Chennai Court March 1990 Judgments
P. Mani Vs. P. Viswanathan and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-23-1990
Reported in: (1990)2MLJ414
Ratnam, J.1. The third defendant in C.S. No. 353 of 1987 has preferred this appeal against the dismissal of Application No. 5617 of 1989 filed by him to transpose him as the plaintiff in the suit and to permit him to continue to suit, subject to his obtaining letters of Administration with the will annexed to the last Will and Testament dated 17-9-1986 of his deceased mother Alamelu Ammal, the plaintiff in the suit.2. In C.S. No. 353 of 1987, Alamelu Ammal, the mother of the appellant as well as the respondents herein, had prayed for a declaration of her title to the A schedule property (forming part B schedule) and for recovery of possession of the same with past and future mesne profits or in the alternative, for partition and separate possession of a fourth share in the B schedule property and for recovery of past mesne profits in a sum of Rs. 51,870 and future mesne profits as well. According to the case of the plaintiff in the suit, the suit property belonged to her father-in-law ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Devi Chit Fund
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-22-1990
Reported in: [1990]186ITR738(Mad)
Ratnam, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the following questions of law have been referred to this court for its opinion : (1) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal's finding that debts to the tune of Rs. 40,254 due from C. L. Badrinarayanan and C. B. Lakshminarayanan Chettiar have become irrecoverable during the year of account and the same should be allowed as 'bad debts' in the assessment for the year 1971-72 is sustainable in law (2) Whether the Appellate Tribunal's above finding is based on relevant materials and is a reasonable view to take on the facts obtaining in this case ?' 2. The assessee is a firm carrying on business in money-lending and conducting chits. While filing the return for the assessment year 1971-72 for the accounting period ending March 31, 1971, the assessee claimed allowance for bad debts in the accounts of C. L. Badrinarayanan,...
Tag this Judgment!N.C. Rangesh and Others Vs. Inspector General of Registration and Othe ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-22-1990
Reported in: (1990)84CTR(Mad)241; [1991]189ITR270(Mad); (1991)IMLJ233
K.S. Bakthavatsalam, J.1. The common question involved in all these writ petitions is about the validity of the circular issued by the Inspector-General of Registration dated May 29, 1989, and the circular dated March 11, 1977, issued by the same authority. 2. The petitioners in W.P. Nos. 408, 409, 1466 to 1470 of 1990 are purchasers of land from the one and the same owner Mrs. Subhalakhsmi Each of the abovementioned purchasers purchased a different extent of undivided interest from the said owner, Mrs. Subhalakshmi, in No. 15, Venkatarama Iyer Street, T. Nagar, Madras-17. Each of the petitioners entered into an agreement individually and has paid an advance of Rs.1,001 and the sale consideration agreed by the parties in each transaction exceeds rupees one lakh. 3. The petitioner in W.P. No. 1389 of 1990 purchased a property measuring an extent of five grounds 1180 sq. ft. in T.S. No. 47, Block No. 37 of Kottur Village, and that property belongs to a Hindu undivided family consisting o...
Tag this Judgment!N.C. Rangesh and ors. Vs. Inspector General of Registration, Registrat ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-22-1990
Reported in: (1991)233MLJ1
ORDERK.S. Bakthavatsalam, J.1. The common question involved in all these writ petitions is about the validity of the circular issued by the Inspector General of Registration dated 29.5.1989 and the Circular dated 11.3.1977, issued by the same authority.2. The petitioners in W.P. Nos. 408, 409, 1466 to 1470 of 1990 are purchasers of land from the one and the same owner Mrs. Subbulakshmi. Each of the above mentioned purchasers purchased different extent of undivided interest form the said owner Mrs. Subbulakshmi, in No. 15, Venkatarama Iyer Street, T. Nagar, Madras-17. Each of the petitioner entered into an agreement individually and has paid an advance of Rs. 1,001 and the sale consideration agreed by the parties in each transaction exceeds Rs.1 lakh.3. The petitioners in W.P. No. 1389 of 1990 purchased a property measuring an extent of five grounds 1180 sq.ft. in T.S. No. 47, Block No. 37 of Kottur Village, and the property belongs to Hindu undivided family consisting of petitioners, t...
Tag this Judgment!Dunlop India Ltd. Vs. the Assistant Commissioner of Urban Land Tax and ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-22-1990
Reported in: (1990)2MLJ152
A.S. Anand, C.J.1. The only meaningful question requiring consideration in this writ appeal is whether the petitioner who had the benefit of an assignment of some urban land from the State is liable to be assessed to Urban Land Tax under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Urban Land Tax Act, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in respect of the assigned land. 2. The appellant was the petitioner in W.P.No.3474 of 1979. He called in question an order of assessment under the Act in respect of land to the total extent of 150.70 acres out of which 149.60 acres had been acquired by the Government from third parties and assigned the appellant-company. The remaining 1.10 acres had been purchased by the appellant-company privately. Upon being called to pay Urban Land Tax as per the assessment order in ULT 6/85 dated 29-6-1976, the appellant preferred an appeal to the Tribunal. Vide judgment dated 27.9.1978 the Tribunal set aside the assessment order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of U...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. D. Rani and 7 Others Vs. the Management Indian Drugs and Pharmace ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-21-1990
Reported in: (1991)ILLJ62Mad
Dr. A.S. Anand, C.J.1. Appellants were the writ petitioners in Writ Petition No. 7557 of 1984. Appellants 1 to 7 are the legal representatives of some deceased employees of the respondent-management. They sought a writ of mandamus to direct the respondent-management to release and settle the withheld payments of death benefits due to them as dependents of the deceased employees, and to pay an amount of Rs. 10,000 each together with interest thereon at the rate of 12 per cent annum calculated from the due date. The writ petition was resisted and by judgment dated 14th December, 1984, the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition. Hence this appeal. 2. The facts are not in dispute. Seven employees viz., (1) Shanmugam (2) G. Kulandaiswamy (3) R. Selvanathan (4) R. Mariappan (5) Sambandam (6) C. Chellappan and (7) Md. Usman died while in the service of the management-respondent on 26th June 1977, 8th May 1982, 30th October 1983, 2nd October 1983, 27th December 1983, 30th August 1983...
Tag this Judgment!D. Rani and ors. Vs. the Management of Indian Drugs and Pharmaceutical ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-21-1990
Reported in: (1990)2MLJ1
A.S. Anand, C.J.1. Appellants were the writ petitioners in writ petition No. 7557 of 1984. Appellants 1 to 7 are the legal representatives of some deceased employees of the respondent-management. They sought a writ of mandamus to direct the respondent-management to release and settle the withheld payments of death benefits due to them as dependents of the deceased employees, and to pay an amount of Rs. 10,000 each together with interest thereon at the rate of 12 per cent per annum calculated from the due date. The writ petition was resisted and by judgment dated 14th December, 1984, the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition. Hence this appeal.The facts are not in dispute. Seven employees viz.(1) Shanmugam. (2) G. Kulandaiswamy. (3) R. Selvanathan, (4) R. Mariappan, (5) Sambandam, (6) C. Chellappan and (7) Md. Usman died while in the service of the 'management-respondent on 26.6.1977, 8.5.1982, 30.10.1983, 2.10.1983, 27.12.1983. 30.8.1983 and 1.10.1983 respectively. While the...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. V. Mahadev Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-20-1990
Reported in: (1990)82CTR(Mad)236; [1990]184ITR533(Mad)
Ratnam, J.1. The assessee, a registered medical practitioner, who was employed in the medical department in the State of Tamil Nadu, resigned his job and proceeded to the United States of America for securing a qualification in Internal Medicine. He joined the medical school in the University of Massachusetts and one of the requirements of the American Board of Internal Medicine, in order to obtain certification in Internal Medicine was that a candidate had to do internship in a hospital for a prescribed period Accordingly, the assessee worked in and completed internship at the Worcester City Hospital from June, 1973, to June 1974. It also appears that the assessee worked there for two more years. During the accounting period ending March 31, 1974, relevant for the assessment year 1974-75, the assessee had admittedly received 7,086.82, and, in course of the assessment proceedings, the assessee claimed that the amount received from the hospital was in the nature of a stipend paid to mee...
Tag this Judgment!Plasticraft Industries Vs. Assistant Collector of Central Excise
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-20-1990
Reported in: 1991(52)ELT168(Mad)
ORDER1. This petition coming on for hearing upon perusing the petition the counter affidavit filed herein on 6-3-90 and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. Mahesh Jet Malani for Mr. Raju K. Lukose Advocate for the Petitioners and of Mr. P. Raja Manickam, Central Government Public Prosecutor on behalf of the respondent and having stood over for consideration till this date, the court made the following order :- The Petitioner are the accused in CC No. 31 of 1989 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Poonamallee. The prosecution has been initiated against the petitioners on a private complaint preferred by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Headquarters Preventive Unit, Madras, the respondent herein, for violation of the provisions of the Central Excise Act and Rules framed thereunder. 2. This petition has been filed seeking to invoke inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to quash the proceedings pending before the Court below as n...
Tag this Judgment!Madras Palayacot Co. (P.) Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-20-1990
Reported in: (1990)37TTJ(Mad)22
ORDERPer Shri. T. N. C. Rangarajan, Judicial Member - This appeal is directed against the order under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.2. The assessee is a company. In the previous year ended 31-3-1983, corresponding to the assessment year 1983-84, the assessee had paid interest of Rs. 5,60,105 on deposits received from its shareholders. The assessee company had executed a hypothecation trust on 18-10-1982 in favour of three trustees who were to hold a charge on the stock and debts as well as the immovable property belonging to the assessee company for the benefit of the depositors as security for the repayment of the deposits. This charge for a sum of Rs. 30,00,000 had been registered under section 125 of the Companies Act. When the Income-tax Officer made the assessment on 4-8-1984, he did not make any disallowance under section 40A (8). On a review of that order the Commissioner of Income-tax was of the opinion that section 40A (8) was attracted inasmuch as the charge was not...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »