Chennai Court December 1997 Judgments
M. Palanivelu Vs. P.V. Dhandapani, Proprietor, Veerappah Transport and ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-29-1997
Reported in: (1998)2MLJ11
ORDERS.S. Subramani, J.1. Petitioner seeks the issuance of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of a writ, forbearing the 2nd respondent from proceeding any further with the timing conference as notified in R. No. 73335/E2/95, dated 28.4.1997 to fix timings in respect of 1st respondent's vehicle MSQ.7297 plying on the route Kilputhupattu to Madurantakam varied upto Gorimedu, and thus render justice.2. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it is said that the petitioner herein is a stage carriage operator, operating among others an inter-State permit plying on the route Palankulathur to Pondicherry (via.) Tindivanam, Marakkanam. The said route is included in the inter-State agreement entered into between the States of Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry, and the Primary Authority is the State Transport Authority, Tamil Nadu (2nd respondent herein). It is said that the first respondent herein is also a stage carriage operator operati...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Fenner (India) Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-24-1997
Reported in: (1998)148CTR(Mad)506; [2000]241ITR645(Mad)
N.V. Balasubramanian, J. 1. The assessee is a public limited company and the assessment year involved is 1979-80, the relevant previous year ending on 31st August, 1979. The ITO, while completing the assessment made certain disallowance under s. 40(c) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act'). He held that the gratuity paid to one Krishnan, the director of the company should be taken into account for the purpose of determining the ceiling under s. 40(c) of the Act. Similarly, he took into account the provident fund contribution, pension contribution and one year term assurance contributed by the company in respect of directors amounting to Rs. 72,593. He, therefore, held that the entire sum would represent the payments made to the director and it has to be disallowed under s. 40(c) of the Act. He, therefore, disallowed a sum of Rs. 1,05,593 in the computation of the income of the assessee applying the provisions of s. 40(c) of the Act. 2. The CIT(A), on appeal, d...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Premier Mills Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-24-1997
Reported in: [1999]239ITR165(Mad)
ORDERN.V. Balasubramanian, J.1. At the instance of the Department, the Tribunal has referred the following questions of law for our consideration :'(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and having regard to the provision to r. 5(1) of the IT Rules, the ITO was not correct in allowing proportionate depreciation for the asst. yr. 1980-81 (ii) Whether the Tribunal's further finding that the ITO cannot impose any condition while allowing change of previous year is sustainable in law ?' 2. The assessee is a public limited company engaged in the spinning of yarn, textiles etc. The assessee was following the financial year as the previous year and in its application dt. 11th February, 1980 the assessee-company desired a change of its accounting year ending on the month of June of every subsequent year. The ITO by his letter dt. 21st February, 1980 acceded to the request of the company on the following conditions :(i) The company can close their accounts for 15 month...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sudarsan Chits (i) Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-24-1997
Reported in: [1999]240ITR319(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 our consideration under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on an interpretation of s. 40(c) r/w ss. 2(31) and 2(32) of the IT Act, the Tribunal is right in holding that the provisions of s. 40(c) are not attracted 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the sum of Rs. 5,33,755, being contribution made by the assessee to the approved gratuity fund, is an admissible deduction ?' 2. The assessee is a company carrying on business in chits. During the course of assessment proceedings for the asst. yr. 1978-79, the assessee claimed deduction for a sum of Rs. 2,50,000, being the remuneration paid to the managerial staff of the holding company under an agreement dt. 1st May, 1973 ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sudarsan Chit (India) Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-24-1997
Reported in: [1999]239ITR170(Mad)
N.V. Balasubramanian, J. 1. The assessee is a subsidiary of Sudarsan Trading Co. Ltd. The employees of the assessee-company were previously the employees of the holding company. The assessee-company was incorporated on 19th December, 1973.According to the assessee, there was a continuity of the service of the employees and for the purpose of calculating gratuity the services rendered by the employees of the assessee-company in the holding company should be taken into account and after taking note of the entire service rendered by the employees in both the companies, the assessee made a contribution of Rs. 3,97,628 towards the approved gratuity fund. The assessee claimed the same as deduction in the determination of the computation of the income for the asst. yr. 1977-78. The ITO rejected the claim of the assessee on the ground that the assessee-company was incorporated only on 19th February, 1973, and as such the employees who have not put in continuous service of five years with the a...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. D. Lakshminarayanaswamy
