Chennai Court November 1989 Judgments
Sakthi Estates Vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-30-1989
Reported in: [1990]185ITR601(Mad)
K.M. Natarajan, J.1. These revisions are directed by the assessee against the common order passed by the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras, in respect of the levy of assessment for the years 1973-74 to 1976-77. The revision-petitioner is the assessee, namely, Messrs. Sakthi Estates, Pollachi. The abovesaid estate consisted of lands on which coffee, cardamom, etc., were grown. According to the assessee, only on a portion of the lands, there were mature plants from which income was actually derived. There were immature coffee plants and on some lands, new planting work was done which yielded no agricultural income during the years. The assessee claimed deduction of the interest on the loan borrowed in connection with the maintenance of the said estate. The question that arose for consideration before the Tribunal was whether deduction is to be given under section 5(k) or under section 5(e) of the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1955. It was contended b...
Tag this Judgment!T.C. Srinivasan Vs. the Assistant Commissioner of Labour (Appellate Au ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-29-1989
Reported in: (1990)1MLJ326
ORDERNainar Sundaram, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order of the first respondent in T.S.E. No. 25 of 1982. That was an appeal preferred by the petitioner under Section 41 (2) of the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishments Act, 1947, hereinafter referred to as the Act, with reference to the second respondent dispensing with the service of the petitioner. The body of the order dated 1.11.1979 dispensing with the services of the petitioner passed by the second respondent reads as follows:During my recent visit to the U.K. I came to know from our publishers that the British Government is substantially reducing the subvention on the ELBS programme, which will result in the ELBS list getting whittled down. This was confirmed by the secretary of BDC. Furthermore the University Grants Commission has no funds for allocation this year; Consequently there will be no demand for books from the University and College libraries this season. The unhappy developments will naturally resul...
Tag this Judgment!S.P.G.C. Metal Industries (P) Ltd. Vs. Cegat
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-28-1989
Reported in: 1991(52)ELT383(Mad)
Sathiadev, J.1. This appeal is preferred against the order in W.P. No. 13382 of 1989, which in turn was filed to set aside the order of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, South Regional Bench, dated 12-9-1989, in SB/S/Order No. 160/1989. It was an order passed with reference to Section 35F of Central Act I of 1944. The only question that requires to be considered is, whether the condition imposed by the Tribunal to pre-deposit a sum of Rs. 3,65,000/- would cause undue hardship to the appellant 2. In considering this aspect, the Tribunal, on the point taken, that with regard to biscuit tin components, a relief is 'prima facie' climbable by the appellant, had waived the demand made in respect of that category and confined the pre-deposit to Rs. 3,65,000/- representing the other categories of demands made on the appellant. What is contended by Mr. Ramachandran is that, a misconception had been entertained by the learned Judge that it was not the entire amount of Rs...
Tag this Judgment!S. Kannan Vs. State Bank of India
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-28-1989
Reported in: (1990)IILLJ487Mad
1. The prayer in the writ petition is for issue of a writ of Mandamus to forbear the respondents from imposing any punishment on the petitioner in pursuance of the domestic enquiry conducted against him and to revoke the suspension and reinstate him with full back wages and all attendant and consequential benefits, past, present and future. 2. The petitioner is an officer of the State Bank of India in the Junior Management Grade. He was working as Accountant in the Branch at Ranipet, North Arcot District, from July 1978 to October 1980 and as Accountant and later as Branch Manager in the Branch at Royapettah, Madras from October 1980 to January 1985. He was suspended from service from 7th January, 1985 and an investigation into alleged acts of irregularities and fraud was made and a memorandum of charges containing nine charges was issued to him in March 1986. An enquiry was held in which evidence, oral and documentary, was recorded. After the conclusion of the evidence, the petitioner...
Tag this Judgment!S. Kannan Vs. Member of the Local Board, State Bank of India and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-28-1989
Reported in: (1990)1MLJ516
ORDERM. Srinivasan, J.1. The prayer in the writ petition is for issue of a writ of mandamus to forbear the respondents from imposing any punishment on the petitioner in pursuance of the domestic enquiry conducted against him and to revoke the suspension and reinstate him with full backwages and all attendant and consequential benefits, past, present and future.2. The petitioner is an officer of the State Bank of India in the Junior Management Grade. He was working as Accountant in the branch at Ranipet, North Arcot District, from July, 1978 to October, 1980 and as accountant and later as Branch Manager in the Branch at Royapettah, Madras from October, 1980 to January, 1985. He was suspended from service from 7-1-1985 and an investigation into alleged acts of irregularities and fraud was made and a memorandum of charges containing nine charges was issued to him in March, 1986. An enquiry was held in which evidence, oral and documentary was recorded. After the conclusion of the evidence,...
Tag this Judgment!Vincent P. Ferns Vs. Gift-tax Officer.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-28-1989
Reported in: [1990]33ITD58(Mad)
ORDERPer Shri T. C. A. Ramanujam, Accountant Member - The appellant is aggrieved at the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner confirming the assessment to gift-tax in respect of what the Gift-tax Officer claimed to be surrender of goodwill consequent to the retirement of one partner from the firm. Shri C. Kochunni Nair, Advocate, appeared for the appellant and Shri Anil Kumar, Departmental Representative for the department.2. Late Mr. Ronald Ferns was a partner in M/s. Madras Pack Marine, a registered firm assessed in the Karikudi Income-tax Circle-I (4) since its inception in 1973. He had 60% share in the firm and contributed a capital of Rs. 36,000. He retired from the firm w. e. f. 31-3-1976. The firm had only two major partners. On his retirement, the remaining partner Mr. Cleetus admitted Mrs. Irene Mary as partner with 40% share in the business. The incoming partner brought in Rs. 1,20,000 towards her share of capital. The G. T. O. considered that taxable gift arose in th...
Tag this Judgment!income-tax Officer Vs. Trichy Distilleries and Chemicals Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-27-1989
Reported in: [1990]32ITD794(Mad)
ORDERPer Shri George Cheriyan, Senior Vice President - This appeal by the Revenue relates to the assessment year 1981-82. Only a short point is involved in this appeal. The assessee had claimed 15% depreciation on electrical installations in an Acetic Acid manufacturing unit which had been set up in the accounting year which ended on the 31st May, 1980. The I. T. O., however, allowed only 10% depreciation stating that electrical installations came under 'general machinery'. The difference between the amount claimed and the amount allowed was as under :-Claimed Allowed Difference Electrical installations 124901 83260 416332. In appeal, the C. I. T. (A) held that 15% depreciation should be allowed since electrical installations formed part of the plant.3. The Department aggrieved with the decision of the C. I. T. (A) is in appeal before us. It is submitted that the finding of the C. I. T. (A) that electrical installations formed part of the Acetic Acid plant was not correct and further t...
Tag this Judgment!Adhiyaman Educational and Research Institutions Vs. the State of Tamil ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-23-1989
Reported in: AIR1991Mad246
1. The pivotal issue in this case is whether after the coming into force of the All India Council for Technical Education Act, 1987 (Act 52 of 1987), the State Government could withdraw the permission granted earlier to the Writ Petitioner to start a private Engineering College and the University of Madras could cancel or withhold affiliation to the college on the ground that the conditions imposed respectively by the State Government and the University for the grant have not been fulfilled. The other issues are only ancillary and answers thereto will depend on the answer to the above issue. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to by their rank in the writ petitions.2. The writ petitioner is a registered Trust by name The Adhiyamman Educational and Research Institution. The petitioner applied to the Government of Tamil Nadu for permission to start a new self-financing private Engineering College without involving am financial commitment on the part of the Government. A...
Tag this Judgment!T. Savariraj Pillai Vs. R.S.S. Vastrad and Company, Represented by One ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-23-1989
Reported in: (1989)2MLJ349
ORDERSathiadev, J.1. Defendant in O.S. No. 1293 of 1984 on the file of II Additional Subordinate Judge, Tiruchirapalli is the petitioner. Plaintiff is the sole respondent. Plaintiff filed the suit based on equitable mortgage and for other reliefs, and at the stage when defendant was examined as D.W.I, he filed I.A. No. 466 of 1987 under Order 23 Rule 1(3) and Section 151, Civil Procedure Code seeking permission to withdraw the suit with liberty to file a fresh suit in respect of the subject-matter of the present suit. The suit was filed by M/s. R.S.S. Vashtrad & Company through one of its partners M.M. Nalavad. He had sworn to before Court that he had filed Exhibit A-2 partnership deed to show that he is a partner of the plaintiff Firm even prior to 10-1-1983, but, however, this fact was not intimated to the Registrar of Firms by the Auditor of the Firm, and that entry has been made in the Register only during the pendency of the suit, and therefore it being a formal defect, which woul...
Tag this Judgment!Balaram Bus Service Vs. the Secretary, State Transport Authority
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-23-1989
Reported in: (1990)1MLJ168
ORDERBakthavatsalam, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Madras, dated 30th day of December, 1987, approving the order of the State Transport Authority renewing the petitioner's permit for three years which is upto 31st July, 1990.2. The contention raised is that the Tribunal relied upon the Judgement of the Supreme Court in Yogeshwar Jaiswal v. State Transport Appellate Tribunal and Ors. : [1985]2SCR790 and held that the Secretary, Transport Authority was entitled to renew the permit for a limited period only viz., three years. Ultimately the Tribunal held that the order of State Transport Authority does not call for interference.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues before me that the very same Tribunal has passed orders subsequently renewing the permits for four years in many cases and five years in certain cases and only in this case the petitioner has been granted permit only for three, years. The learned coun...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »