Chennai Court August 1985 Judgments
Union of India and ors. Vs. Aruna Sugars Limited and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-12-1985
Reported in: 1986(8)ECC78; 1986(24)ELT492(Mad)
1. This judgment will dispose of W.A. Nos. 303, 309 and 311 of 1980 which respectively arise out of W.P. Nos. 550, 2467 and 436 of 1977. All these three petitions along with some other petitions have been disposed of by a common judgment of this Court delivered on 28th of September, 1979. The appeals involve the construction of a notification issued by the Central Government in exercise of its powers under sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, hereinafter referred to as 'the rules'. The relevant part of the notification reads as follows - 'In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, the Central Government hereby exempts sugar described in column (2) of the Table below and falling under sub-item (1) of Item No. 1, from so much of the duty of excise leviable thereon as is specified in the correspondent entry in clauses (3) and (4) of the said Table. ------------------------------------------------------------------...
Tag this Judgment!Ramu Chettiar Vs. B.R. Govindarajulu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-07-1985
Reported in: AIR1987Mad3
ORDER1. This revision is, directed against the order passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Salem, reversing the order passed by the learned Second Additional Subordinate Judge, Salem.2. The facts which are necessary for understanding the points involved in the revision can be shortly stated as follows: One late V. Sundaram filed a petition against the petitioner herein for adjudging him as insolvent in I. P. No. 67 of 1974 on the allegation that he had executed a promissory note in his favour on 6-1-1974, and subsequently in order to defraud his debt and other creditors, he executed a sale deed on 19-3-1974, in favour of his nominees in respect of his properties and also in view of his unequivocal declaration of his inability to pay the debts and suspension of the payment of the debts. The petitioning creditor died on 14-9-1975 and his legal representatives came on record as petitioners 2 to 9 in I. P. 67 of, 1974. The insolvency petition originally was allowed on 18-9-1976 a...
Tag this Judgment!Ravi Lubrication Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-07-1985
Reported in: [1986]61STC27(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. In this tax revision case filed by the assessee, the view taken by the Tribunal that the used or drained oil as called by the assessee or the waste oil as called by the revenue could be treated as a lubricating oil coming under entry No. 47. The assessees are dealers in grease and for the purpose of manufacturing of grease they purchased the used lubricating oil and after refining them used it as a base for manufacture of grease. For the assessment year 1975-76, they were assessed on a taxable turnover of Rs. 7,63,604 at 8 per cent in sales of grease manufactured by them and also on a turnover of Rs. 1,32,916 taxed at 4 per cent under section 7-A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, in respect of purchases of used oil, which has been used for the manufacture of grease by the assessee. The assessee claimed that the turnover of Rs. 1,32,916 represents his purchase of the lubricating oil and the lubricating oil being falling under entry No. 47 of List I is taxabl...
Tag this Judgment!Ramu Chettiar Vs. S.R. Govindarajulu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-07-1985
Reported in: (1986)1MLJ249
ORDERK.M. Natarajan, J.1. This revision is directed against the order passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Salem, reversing the order passed by the learned Second Additional Subordinate Judge, Salem.2. The facts which are necessary for understanding the points involved in the revision can be shortly stated as follows: One late V. Sundaram filed a petition against the petitioner herein for adjudging him as insolvent in I.P.No. 67 of 1974 on the allegation that he had executed a promissory note in his favour of 6th January, 1974, and subsequently in order to defraud his debt and other creditors, he executed a sale deed on 19th March, 1974, in favour of his nominees in respect of his properties and also in view of his unequivocal declaration of his inability to pay the debts and suspension of the payment of the debts. The petitioning creditor died on 14th September, 1975, and his legal representatives came on record as petitioners 2 to 9 in I.P.No. 67 of 1974. The insolvency pe...
Tag this Judgment!Dollar Company, Madras Vs. Government of India
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-06-1985
Reported in: 1986(9)ECC227; 1986(24)ELT245(Mad)
M.N. Chandurkar, C.J.1. The appellant-company, who is the write petitioner, is a manufacturer of certain ointments which are sold by it at retail prices at Rs. 4.50, Rs. 3.37 and Rs. 3.00. These are ointments for skin troubles, which admittedly are patent and proprietary medicines as defined under Entry 14-E of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. Admittedly, these products were subjected to excise duty only in 1961. It is not now in dispute that even after the excise duty came to be levied for the first time since 1961, the medicinal products are sold by the Company at the same old price. In other words, the excise duty paid by the Company is on the footing that the prices of the different sizes of tubes are Rs. 4.50, Rs. 3.37 and Rs. 3.00 respectively. 2. A Notification came to be issued on 8th October, 1966, being Notification No. 161/66, dated 8th October, 1966 in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. ...
Tag this Judgment!V.M. Rao and ors. Vs. Rajeswari Ramakrishnan and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-02-1985
Reported in: [1987]61CompCas20(Mad)
Ramaswami, J.1. These two appeals have been filed against the common judgment in C.S. No. 322 of 1975 and Company Petition No. 94 of 1976. The plaintiffs in the suit and the petitioner in the company petition are the appellants. The first appellant, V. M. Rao, is the elder son of late V. Ramakrishna, I.C.S. Appellants Nos. 2 and 3 are the wife and daughter, respectively, of the first appellant. The first respondent, Rajeswari Ramakrishnan, is the elder sister and V. L. Dutt, the fifth respondent, is the younger brother of the first appellant. The third respondent, P. R. Ramakrishnan, is the husband of Rajeswari Ramakrishnan and respondents Nos. 2 and 4 are two of their sons. The sixth respondent is V. Ramakrishna Sons Ltd. which is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, hereinafter referred to as 'the company.' 2. The company was incorporated under the Companies Act and a certificate of incorporation was granted on July 7, 1949. The nominal capital of the company is Rs. 10...
Tag this Judgment!Janaki and ors. Vs. Prabath Finance
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-02-1985
Reported in: I(1986)ACC100; AIR1986Mad273
ORDER1. The revision is against the order of the District Munsif of Salem in E. P. No. 663 of 1981 in O.S. No. 1163 of 1978. The judgment debtors-respondents in the execution petition are the revision petitioners.2. The respondent herein obtained a decree for money against one Chandramouli and the second respondent in the execution petition. The said Chandramouli died subsequently in a motor vehicle accident and the revision petitioners are his heirs and legal representatives. In M.A.C.A. 3 of 1981 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Salem, compensation has been awarded to the revision petitioners in respect of the death of late Chandramouli. The respondent filed the execution petition in execution of his decree in O.S. 1163 of 1978 and sought attachment of the amount of compensation awarded to the revision petitioners on account of the death of the late Chandramouli. The respondents objected to the attachment; but the learned District Munsif overruled the objection and ord...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›