Chennai Court July 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.
Pappammal Vs. N. Chinna Gounder (Died) and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-25-1983
Reported in: (1984)2MLJ210
ORDERT. Sathiadev, J.1. The main point taken is that, the order of the appellate authority was passed without jurisdiction, in that, it was taken up by III Addl. Sub-Judge, Tiruchirapalli, on being transferred by Principal Subordinate Judge on 18.7.1979, which could not have been done by the Principal Subordinate Judge, because Rule 17 of the rules framed under Act 18 of 1960 empowers only the District Court to transfer appeals from one appellate authority to another appellate authority. in T.R. Babu v. M.S. Shanmugham Chettiar (1965) 2 M.L.J. 15, it has been held that there is a clear distinction between orders of transfer and administrative orders allocating business to the courts of particular Judges under Section 4-A of Tamil Nadu Act III of 1873. Once a Judge has taken cognizance of a suit, any order removing the suit from his file is an order of transfer, and hence Section 4-A would not apply. In the instant matter, appeal was presented on 5.3.1977. Thereafter, it was called on i...
Okay Rubber Corporation Vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-22-1983
Reported in: [1984]55STC247(Mad)
Fakkir Mohammed, J. 1. These tax cases on revision have arisen out of the orders of the Additional Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madurai, in M.T.A. No. 442 of 1976, 736 of 1979 and 737 of 1979. The common question involved in all the three cases is, 'Whether RMA rubber can be treated as raw rubber, viz., latex, as defined in item No. 74 of the First Schedule to the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, exigible to 5 per cent sales tax ?' 2. For the assessment years 1974-75, 1975-76 and 1976-77, the petitioners were assessed to sales tax on the respective turnovers of Rs. 4,21,020, Rs. 2,86,242 and Rs. 1,69,632 at 5 per cent treating the sale of RMA rubber sheet as raw rubber, viz., latex, as per item No. 74 of the First Schedule to the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act and were imposed penalties of Rs. 21,051 for 1974-75, Rs. 21,468 for 1975-76 and Rs. 12,763 for 1976-77 respectively on the ground that the assessee did not disclose the abovesaid turnovers. 3. The Deputy Commercial Tax Offic...
P.S.S. Somasundaram Chettiar Vs. R. Sathappan and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-22-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Mad372
Fakkir Mohammed, J. 1. These applications, have come by way of reference made by the learned single Judge, Singaravelu, J., under the following circumstances.2. The first plaintiff, one Sathappan, the quandom minor represented by his mother Meenakshi Achi as next friend, filed C.S. No. 188 of 1972 on the file of this Court for partition and separate possession of his half share, for a declaration that the alienations made by the first defendant, who is the father of the first plaintiff, are void and not binding on the first plaintiff and for certain other consequentional reliefs as against 72 defendants. Large items of properties described in eight schedules are the subject matter of the suit. Pending suit, the quandom minor first plaintiff attained majority. The father, first defendant, filed Application No. 4390 of 1982 in Nov., 1982 for passing a decree in terms of the compromise dated 30-8-1981. It was state in the affidavit in support of that application that the first defendant h...
The State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Universal Agencies
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-21-1983
Reported in: [1984]56STC269(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. The two points that arise for consideration in this tax case are : (1) Whether the purchase turnover under section 7A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, could be included in the total turnover; and (2) Whether the copper wire manufactured and sold by the assessee could be brought in under entry 41 of the First Schedule to the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. 2. So far as the first question is concerned, we have the recent decision of the Full Bench of this Court in T.C. No. 731 of 1977 - State of Tamil Nadu represented by Deputy Commissioner (C.T.), Madras Division v. Manakchand [1984] 56 STC 237 (FB) - dated 3rd February, 1983, holding the purchase turnover taxable under section 7A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, should also form part of the total turnover of the assessee. Following the said decision of the Full Bench we have to hold that the purchase turnover of the assessee taxable under section 7A of the said Act will have to be inc...
M.R. Pratap Vs. V.M. Muthuramalingam, Income-tax Officer, Central Circ ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-20-1983
Reported in: (1984)39CTR(Mad)43
1. The criminal revision is directed against the order of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Madras, in M.P. No. 3269 of 1979 in C.C. No. 2652 of 1974, on the file of his court, refusing to discharge the 2nd accused without trial. The criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 2652 of 1974, in so far as the 2nd accused is concerned. 2. The revision case and the miscellaneous petition have come to be filed in the following circumstances. The Income-tax Officer, Madras, filed a complaint against M/s. Rayala Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (accused No. 1) and its managing director, Sri M. R. Pratap (accused No. 2) for non- payment within the prescribed time of income-tax deducted from the salaries of the employees of the company. The case was taken against the two accused under s. 276B read with s. 200 of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act'), and rule 30 of the I.T. Rules, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'), and process was issue...
Usha Enterprises, Madras Vs. Government of India and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-20-1983
Reported in: 1983(14)ELT2350(Mad)
Padmanabhan, J. 1. This writ appeal has been filed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dismissing W.P. 1924 of 1977, filed by the petitioner. The prayer in the writ petition was to quash the order dated 8-2-1977, passed by the Government of India, in the following circumstances. On 11-11-1970, the officers of the Customs department, Madras, seized 34 bags of nutmegs without shell and 15 bags of nutmegs with shell from the petitioner in the reasonable belief that the goods were smuggled goods and were imported in contravention of the Customs Act, 1962 (for short the Act). On 28-4-1971, a show cause was issued by the Assistant Collector of Customs to one Tilakar of the petitioner's firm. Thereafter, on 24-3-1971, a notice was sent to the petitioner stating that the 49 bags of nutmegs would be sold as they were deteriorating and the sale proceeds kept in abeyance. It is admitted that on 15-6-1971, the petitioner wrote to the Assistant Collector of Customs agreeing to the good...
T.i. Miller Ltd. Vs. Union of India and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-20-1983
Reported in: 1987(31)ELT344(Mad)
1. This Writ Petition coming on for hearing on Thursday, the seventh; fourteenth, Friday the 15th, Tuesday, the 19th day of July, 1983; and on this day upon persuing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof the order of the High Court, dated 23-2-1981 and made herein, and of the records relating to the order C. No. V. 68/(N.S.)3/41/79, dated 31-1-1981 as amended by order C. No. V/68(N.S.) 3/41/79, dated 5-2-1981, on the file of the 2nd respondent comprised in the return of the respondents to the writ made by the High Court, and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. Habibullah Badsha, Advocate for the Petitioner, and of Mr. T. Somasundaram, Additional Central Government standing counsel on behalf of the Respondents, the court made the following Order :2. The Writ Petition is directed against the order dated 5-2-1981, of the Assistant Collector of Central Excise (2nd respondent) confirming the demand for Rs. 5,79,449.13 substituting the original demand for Rs. 7,09,237-84. Thi...
Neelambal and anr. Vs. Mohanram Chettiar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-20-1983
Reported in: (1984)2MLJ264
ORDERT. Sathiadev, J.1. Auction purchaser in O.S. No. 54 of 1968 on the file of Sub Court, Chidambaram filed E.A. No. 25 of 1982 under Order 21, Rule 22 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for confirmation of the Court sale held . on 6-3-1972 and for the grant of sale certificate, praying that the said orders be passed ex-parte and out of order. He also filed a petition under Section 151 of the Code for dispensing with notice in the application filed under Order 21, Rule 22 of the Code. Court below, by not taking into account E.A. Nos. 14 of 1979, 33 of 1979, 172 of 1981, 173 of 1981 and 220 of 1981, which are applications filed for cancellation of the auction sale, and which are still pending disposal, had ordered the petition for confirmation of sale. Aggrieved against the said order, this revision petition is filed by Neelambal and Valambal, who are heirs of the judgment-debtor and who have claimed reliefs, under Acts 38 of 1972, 13 of 1980 and 10 of 1981 for settin...
S.A. Sundaram Vs. the President, Councile of the Institute of Chartere ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-19-1983
Reported in: [1984]56CompCas183(Mad)
Mohan, J.1. This writ petition is for a certiorarified mandamus to quash the communication dated June 29, 1982, addressed to the petitioner by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India which is as follows : 'Your letter of June 24, 1982, addressed to the Assistant Secretary, madras has been forwarded to us for necessary action. The power of registration of a firm name vests in the Council, under regln. 165 and such power implies the power to refuse to register a name not approved by it. The Council has taken a decision that all firm names which have no relevance to the names of the partners should not be registered. We would, therefore, advise you to suggest some other name in conformity with the proper name of the partners constituting the firm.' The further prayer is for a direction to the respondents to pass an order registering the firm name 'Ram and Ramesh' as per the application of the petitioner filed under regln. 165 of the Chartered Accountants Regulations. 2. The short ...
A.S.K. Ramasamy Nadar and Sons Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-19-1983
Reported in: [1985]58STC148(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. The assessees in this case are dealers in toor dhal, gram dhal, etc. they filed A-2 returns for 1970-71 for a total and taxable turnover of Rs. 15,50,748.74. On 18th December, 1970 the assessees' places of business were inspected by the Special Staff and they found 27 slips of paper in which transactions of business were noted and they were recovered. The entries found in the slips were compared with the regular accounts. It was found that the transactions noted in the slips were not accounted for in the regular accounts and the total omissions as per the slips were found to be Rs. 73,617.65. The earliest of the slips was dated 14th May, 1970 and the last date found in the slips in 11th December, 1970. Besides, on the day of the inspection, it was found that there was stock variation in the actual stock on hand and the book balance. For the said deficiency in stock, the assessee were levied a compounding fee of Rs. 500. Taking note of the transactions found in the slips...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »