Chennai Court October 1997 Judgments
Mohammed Farook Vs. Asstt. Collector of C. Ex., Tiruchirapalli
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-21-1997
Reported in: 2000(116)ELT24(Mad)
ORDER1. Heard both the parties. 2. The above revision is directed against the order dated 14-9-1994 in Crl. M.P. No. 2082/94 in C.C. No. 347/92 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Coimbatore refusing to discharge the petitioner. 3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner facing a trial for an alleged offence under Section 135(1)(b)(i) of the Customs Act. According to the petitioner, there is no material evidence even to suggest that the petitioner has involved in the alleged offence and therefore the petitioner has filed an application under Section 245 of Criminal Procedure Code to discharge him from the said charge. 4. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Coimbatore refused to discharge the petitioner holding that the petitioner has not established that the charges are groundless and accordingly dismissed the Crl. M.P. No. 2082/94 by an order dated 14-9-1994. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has filed the above revision petition. 5. Th...
Tag this Judgment!Swadharma Swarajya Sangha Vs. Indian Commerce and Industries Co. Pvt. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-21-1997
Reported in: [1999]98CompCas151(Mad); (1998)IMLJ724
M.S. Liberhan,C.J.1. The only contention raised in this appeal is that the director was competent to file the suit as authorised by the articles of association. It would be expedient to reproduce the relevant portion of Article 104 of the memorandum and articles of association :'Without prejudice to the general powers conferred by the last preceding articles and the other powers conferred by those presents it is hereby expressly declared that the directors shall have the following powers, that is to say, power . . .(b) to institute, conduct, defend compromise or abandon any legal proceedings by or against the Sangha or its officers, or otherwise concerning the affairs of the Sangha and also to compound and allow time for payment of or satisfaction of any debts due and of any claims or demands by or against the Sangha . . .'2. A reading of the above article leads to an inference that it is the directors who should jointly authorise to decide to institute or institute a suit. Concedingly...
Tag this Judgment!P.M. Vijayakumar Vs. Monara Chits (P) Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-21-1997
Reported in: 1997(3)CTC132
ORDERA. Raman, J.1. This is an application filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code to quash the proceedings in C.C.No. 1447 of 1994 pending on the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai.2. The complainant is one M/s. Monara Chits (P) Ltd. The case of the complainant is that the accused entered into two chit transactions and became a successful bidder in the auction held on 20.12.1990 and 30.5.1991 and he committed default in payment of subsequent instalments and when the complainant approached the accused for collection the accused issued three post dated cheques drawn on Bank of Maharashtra dated on 5.12.1993 and 6.12.1993 and 7.12.1993 for a total sum of Rs. 46,900 in discharge of the liability due by him on the two transactions to the complainant. The said cheques were presented at the Bank for collection on 9.12.1993 and they were all returned on 11.12.1993 on the ground that there were no sufficient funds in the account. Later a notice was issued by the co...
Tag this Judgment!Aluminium Industries Ltd., Rep. by Its Commercial Manager Vs. Minerals ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-21-1997
Reported in: 1997(2)CTC636; (1998)IMLJ1
ORDERShivaraj Patil, J.1. These writ appeals are placed before us for disposal based on the order of reference made on 10.3.1997 by the Division Bench of this Court.2. These two writ appeals are directed against one and the same judgment and order of the learned single Judge dated 21.2.1990 in W.P. No. 2336 of 1981, one filed by the writ petitioner, and the other filed by the respondent No. 1 in the writ petition respectively. For convenience, we will refer to the parties throughout this judgment as they are arrayed in the writ petition.3. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to these appeals, and leading to the reference of these appeals to a larger bench, are the following:-The petitioner is a public limited company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1913 having its factories at Kundare in Kerala, Hirakud in Orissa and Hyderabad in Andhra Pradesh. It is one of the prime manufacturers of Aluminium cables and conductors for supply to State Electricity Boards and other power ...
Tag this Judgment!Dosson Daview and ors. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by Its Collector o ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-21-1997
Reported in: 1997(3)CTC375; (1998)IIMLJ143
ORDERAR. Lakshmanan, J.1. Against the order made in Check Slip Nos. 518/xxiv/S in O.S.No. 434 of 1993, 517/xxiv/S in O.S.No.433 of 1993 and 519/xxiv/S in O.S.No.435 of 1993 dated 9.12.1996, on the file of the District Munsif, Pattukottai, the above CRPs have been filed.2. The petitioners in all these three revisions have filed three different suits on the file of the District Court, Pattukottai for declaration and injunction with respect of their ownership as ancestral rights and by valuing the suit property under Section 25(b) of the Tamilnadu Court Fee and Suits Valuation Act. The lower court has raised an objection by way of check slip stating that the relief claimed is an intangible right. The petitioners filed their objections stating that both the warrams under the Inam Abolition Act, 1963 are with them and that no rent is paid to anyone. However, the learned District Munsif by order dated 5.9.1996 allowed the check slip objection and directed the petitioners to pay the court fee...
Tag this Judgment!Swadharma Swarajya Sangha, Represented by Its Director Mrs. Lalitha Ra ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-21-1997
Reported in: (1998)1MLJ724
Manmohan Singh Liberhan, C.J.1. The only contention raised in this appeal is that the Director was competent to file the suit as authorised by the Articles of Association. It would be expedient to reproduce the relevant portion of Article 104 of the Memorandum of Articles of Association:without prejudice to the general powers conferred by the last preceding articles and the other powers conferred by these presents it is hereby expressly declared that the Directors shall have the following powers, that is to say, power.(b) to institute, conduct, defend, compromise or abandon any legal proceedings by or against the Sangha or its officers, or otherwise concerning the affairs of the Sangha and also to compound and allow time for payment of or satisfaction of any debts due and of any claims or demands by or against the Sangha.2. A reading of the above, article leads to an inference that it is the Directors who should jointly authorise to decide to institute a suit Concedingly, the Directors...
Tag this Judgment!Dosson Daview and ors. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu Represented by Its Coll ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-21-1997
Reported in: (1998)2MLJ143
ORDERA.R. Ldkshmanan, J.1. Against the orders made in Check Slip Nos. 518/xxiv/S in O.S. No. 434 of 1993, 517/xxiv/S in O.S. No. 433 of 1993 and 519/xxiv/S in O.S. No. 435 of 1993 dated 9.12.1996, on the file of the District Munsif, Pattukottai, the above C.R.Ps. have been filed.2. The petitioners in all these three revisions have filed three different suits on the file of the District Munsif Court, Pattukottai for declaration and injunction with respect to their ownership as ancestral rights and by valuing the suit property under Section 25(b) of the Tamil Nadu Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act. The lower court has raised an objection by way of check slip stating that the relief claimed is an intangible right. The petitioners filed their objections stating that both the warams under the Inam Abolition Act, 1963 are with them and that no rent is paid to anyone. However, the learned District Munsif by order dated 5.9.1996 allowed the check slip objection and directed the petitioners to...
Tag this Judgment!Carborandum Universal Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-20-1997
Reported in: [2000]241ITR402(Mad)
N.V. Balasubramanian, J. 1. This is a combined reference both at the instance of the Revenue as well as the assessee and the Tribunal, at the instance of both the assessee and the Revenue, has drawn up a consolidated statement of case and referred the following questions of law under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, for our opinion. The question of law at the instance of assessee : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee was not entitled to the deduction in computing its total income for the asst. yr. 1973-74 of the amount of surtax payable for the year ?' The question of law at the instance of Revenue : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and having regard to the provisions of s. 40A(7) of the IT Act, 1961, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee is entitled to the deduction of the provision for gratuity of Rs. 10,58,521 in the assessment for the asst. yr. 1973-74 ?...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Carborandum Universal Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-20-1997
Reported in: [2000]241ITR407(Mad)
N.V. Balasubramanian, J. 1. At the instance of the Revenue, the Tribunal has stated a case and referred the following questions of law for the asst. yr. 1975-76 under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the expenditure incurred on the maintenance of the flat at Bombay and depreciation on the said building should be allowed as a deduction even though it is a guest house within the meaning of s. 37(3) of the IT Act, 1961 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the provision for gratuity should be allowed as a deduction even though there was no approved gratuity fund in existence during the previous year relevant for the asst. yr. 1975-76 ?' 2. The answer to the second question need not detain us as the Tribunal has followed its earlier order for the asst. yr. 1973-74 in the assessee's own ca...
Tag this Judgment!Executive Officer, Nemeli Sri Alavandar Naicker Charities Vs. Commissi ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-18-1997
Reported in: [1999]240ITR156(Mad)
Rengasamy J.1. These two writ petitions under article 226 of the Constitution of India are filed for certiorarified mandamus to quash the common order of the Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, Chepauk, Madras, levying the agricultural income-tax for the assessment years 1975-76 and 1976-77. 2. The facts are as follows : 3. The petitioner, which is a public charity is having the agricultural income and, therefore, it filed the returns for the assessment years 1975-76 and 1976-77 stating that no tax was leviable and the Agricultural Income-tax Officer also had accepted those returns. However, the second respondent/Agricultural Income-tax Officer having found that the above assessment was not according to law, reassessed under section 35 of the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), and levied tax of Rs. 2,058.25 and Rs. 1,561.40, respectively, for the assessment years 1975-76 and 1976-77. The petitioner aggrieved by this order, filed an...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »