Chennai Court September 1997 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Smt. Savithiri Sam
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-17-1997
Reported in: [1999]236ITR1003(Mad)
J. Kanakaraj, J.1. The assessee is a shareholder in a private limited company called Sujani Textiles Ltd. Her husband late Shri G. N. Sam was also a shareholder in that company. Her husband withdrew large sums of money on different dates from the said company. On December 31, 1961, there was a total sum of Rs. 3,68,345 on reserves made up of the following amounts : (Rs.)'Reserves including provisions made for the assessment year 3,00,000Surplus in the profit and loss account 19,865Proposed dividends 48,480Total 3,68,345.'2. For the assessment year 1962-63, a sum of Rs. 1,95,550 was assessed in the hands of her husband as deemed dividend by invoking the provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Income-tax Act. Deducting this amount of Rs. 1,95,550 from the reserves of Rs. 3,68,345 the balance of Rs. 1,72,795 was treated as deemed dividend and brought to tax in the hands of the assessee for the assessment year 1962-63. The relevant previous year for the assessment year 1962-63 is the year en...
Tag this Judgment!Veeraraghavan I.P.S Vs. State
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-17-1997
Reported in: 1997(3)CTC188
ORDERK. Govindarajan, J.1. The petitioner who is the accused No. 2 has filed the above Crl.O.P. praying to enlarge him on bail, pending investigation in Crl .No. 34 of 1996, on the file of the Additional Superintendent of Police, C.B., C.I.D., head quarters, Chennai.2. A case was registered against him on the complaint given by the Home Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu, to the Director General of Police, which was registered on 16.9.1996 for the alleged offences under Sections 120-B, 109 read with Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(c) and (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.3. The petitioner took charge as Director of Fire Service on 21.7.1990 from one E. Hariharane and he has been shown as A - 1 in this case. According to the prosecution, the petitioner in pursuance of criminal conspiracy has selected A-3 company to purchase on emergency rescue tender and thus abused his office and obtained pecuniary advantage to A-3 to the tune of Rs. ...
Tag this Judgment!Chengalrayan Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-17-1997
Reported in: (1998)60TTJ(Mad)734
ORDERABDUL RAZACK, J.M. :These two appeals are filed by the assessee and the assessment years involved are 1986-87 and 1987-88.2. In the appeal relating to the asst. yr. 1986-87 (ITA No. 960/Mad/91) the key controversy is whether or not the excise duty incentive/rebate (for short EDI) of Rs. 1,24,05,255 received by the assessee is assessable to tax as business income. The other common dispute in the appeals for the asst. yrs. 1986-87 and 1987-88 is whether the tax authorities were right in holding that the expenditure on maintenance of guest house including depreciation is allowable. The third dispute in the appeal relating to the asst. yr. 1986-87 is whether interest received from bank on the deposit of Molasses Storage Fund is assessable to tax or not.3. We shall first deal with the disputes regarding the expenditure on guest house maintenance and the bank interest on Molasses Storage Fund.4. We have heard both sides on these two disputes in the two assessment years. In our view, the...
Tag this Judgment!Andhra Prabha (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-16-1997
Reported in: (1998)144CTR(Mad)12; [1999]238ITR525(Mad)
J. Kanakaraj, J. 1. T.C. No. 939 of 1983, arises out of a reference made at the instance of the assessee and the question posed for consideration is as follows : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the term 'expenditure' under section 40A(8) could refer to the net expenditure after the setting off interest income of the assessee ?' 2. T.C. No. 940 of 1983, arises out of a reference at the instance of the Revenue and the question posed for consideration is as follows : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the provisions of section 40A(8), effect from April 1, 1976, applied only to expenditure incurred after April 1, 1976, and not to computation of income for the assessment year 1976-77 ?' 3. We will first take up the reference made at the instance of the Revenue comprised in T.C. No. 940 of 1983. Section 40A(8) was introduced by the Finance Bill, 1975, in February, 1975. It received the assent of the President on May 12, 1975. Sub-section...
Tag this Judgment!P.V. Subbiah Naidu Vs. the Government of Tamil Nadu and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-16-1997
Reported in: (1998)2MLJ222
ORDERV. Rengasamy, J.1. These writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India are for issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the G.O.Ms.No. 1767, Revenue, dated 19.9.1988 issued under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. The petitioners claim to be the owners of the properties. The petitioner in W.P.No. 12840 of 1988 purchased 1800 Sq.ft. in S.No. 121/14 on 4.7.1987 under the document No. 553 of 1987 dated 9.7.1987 from the petitioners in W.P.No. 14852 of 1988. The Government notified the intention to acquire the properties mentioned in these writ petitions under Section 4(1) of the Act by the G.O.Ms.No. 1378, Revenue, dated 4.7.1987 and the same was published in the Gazette on 13.9.1987. The petitioner in W.P.No, 15274 of 1988 has purchased 100 sq.ft. in S.No. 121/20-A under sale deed dated 5.10.1987 through the document No. 712 of 1987. As this sale deed is dated 5.10.1987, subsequent to the notification under Section 4(1...
