Chennai Court January 1995 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Rayala Corporation (P.) Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-20-1995
Reported in: [1995]215ITR883(Mad)
ORDER--Failure to notice assessee's recalcitrance.Ratio :Where Tribunal instead of taking notice of assessee's recalcitrance treated it as a wronged person, the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal for deciding afresh. Facts:While operating as an importer, the assessee-company was involved in siphoning valuable foreign currency to a named account in Sweden. It has been doing so, by over-invoicing to the extent of 40 per cent of the value of the goods that it intended to import or imported and by receiving excess money in foreign currency and keeping it calandestinely in a bank in Sweden. The Enforcement Directorate and the Income Tax Department got some clue about the dealings of the assessee and as a result of the raid, startling disclosures followed. The assessee when called upon to produce materials for assessment in accordance with law by a notice under section 148 of the Act declined to the extent that it gave no care to any of the notices and letters of the assessing officer. ...
Director of Income-tax (Exemptions) Vs. Thanthi Trust
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-20-1995
Reported in: [1995]215ITR879(Mad)
Thanikkachalam J.1. In these tax case petitions, the Department requested to direct the Tribunal to refer the following common questions of law said to arise out of the common order of the Tribunal for the assessment years 1975-76 and 1976-77 for our opinion under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the provisions of section 11(4) are not applicable to the facts of this case 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in deleting the disallowance sustained by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) towards excessive wastage in newsprint 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in deleting the additions sustained by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) towards sale of waste 4. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appel...
V.M. Rao Vs. Commissioner of Wealth Tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-20-1995
Reported in: [1997]228ITR789(Mad)
Mishra, J. 1. The question under reference, 'in the facts and circumstances of the case was the Tribunal right in holding that the compulsory deposits were includible in the net wealth and that the market value should be taken to be the face value ?' needs to be answered, in our opinion, only after a fresh determination of the relevant contentions of the parties which appear to arise on the facts of the case and since such contentions are not adverted to by the Tribunal at all, we propose to remit the matter back to it for a rehearing and disposal in accordance with law and if still there is any occasion for a question to be referred to this Court, to do so in accordance with law. 2. The assessee, an HUF, has been making compulsory deposits under the Compulsory Deposit Scheme (Income-tax Payers) Act, 1974, read with the Compulsory Deposit (Income-tax Payers) Scheme, 1974. The valuation date under the WT Act for the asst. yr. 1977-78 is 30th September, 1976. The aggregate of the compuls...
The Collector of Kamarajar District Vs. C. Kulandaivelu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-20-1995
Reported in: (1995)1MLJ633
K.A. Swami, C.J.1. These appeals are preferred against the common order dated 9.2.1994 passed by the learned single Judge in W.P. Nos. 8127, 8129, 8131 and 8133 of 1992. In these writ petitions, the petitioners sought for quashing the orders passed by the Collector of the District, rejecting the applications filed for renewal, of the leases on the ground that the applications were filed beyond the period permitted for making such an application for renewal and that the second renewal was not permissible. Learned single Judge has found that the applications, for renewal were filed in time. That it is so is not disputed before us. The second reason given by the Collector that Rule 9 of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'), as it stood prior to the amendment, did not provide for second renewal. Rule 9(1) as it stood prior to the amendment, was as follows9. Renewal of lease: (1) Subject to the provisions of Clause (b) of Sub-rule (1) ...
V. M. Rao Vs. Commissioner of Wealth Tax.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-20-1995
Reported in: (1998)147CTR(Mad)192
MISHRA, J. :The question under reference, 'in the facts and circumstances of the case was the Tribunal right in holding that the compulsory deposits were includible in the net wealth and that the market value should be taken to be the face value ?' needs to be answered, in our opinion, only after a fresh determination of the relevant contentions of the parties which appear to arise on the facts of the case and since such contentions are not adverted to by the Tribunal at all, we propose to remit the matter back to it for a rehearing and disposal in accordance with law and if still there is any occasion for a question to be referred to this Court, to do so in accordance with law.2. The assessee, an HUF, has been making compulsory deposits under the Compulsory Deposit Scheme (Income-tax Payers) Act, 1974, read with the Compulsory Deposit (Income-tax Payers) Scheme, 1974.The valuation date under the WT Act for the asst. yr. 1977-78 is 30th September, 1976. The aggregate of the compulsory ...
intelligence Officer, Narcotics Control Bureau Vs. Arif U. Patel
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-19-1995
Reported in: 1995(76)ELT28(Mad)
ORDER1. Crl. O.P. No. 6552/94 is filed under Section 439 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for cancellation of the bail granted to the respondent. The respondent was arrested and remanded before the Special Judge dealing with narcotic drugs and psychotropic substance cases (VIII Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Madras) for the alleged offence under Sections 21 and 23 read with Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter to be referred to as N.D.P.S. Act). 2. The prosecution alleges that this respondent, who is of Indian origin but settled in England, alongwith the other accused, had caused export of huge quantity of Hashis to Port Ashdode, Israel, concealed in cartons of vacuum flasks, consigned from Madras under the names of V.J. Exports, K.J. Exports and Viswa Jothi Exim Corporation, which are bogus companies, for taking to Dubai in the trafficking of drugs in connivance with one Dubai based trafficker by name Khalid Bhai. It...
R. Sundaram Vs. State Bank of India
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-19-1995
Reported in: (1996)ILLJ459Mad
Srinivasan, J. 1. The case of the petitioner is that he was in temporary service of the State Bank of India in the first instance at Lalgudi and thereafter at Madurai branch as a temporary watchman. According to him, he was in service from May 6, 1968 to August 9, 1972 under orders passed periodically and his services were terminated arbitrarily and illegally without any reason. It is his claim that he was in continuous service within the definition of Section 25-B(i) of the Industrial Disputes Act (herein after referred to as 'The Act') from October 23, 1967 or at any rate from May 6, 1968 till August 10, 1972. It is also contended that he had worked for more than 240 days in the year preceding his termination and notice ought to have been issued to him under Section 25-F of the Act. Relying upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in The State Bank of India v. Shri N. Sundara Money (1976 -I-LLJ-478) : : (1976)ILLJ478SC the petitioner has come forward: with the Writ Petition for issue o...
Mrs. Zeenath Beevi Vs. N.V.K. Mohamed Sultan Rowther and Sons Limited ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-19-1995
Reported in: (1995)1MLJ639
Srinivasan, J.1. This appeal is filed by the plaintiff C.S. No. 1577 of 1992. The suit is for a mandatory injunction against the first defendant restraining it from manufacturing, marketing, dealing, supplying, selling or otherwise dealing with in scented betel nut and tobacco under the trade names Roja, Raja and Kera and using the trade-names Roja, Raja and Kera, and the picture consisting of a red Rose with green leaves and/or in any other names or marks, figures or pictorial representations having a similarity in visual or phonetic similarity including the name Roja, Raja Gold or any other similar names and a mandatory injunction directing the first defendant to withdraw from the market all products manufactured and issued for distribution being scented betel nuts and tobacco under the said trade names.2. In short, the case of the plaintiff is as follows. The plaintiff is the daughter of N.V.K. Mohamed Sultan who was carrying on business during his life time in the manufacture and m...
Champalal JaIn and anr. Vs. Thattikunda Rajamannar Trust by Its Secret ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-19-1995
Reported in: (1995)1MLJ589
ORDERS.S. Subramani, J.1. These Appeals are by the plaintiffs in C.S. No. 1031 of 1994, on the file of this Court. O.S.A. No. 4 of 1995 is against the order in Original Application No. 773 of 1994, and O.S.A. No. 5 of 1995 is preferred against the order in Original Application No. 774 of 1994.2. The suit filed by the appellants is for a permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the respondents herein or their men or agents from dispossessing the plaintiffs from their occupation of their portions in the ground floor and in the first floor at No. 124, N.S.C. Bose Road, Madras-79.3. The relevant facts as set out in the plaint are as follows:According to the plaintiffs they are sub-tenants who cause into occupation of the premises in the year 1978 and 1972 respectively. According to them, they have taken those premises from the 11th defendant in the suit. The 1st defendant is the landlord. According to them, they came into occupation of the premises in their possession on the basis of a...
Pattammal Vs. District Magistrate and Collector and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-18-1995
Reported in: 1995(1)CTC335
ORDERJanarthanam, J.1. Pattammal (Petitioner) is the wife of the detenu S. Rajangam. The detenu, it is said, is a bootlegger. Apart from the ground case, as set out in the grounds of detention, the detenu had come to adverse notice in seven other cases. The District Magistrate and Collector, Nagai-Quaide-Milleth District, Nagapattinam (First respondent), in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 3 of Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 clamped upon the detenu the impugned order of detention in his proceedings COC No. 5/94 dated 30.1.1994 with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and health.2. Mr. K. Manivasakam, Learned Counsel for the petitioner, would press into service a lone and sole ground viz., that the representation sent to the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu had not at all been considered and disposed of till upto date and in that view of the matter, the impugned order of is liable to be set aside.3. Mr. R...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »