Chennai Court February 1998 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.
Smt. K.N. Sita Vs. Controller of Estate Duty
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-10-1998
Reported in: [1999]239ITR108(Mad)
R. Jayasimha Babu, J.1. The question of law referred to us at the instance of the Revenue under the Estate Duty Act, in respect of the estate of the late P.S.K. Moorthy, who died on August 7, 1976, leaving behind him his widow Smt. K.N. Sita, and an unmarried daughter Miss Saroja, is 'whether the Tribunal was right in law in confirming the rejection of the applicant's claim for deduction of a sum of Rs. 1,00,000 being the charge of the maintenance of wife and daughters and the provision for marriage expenses of the unmarried daughters in computing the value of estate for the purpose of the estate duty ?'2. The Assistant Controller of Estate Duty (I) had rejected this claim by the accountable person on the ground that the same has not been provided for under the Estate Duty Act, That rejection was confirmed by the Appellate Controller of Estate Duty, who during the course of his order referred to the Hindu Succession Act, and the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ambur Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-10-1998
Reported in: (1999)154CTR(Mad)399
R. JAYAS1MHA BABU, J.:The following questions of law have been referred to us at the instance of the Revenue, they relate to the asst. yr. 1973-74.'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal's view that the payments of additional sales-tax relating to the earlier years should be allowed as a deduction for the asst. yr. 1973-74 is sustainable in law?''Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in holding that the extra shift allowance of plant and machinery should be granted with reference to the number of days the concern worked and not with reference to the number of days each item of machinery worked in the previous year ?'2. We may dispose of the second question first, as there is no dispute that question is required to be answered against the Revenue in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of South India Viscose Ltd. vs . CIT : [1997]227ITR286(SC) . We accordingly answer the second question in the...
D. Kader Batcha and Six Others Vs. Goripalayam Darga, Through Its Mana ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-09-1998
Reported in: 1998(1)CTC742; (1998)IIIMLJ69
ORDER1. The defendants 3 to 8 and 10 aggrieved against the order passed in E.A.No.880 of 1991, in E.P.No.277 of 1988 in O.S.No.16 of 1976, dated 15.4.1993, on the file of the learned District Munsif, Madurai Town, have filed the above Revision.2. The respondent filed the suit in O.S.No.16 of 1976 for ejectment. The suit property is a vacant site measuring 49' east west on the northern side, 48' east west on the southern side, 46' north-south on the eastern side and 27' north-south on the western side in old T.S.No.1285/1, new T.S.No.3643/3 and 4. According to the respondent/plaintiff, the vacant site was taken on lease bythe first defendant, one Dawood Sahib from the plaintiff on 1.7.1956. The suit property forms part of Goripalayam Darga burial ground and so it is a wakf property. According to the plaintiff, the first defendant is not entitled to the benefit of the Madras City Tenants Protection Act since the commencement of lease was from 1.7.1956, and the suit property is a wakf pro...
South India Shipping Corporation Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-09-1998
Reported in: (1998)147CTR(Mad)476; [1999]240ITR24(Mad)
R. Jayasimha Babu, J.1. For the assessment year 1976-77, at the instance of the assessee, the following questions of law have been referred :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding in paras 4 and 9 that the interest from bank deposits and interest on loan to others should be assessed under the head 'Other sources' and not under the head 'Business' ?2. Whether the Tribunal was right in holding in paragraph 7 that the sum of Rs. 3,11,48,040 representing the additional cost incurred due to exchange fluctuations is capital expenditure under Section 43A and in confirming disallowance of the claim for development rebate thereon ?'2. For the same assessment year in respect of the assessee's assessment, the Revenue also having sought a reference, the following questions have been referred at the instance of the Revenue :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and having regard to the provisions of Section 57 of t...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Popular Lunghi Co.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-06-1998
Reported in: [1999]238ITR229(Mad)
N.V. Balsubramanian, J.1. The assessee is a firm carrying on business in the manufacture and sale of khailees. The years of assessment with which we are concerned are 1967-68, 1968-69 and 1969-70. The reference relates to levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the Act. The factual situation for all the assessment years are common, and hence we thought fit to notice the facts for the assessment year 1967-68 and it is not necessary to burden the judgment with the factual situation for the other two assessment years. The assessee filed return of income for the assessment years 1967-68, 1968-69 and 1969-70 on May 30, 1968, March 28, 1969 and February 9, 1970, disclosing income of Rs. 95,924, Rs. 1,37,645 and Rs. 2,39,832, respectively. The assessment for all the years were completed on March 23, 1971, January 10, 1972 and on January 10, 1972, respectively. On September 19, 1972, subsequent to the completion of assessment for all the ...
Sreeraman S. Vs. District Judge
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-06-1998
Reported in: (1999)IILLJ350Mad
Shivaraj Patil, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner in this writ petition has questioned the validity and correctness of the order dated November 1, 1991 passed by the respondent and prayed to direct the respondent to reinstate the petitioner in service with all monetary and attendant benefits.2. The short facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are the following:The petitioner was temporarily appointed as Office Assistant of the respondent Tribunal by proceedings No. 489/80 dated August 8, 1980 as a candidate sponsored by the Employment Exchange. He reported for duty on August 8, 1980. His services were regularised by proceedings dated November 10, 1983. He was declared to have satisfactorily completed the probation on the afternoon of August 8, 1982. Thus he was an approved probationer in service with effect from August 9, 1982. His services were not confirmed as he was not made a permanent member of the service. When the petitioner remained absent un...
State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Krishna Oil Mills
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-06-1998
Reported in: [2003]133STC347(Mad)
ORDERJanarthanam, J.1. This Tax Case (Revision) is directed against the order dated March 27, 1992 of the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras-104 (Main Bench) (for short 'Tribunal') and made in T.A. No. 851 of 1991 relating to the assessment year 1989-90 under the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (Act No. 74 of 1956--for short 'CSTA').2. The assessee-dealers--Tvl. Krishna Oil Mills, having their place of business at No. 34/3, Vellore Main Road, Arcot, is coming within the jurisdiction of the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Arcot. For the assessment year 1989-90, the assessee-dealers submitted their return under CSTA. The business premises of the assessee-dealers, it is said, was inspected on January 30, 1990 by the Enforcement officials and certain slips were recovered. One such slip recovered was slip No. 5 recovered under D7 records. The said slip No. 5 was written in the letter pad of Tvl. Krishna Oil Mills. On verification of the said slip, the following fac...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-05-1998
Reported in: [1999]239ITR132(Mad)
N.V. Balasubramanian, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, the Tribunal referred the following three questions of law for our consideration under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with Section 18 of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964, for the assessment years 1969-70, 1972-73 and 1973-74 :'1. Whether the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the capital should not be proportionately reduced in terms of Rule 4 of the Second Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964, consequent to the deductions allowed under Chapter VI-A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment years 1969-70, 1972-73 and 1973-74 ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the reserve for bad and doubtful debts should be taken as capital for the levy of surtax for the assessment year 1969-70 ?3. Whether, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the dividends declared subsequent to the first day of th...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Chemicals and Plastics India Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-05-1998
Reported in: [1999]239ITR846(Mad)
N.V. Balasubramanian, J.1. In compliance with the directions of this court dated March 14, 1989, the Tribunal referred the following question of law for our consideration under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the expenditure incurred on the maintenance of the guest house and the depreciation on the building used as a guest house should be allowed as a deduction ?'2. The assessee is a public limited company. The assessment year involved is 1978-79. The assessee maintained a guest house at Mettur and incurred certain expenditure amounting to Rs. 30,528 and also claimed depreciation of Rs. 8,999 in computing the income of the previous year ended March 31, 1978, relevant to the assessment year 1978-79. The Income-tax Officer disallowed the claim of the assessee with reference to both the amounts, namely, the expenditure as well as the claim of depreciation. The assessee...
Uni Rubber and Footwear (P) Limited Vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-05-1998
Reported in: [2003]133STC629(Mad)
ORDERJanarthanam, J. 1. Desirable it is, to pen down a common order, inasmuch as the issue falling for consideration in all these actions is one and the same pertaining to the same assessee relatable to the three assessment years 1985-86, 1987-88 and 1988-89 under the provisions of Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (for short 'CST Act').2. The assessee-dealers, Tvl. Uni Rubber and Footwear (Private) Limited, having their place of business at No. 84, Sipcot, Hosur, is coming within the jurisdiction of Commercial Tax Officer, Hosur. The assessee-dealers' head office, it is said, is located at Hosur, besides having a branch office at Bangalore. The assessee-dealers, it appears, effects sale of their goods inter-State, besides effecting stock transfer for open market sale to their branch at Bangalore. During the relevant assessment years 1985-86, 1987-88 and 1988-89, it appears, the assessee-dealers camouflaged their accounts by creating records in such a way that the inter-State sales effected ...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 17
- 18
- 19
- Next ›
- Last »