Chennai Court June 1986 Judgments
City Transports Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-19-1986
Reported in: [1986]162ITR436(Mad)
Ramaswami, J. 1. This reference has been made under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in pursuance of a direction of this court in T.C.P. No. 410 of 1977 dated February 10, 1978. The questions referred are:'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the entire sale proceeds represented the sale price of the buses only ? 2. Whether the Tribunal had sufficient material to hold that there was no case for apportioning the sale price as between the buses and the route permits ? 3. Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee cannot be permitted to make an apportionment between the price of the busesand the route rights ' 2. The assessee is carrying on the business of plying buses in Coimbatore District with permits granted by the Road Transport Authority. During the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1973-74, the assessee had sold four out of six buses owned by it for a composite considerat...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Sarvaraya Sugars Ltd. Vs. Appellate Collr. of C. Ex.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-19-1986
Reported in: 2000(115)ELT625(Mad)
Nainar Sundaram, J.1. This writ petition coming on for hearing on this day, upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof the order of the High Court, dated 21-2-1980 and made herein, and the counter affidavits filed herein and the records of the respondents relating to the Order in 222/1979, dated 13-12-1979 and Order No. III/9/332/75-A1, dated 26-7-1975 on the file of the third and fourth respondent respectively comprised in the return of the respective respondents to the writ made by the High Court, and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. T.T. Vijayaraghavan, 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 point involved in this writ petition has already been answered in favour of the petitioner by a Bench of this Court in Union of India, Resp. by the Collector of Central Excise v. Aruna Sugars Ltd. [W.A. Nos. 303, 309 and 311 of 1980 -...
Tag this Judgment!Sivashanmukham and anr. Vs. Ongayammal and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-19-1986
Reported in: (1987)1MLJ91
S. Swamikkannu, J.1. This Pauper Appeal is filed by the plaintiffs Sivashanmugam and Sakthivel (minor by next friend Sivashanmugam). The second appellant was declared as major as per order dated (19.2.1974 in C.M.P. No. 13460 of 1973). The respondents in this appeal are the first defendant Ongayamrnal, the second defendant Thangarajan, the fourth defendant A.M. Venkatachala Mudaliar, the 5th defendant A. Sengoda Mudaliar, the 6th defendant A. Loganathan, the 8th defendant M.P. Perianna Mudaliar, the 9th defendant Appavu Mudaliar, the 10th defendant President, House Mortgage Bank, Erode, 11th defendant Kandayammal, 12th defendant Murugesan, 13th defendant Singaravelu, 14th defendant Saraswathi, 15th defendant Savithri, 16th defendant Radhamani, 17th defendant S. Palaniswamy Chettiar, 18th defendant A. Sivashanmugham, 19th defendant Indrani, 20th defendant Kanaka and 21st defendant Sivasalthammal. The suit was filed by the plaintiffs Sivashanmugam and Sakthivel before the lower Court in:...
Tag this Judgment!National Insurance Co. Ltd., Madras and Etc. Vs. A.D. Jeyaveerapandia ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-18-1986
Reported in: AIR1989Mad39
Ratnam, J.1. Appeals Nos. 428 to 431 of 1979 have been preferred by the National Insurance Company Limited, Madras (hereinafter referred to as 'the Insurance Company') against the common judgment and decrees passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Nagapattinam, in O.S. Nos. 20, 21; 44 and 51 of 1977. Appeal No, 1026 of 1979 has been preferred by the plaintiff in O.S. No, 20 of 1977, Sub-Court, Nagapattinam, against the decree therein, in so far as the Court below disallowed apportion of the claim made in that Suit.2. All the suits, out of which these appeals have arisen, were instituted for the recovery of different amounts from the Insurance Company representing the value of onion baskets jettisoned from the country boatsinto which they were loaded for shipment in the vessel M. V. Chidambaram, on the strength of the policies of insurance issued by the Insurance Company in favour of the exporting firms or in favour of M/s. National Agricultural Co-operative Marketing Federation of Ind...
Tag this Judgment!Sivakumar and anr. Vs. V. Somasundaram and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-18-1986
Reported in: (1987)1MLJ132
Ratnam, J.1. Plaintiffs 1 and 3 in O.S. No. 32 of 1978, Sub-Court, Chengalpattu, have preferred this appeal against the judgment and decree therein in so far as the Court below declined to grant the relief of partition and separate possession as regards items 1 to 8 of A schedule properties. The appellants and the third respondent are the sons of the first respondent and all of them constituted members of a joint Hindu family, which owned the properties described in Schedules A to C to the plaint. The first appellant was born on 15th May, 1958, while the date of birth of the second appellant is 5th October, 1972. According to their case, their father, the first respondent herein, for more than ten years prior to the institution of the suit, was indifferent to the affairs of the family and had been leading a wayward and fast life. The appellants claimed that they had been cultivating the landed properties with the assistance of their mother and by living in the ancestral house. The furt...
Tag this Judgment!National Insurance Company Ltd. and ors. Vs. A.D. Jeyaveera Pandia Nad ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-18-1986
Reported in: I(1990)ACC341
Ratnam, J.1. Appeals Nos. 428 to 431 of 1979 have been preferred by the National Insurance Company Limited, Madras (hereinafter referred to as 'the Insurance Company') against the common judgment and decrees passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Nagapattinam, in O.S. Nos. 20,21,44 and 51 of 1977. Appeal No. 1026of 1979 has been preferred by UieplaintiffinO.S.No.20of 1977, Sub-Court, Nagapattinam, against the decree therein, in so far as the Court below disallowed a portion of the claim made in that suit2. All the suits, out of which these appeals have arisen, were instituted for the recovery of different amounts from the different amounts from the Insurance Company representing the value of onion baskets jettisoned from the country boats into which they were loaded for shipment in the vessel M.V. Chidambaram, on the strength of the policies of insurance issued by the Insurance Company in favour of the exporting firms or in favour of M/s. National Agricultural Co-operative. Marketing...
Tag this Judgment!A.S.S.P. and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-17-1986
Reported in: (1986)55CTR(Mad)375; [1988]172ITR274(Mad)
V. Ramaswami, J.1. In this reference under section 256 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following two questions have been referred at the instance of the assessee : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the reassessments made on March 29, 1973, for the assessment years 1962-63 and 1963-64 were invalid ?' 2. Whether the reassessments made on March 29, 1973, are beyond the period of limitation prescribed under section 153(2) of the Income-tax Act and hence invalid ?' 2. The assessee is a registered firm carrying on business in purchase and sale of cloth. For the assessment year 1962-63 corresponding to the previous year ended March 31, 1962, the assessee filed a return showing a total income of Rs. 890 from textile exports and an assessment was made on the same day by the Income-tax Officer, Erode, accepting the return. Similarly, for the assessment year 1963-64, the assessee filed a return on November 27, 1963, showing a total income of RS. 8,809 from textile ...
Tag this Judgment!Kattabomman Transport Corporation Ltd. Vs. C. Kamachi Ammal and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-17-1986
Reported in: AIR1987Mad84
1. This appeal is filed by the second defendant, namely, Kattabomman Transport Corporation Limited, Nagercoil represented by its present Managing Director, M. Jayaraj having his office at Nesamani Nagar, Rani Thottam, Nagercoil, against the judgment and decree dt. 25-4-1979 in O.S. No. 62/77 on the file of the Court of learned Subordinate Judge, Tuticorin.2. The suit was laid by Kamachi Ammal for specific performance of an agreement of lease and for recovery of arrears of rent.3. The case of the plaintiff is as follows: The suit schedule property belongs to the plaintiff. At the request of the second defendant, the plaintiff consented to let the suit building to the second defendant on a monthly rental of Rs. 750/- for a period of 5 years from 1-10-1974, and accordingly a sum of Rs. 4,500/- was agreed to be paid, which would be adjusted towards rent of the last six months of the lease period and second defendant also agreed to handover possession on the expiry of the lease period. In p...
Tag this Judgment!G.K.T. Bus Service, Palani Vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Mad ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-16-1986
Reported in: AIR1988Mad127
ORDER1. Petitioner in C. R. P. No. 466 of 1982 is the owner of the stage carriage TNA 8689, which was stopped and checked at IW/8 K.M. stone on Palani-Coimbatore, Road at 6.30 p.m., on 263-1980, and it was found carrying six passengers in excess of the permitted seating capacity of 51; and the Registration Certificate, Insurance Certificate and the permit were not available at the time of checking. All the 57 tickets were seized and statements from the crew of the vehicle and a passenger were recorded, resulting in charge memo being issued. After securing explanation from the petitioner the Regional Transport Authority, Coimbatore held that the charge of overloading had been proved, and, therefore, under S. 60(l) of the Motor Vehicles Act, he suspended the permit for three days with an option to compound at Rs. 75/- per day. The Appellate Authority agreed with this finding resulting in this revision petition being preferred.2. C.R.P. No. 80 of 1983: -Petitioner herein is the owner of a...
Tag this Judgment!Janab K.M.A. Abdul Khader and ors. Vs. P. Palanisamy Nadar and Sons
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-16-1986
Reported in: (1987)1MLJ430
ORDERS. Nainer Sundaram, J.1. The petitioners are the landlords within the meaning of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 (Act '8 of 1960), hereinafter referred to as 'the Act1. The first respondent is admittedly the tenant within the meaning of the Act. The landlords would allege that the tenant sublet the premises to respondents 2 to 5. The landlords filed a single petition for eviction urging various grounds therefor, under the provisions of the Act. According to them, there was wilful default in the payment of rents, attracting Section 10(2)(ii); there was subletting, attracting Section 10(2)(ii)(a); one of the door numbers was put to different user, attracting Section 10(2)(ii)(b); there were acts of waste attracting Section 10(2)(ii); the landlords required the premises for their use and own occupation attracting Section 10(3)(a)(iii); and there was a bona fide requirement for demolition and reconstruction attracting Section 14(1)(b) of the Act. The case o...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›