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-24-1997
Reported in: [1999]238ITR976(Mad)
N.V. Balasubramanian, J.1. At the instance of the Department, the following question of law is referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for our consideration : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the assessee is entitled to exemption under section 10(13A) of the Income-tax Act ?' 2. The assessee has been served on May 18, 1992, and there is no representation on behalf of the assessee. 3. The assessment year involved is 1982-83. The assessee is assessed in the status of an individual. The assessee during the course of the previous assessment year 1982-83 received a sum of Rs. 9,000 as house rent allowance from Shri Ramakrishna Mills (CBE) Limited. The assessee claimed that the house rent allowance received is exempt from tax. The Income-tax Officer negatived the claim of the assessee on the ground that the assessee had not incurred any expenditure by way of rent...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Madras Fertilizers Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-24-1997
Reported in: [2000]241ITR177(Mad)
N.V. Balasubramanian J.1. Pursuant to the directions of this court in Tax Case Petition No. 177 of 1987, dated February 20, 1989, the Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law for our consideration : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the value of goods in transit is to be included while working out the deficiency for the purpose of relief under section 80j of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. The point that arises for consideration in this tax case is whether the value of the goods in transit is liable to be included while working out the relief for the purposes of section 80j of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 3. Similar question of law came up for consideration before the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Alcock Ashdown and Co. Ltd. : [1997]224ITR353(SC) , wherein the Supreme Court has held that the value of the work-in-progress should be taken into account for the purpose of granting the relief ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. N. Srinivasan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-24-1997
Reported in: [2000]245ITR147(Mad)
N.V. Balasubramanian, J. 1. Pursuant to the directions of this court in T.C.P. No. 48 of 1982, dated August 30, 1980, the Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for our consideration. 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and having regard to the provisions of section 271(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal was right in holding that penalty was not leviable under section 271(1)(a) of the Act on the assessee-firm ?' 2. The assessment year involved is 1973-74, and the assessee-firm filed its return which was due on August 15, 1973, only on February 27, 1975. There was a delay in filing the return. The Income-tax Officer levied penalty under section 271(1)(a) of the Act. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner (Appeals) found that since the tax had been deducted at source in excess, there is no case for levy of penalty for the delay in furnishing the return and ordered the refund of the su...
Tag this Judgment!M.M. Muthiah Vs. Controller of Estate Duty
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-24-1997
Reported in: [1999]236ITR166(Mad)
N.V. Balasubramanian J.1. This is a combined reference both at the instance of the accountable person and at the instance of the Department arising out of the order of the Tribunal in E.D.A. No. 133/Mds of 1972-73 dated August 31, 1978, under the provisions of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The following questions of law have been referred to us : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the policy No. 83920339 belonged to the Hindu undivided family and section 7 of the Estate Duty Act would apply to the policy amount 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case in respect of the policy amount of Rs. 1,21,728 received under policy No. 83428875, sections 7 and 14 of the Estate Duty Act would apply in accordance with the proportion of 23100/109725 and 46200/86625 respectively 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the inclusion of the lineal descendants' share in the principal value of the deceased...
Tag this Judgment!S.R.P. Tools Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-24-1997
Reported in: [1999]237ITR684(Mad)
N.V. Balasubramanian, J. 1. The assessee is a company engaged in the business of manufacture of motor vehicle accessories. The assessee entered into a technical collaboration agreement with Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd., Tokyo (for short 'MHI') on 10th April, 1972, according to which the Japanese company provided technical know-how to the assessee-company for the manufacture of certain precision tools such as, hobs, gear shaper cutters, broaches, shaving cutters, etc. The assessee-company agreed to pay, according to the agreement, a lumpsum amount of thirty four millions of Japanese Yen in four instalments in US Dollars and the assessee-company was also obliged to pay royalty at 4 per cent. of the selling price of the products manufactured commencing from the fourth year. The assessee paid a sum of Rs. 9,40,250 to MHI under the technical collaboration agreement and claimed the same as revenue expenditure to be deductible as such from business income for the asst. yr. 1975-76, and th...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »