafter referred to as 'the company', which was carrying on business in exhibition of films. The company was incorporated on December 19, 1958, and the share capital of th...
M. Chockalingam and ors. Vs. Veerabadra Chettiar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-14-1983
Reported in: (1984)1MLJ17
K.B.N. Singh, C.J.1. This civil revision petition is posted before this Court since the scope or Order 21, Rule 101 of the Code of Civil Procedure as amended by Central Act CIV of 1976 arises for consideration for the first time in this Court.2. The decree-holders-petitioners in this revision obtained a decree in O .S. No 3328 of 1966 on the file of the City Civil Court Madras for recovery of possession against Appa Rao and others defendants). They took the decree in execution thereafter. In the course of the execution proceedings, the respondents herein obstructed delivery of possession and the decree-holders filed an application E A. No. 4137 of 1966 under Order 21, Rule 97, Civil Procedure Code, complaining of obstruction and praying for removal of the obstruction. The respondents herein who are the obstructors, appeared in the said proceedings and the executing Court decided the question in a summary manner as was the position before the amendment of the provisions of the Code of C...
Lakshmi Card Clothing Mfg. Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-ta ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-14-1983
Reported in: [1984]149ITR716(Mad)
RAMANUJAM J. - The assessee-company had entered into a collaboration agreement dated February 23, 1961, with one M/s. Graf Sales of Switzerland (hereinafter referred to as the 'foreign company'). As per clause 9 of the said agreement, the assessee has to make certain annual payments to the foreign company which for the sake of convenience, may be called 'know-how payments'. For the assessment years 1965-66 and 1967-68, the assessee had made payments of Rs. 6,666 and Rs. 10,526 respectively to the foreign company. The ITO had disallowed the claim for deduction of the said amounts holding that for the previous years, such amounts have been disallowed and the same has been accepted by the assessee without any demur. The said disallowance was challenged before the AAC who, however, held that the claim for deduction was admissible. The Revenue contested the decision of the AAC before the Tribunal. The Tribunal upheld the allowance of the claim. Against the orders of the Tribunal, the Revenu...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras Vs. R. Sithan Chetty Sons
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-13-1983
Reported in: [1984]145ITR306(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. The following question of law has been referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras, for its opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that for the assessment year 1975-76, the provisions of s. 188 were applicable and two separate assessments had to be made, one for the period April 1, 1974, to November 30, 1974, and the other period December 1, 1974, to March 31, 1975 ?' 2. The assessee, which is a registered firm, filed before the assessing authority two returns, one return of income covering the period from April 1, 1974, to November 30, 1974, and another return for the period from December 1, 1974, to March 31, 1975, contending that two separate assessments should be made for the assessment year 1975-76. This claim was made by the assessee on the ground that there was a dissolution of an earlier firm and thereafter a new firm was constituted. The ITO, however, rejected the clai...
Kamalavalli Vs. C.R. Nair and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-13-1983
Reported in: (1984)1MLJ199
Natarajan, J.1. On going through the affidavit filed by the petitioner-detenu and after hearing her and her counsel, we are satisfied that the petitioner has been impregnated against her will and that unless the pregnancy is terminated the petitioner will surfer traumatic and psychological shock, Hence we grant permission to the petitioner to terminate her pregnancy This is subject to the condition that qualified gynaecologists examine her and find that the pregnancy can be terminated without detriment to the petitioner's life and safety. Subject to the above condition, we direct the petitioner to be transferred to the Government Maternity Hospital, Egmore, Madras, for undergoing termination of pregnancy. After undergoing the requisite treatment at the hospital, the petitioner will be transferred back to the custody of Abhaya Nilayam, Mylapore, Madras. The Superintendent of Abhaya Nilayam will inform Thiru Raja, Secretary, ' Madras District Legal Aid and Advice Board, Madras about the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›