Tag this Judgment!K. Suseela Gomathi Vs. the Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Joint ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-15-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)CTC269
ORDER1. Heard the parties.2. The petitioner in the above writ petition has prayed for issue of a writ of mandamus to direct the 2nd Respondent to issue the appointment order for the post of a Research Assistant (non-medical), Internal Medicine Research Wing in Government Hospital, Balarangapuram, attached to Madurai Medical College.3. Mr.M.N.Muthukumaran, the learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission called for applications for the post of a Research Assistant (non-medical) at Internal Medicine Research Wing in Government Hospital, Madurai during 1993 and the petitioner applied to the said post. She was asked to write an entrance examination. After the said entrance examination, by the proceedings dated 26.9.1995, the 1st respondent informed her that she was selected to the said post and also submitted a physical fitness certificate. Thereafter she did not getany appointment order. The counsel for the petitioner further contends that she ...
Tag this Judgment!All India Ex-serviceman Bank Employees' Federation, Tamil Nadu Vs. Uni ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-15-1997
Reported in: (1998)IMLJ264
ORDER1. Heard both sides. The Writ petition was dismissed by a learned single Judge by his order dated 26.11.1992 on the ground that the classification as at present between employees of the Government Organisations and Government department and Nationalised Banks including Reserve Bank of India and on the other hand other employees under private organisations is quite reasonable. According to the learned single Judge the classification is quite reasonable for the reason that while the employees in Government Organisations will have security of service and fixity of tenure, the private employees will not have the same benefit. More often, the private employees are sent out at the whims and fancies of their employers and they cannot be placed on the same pedestal as the Government employees. Before the learned single Judge, it was contended that whether a person is employed under an individual on the one hand or in a Government department on the other, the position with regard to their ...
Tag this Judgment!Arulmigu Dhandayuthapani Swami Thirukkoil Vs. Commercial Tax Officer-i ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-15-1997
Reported in: (1998)IMLJ160
A.R. Lakshmanan, J.1. The writ appeal is directed against the order of J. Kanakaraj, J., in W.P. No. 17003 of 1994 dated September 29, 1994 dismissing the writ petition only on the ground that the appellant has got a right of alternative remedy to file an appeal. 2. The appellant filed the writ petition for the issue of a writ of certiorari calling for the records of the respondent in his proceedings TNGST No. 536296/91-92 dated November 15, 1993 and quash the same. 3. The facts and circumstances leading to the filing of W.P. No. 17003 of 1994 are as follows : The appellant is the Devasthanam looking after the pooja, seva, etc., of the deity 'Lord Muruga' in the famous temple situated in Palani Hills. That temple from time immemorial is one of the very important places of worship for the Hindus and famous festivals are conducted by the appellant every year according to the custom prevailing among the Hindus. After the pooja or seva performed on the deity, prasadams are offered to the d...
Tag this Judgment!Arulmigu Dhandayuthapani Swami Thirukkoil, Represented by the Joint Co ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-15-1997
Reported in: (1998)1MLJ160
AR. Lakshmanan, J.1. The writ appeal is directed against the order of J. Kanakaraj, J., in W.P. No. 17003 of 1994 dated 29.9.1994 dismissing the writ petition only on the ground that the appellant has got a right of alternative remedy to file an appeal.2. The appellant filed the writ petition for the issue of a writ of certiorari calling for the records of the respondent in his proceedings T.N.G.S.T. No. 536296/91-92 dated 15.11.1993 and quash the same.3. The facts and circumstances leading to the filing of W.P. No. 17003 of 1994 are as follows: The appellant is the Devasthanam looking after the Pooja, Seva, etc., of the Deity 'Lord Muruga' in the famous temple situated in Palani Hills. That temple from time im-memorial is one of the very important places of wor-ship for the Hindus and famous festivals are conducted by the appellant every year according to the custom prevailing among the Hindus. After the Pooja or Seva performed on the deity, Prasadams are offered to the devotees. One ...
Tag this Judgment!Sugesan and Co. Private Limited Vs. Pachaiayppa's Trust and Scheduled ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-13-1997
Reported in: (1998)2MLJ249
Shivaraj Patil, J.1. These two appeals arise against the same judgment and decree dated 28.1.1992 passed in C.S.No. 261 of 1983. O.S.A.No. 39 of 1992 is filed by the defendant in the said suit, and O.S.A.No. 217 of 1993 is filed by the plaintiff in the same suit. For convenience the parties will be referred to in this judgment as they were arrayed in the suit itself.2. Briefly stated, the facts leading to the filing of these appeals, can be stated thus:The defendant M/s. Sugesan and Company became a tenant of the plaintiff in respect of the suit premises' bearing Door No. 38, Rajaji Salai, Madras in 1963. The last lease agreement was for a period of five years from 1.12.1977 to 30.11.1982 on a rent of Rs. 4,000 per month from 1.12.1977 to 31.3.1978 and at Rs. 7,000 per month for the remaining period of the lease. The said lease was terminated by notice dated 6.11.1982. There was no agreement between the parties for extension of lease, as the defendant was not agreeable to pay future re...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »