Chennai Court March 1998 Judgments
G. Vasantha Pai Vs. Special Commissioner and Commissioner (Land Reform ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-31-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)CTC272; (1998)IIIMLJ414
ORDER1. The petitioner herein has challenged the two orders, one passed by respondent No.2 in S.R.No.1295 of 1985 dated 31.8.1988 and the other passed by respondent No. l in J2.67024 of 1988 dated 12.12.1988. 2. The respondent No.2 initiated action under the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as 'The Act') and determined that an extent of 1350 sq.mts. of urban land in S.No.210/2Al Alt Pt. of Thiruvanmiyur Village is an excess vacant land under Section 9(5) of the Act. On appeal against such determination, the respondent No. l confirmed the- order of the competent authority. 3. The respondent No.2 issued a notice under Section 9(4) of the Act to the petitioner, terming him as the urban land owner, to acquire the excess vacant land measuring 1350 sq.mts. after allowing 1000 sq.mts. towards his family entitlement under Section 5(1) of the Act, since his family consists of himself and his wife only. 4. The petitioner herein contested the notic...
Tag this Judgment!N.M. Ahamed Ali Vs. Union Bank of India
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-31-1998
Reported in: [2000]101CompCas475(Mad)
S. Jagadeesan, J. 1. The revision has been filed against the order of the lower court rejecting the preliminary objection raised by the petitioner with regard to the jurisdiction of the lower court. The respondent herein filed the suit, O. S. No. 761 of 1987, on the file of the Sub-Court, Trichy, for recovery of a sum of Rs. 9,93,461.89 on a mortgage against the petitioner herein. A preliminary decree has been passed. The petitioner preferred an appeal in A. S. No. 756 of 1989 on the file of this court against the said preliminary decree. 2. In the said appeal, the respondent herein filed C.M.P. No. 9881 of 1997, to send back the records of the suit to the trial court in order to proceed with the final decree proceedings, since there is no stay of the execution of the preliminary decree passed by the trial court. This court by order dated August 5, 1997, directed the Registry to despatch the records in O. S. No. 761 of 1987, to the lower court with a direction that the lower court has ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kutty Flushdoor Furniture Co. (P.) Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-31-1998
Reported in: [2000]243ITR174(Mad)
R. Jayasimha Babu, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following question of law has been referred to us. The question so referred to us arises out of the assessment of the respondent's income for the assessment years 1980-81 to 1982-83, and is as to whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the amounts left with the company by the directors and shareholders cannot be considered as deposits so as to be brought within the meaning of Explanation (b)(i) to Sub-section (8) of Section 40A ?2. The Tribunal's decision was based upon the earlier decision of the Tribunal in the case of Khivraj Motors Ltd. A reference has been brought to this court arising out of that decision in the case of Kkivaraj Motors Ltd. The question is as to whether the amount left with the company by the directors and shareholders constitutes deposit. The decision of this court is reported in CIT v. Khivaraj Motors Ltd. : [1997]227ITR473(Mad) . Thi...
Tag this Judgment!Thirumagal Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-31-1998
Reported in: [2000]246ITR800(Mad)
M.S. Janartiianam, J.1. These tax cases petitions, at the instance of the assesses--Thirumagal Mills Ltd., Gudiyatham, North Arcot District-632 602, are for issuance of a direction to the Tribunal to state a case and refer the common questions of law, as below, for the opinion of this court :'(1.) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in confirming the levy of wealth-tax on all the vehicles, which are held as business assets of the company for the assessment years 1984-85 and 1985-86 ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in upholding the orders of the lower authorities and including the vehicle--'trekker' in the term of motor car and thereby confirming' the levy of wealth-tax on the assessee-company for the assessment years 1984-85 and 1985-86 ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in concluding that all...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sawhany Trading Co. Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-31-1998
Reported in: [1999]240ITR242(Mad)
R. Jayasimha Babu, J.1. The question referred to us at the instance of the Revenue arising out of the respondent's assessment for the assessment year 1975-76 is as to whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding and have valid materials to hold that the assessee was not liable to additional income-tax under Section 104 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1975-76.2. The assessee admittedly had distributable income of Rs. 37,330 and was required to distribute 60 per cent, of the sum at Rs. 22,398 for that assessment year. The assessee, however, could not make the distribution as the audit of the accounts was completed only on June 5, 1976, and the audited accounts were approved and dividend declared at the annual general body meeting held on September 20, 1976. After the declaration was made at the general body meeting, the dividend was in fact, distributed and the amounts so distributed were in excess of 60 per cent, of t...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Gift-tax Vs. Smt. Prema Srinivasan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-31-1998
Reported in: [2000]241ITR92(Mad)
N.V. Balasubramanian, J. 1. The question of law referred to us for our consideration at the instance of the Revenue relating to the assessee's assessment year 1975-76 reads as under : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in cancelling the reassessment made under Section 16(1)(b) in the assessee's case as not valid ?' 2. The assessee is an individual who made a gift of 2,000 shares of Sundaram Industries Limited on March 26, 1975. She valued the shares gifted by her on the basis of the law which prevailed at the time of making the gifts. The Gift-tax Officer accepted the assessee's method of valuation except for adding back the gratuity provision made by the company for purposes of arriving at the value of the shares of the company. The assessee appealed against the valuation determined by the Gift-tax Officer and the assessee's case was accepted. Subsequently, the Gift-tax Officer reopened the original assessment on the ground that the val...
Tag this Judgment!V. Chellappa and Another Vs. Commissioner, Tirunelveli Municipal Corp. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-30-1998
Reported in: 1998(1)CTC465; (1998)IIMLJ450
ORDER1. In these four writ petitions, the grievance being almost similar and a common counter has been filed by the respondents, they are heard together and disposed of by this common order.2. The petitioner in W.P.Nos.3021 & 3022 of 1998 being same, in one petition, he is seeking for declaring the auction notice published in Daily Thanthi, dated.15.2.1998, insofar as it relates to the licence to display advertisements, through television sets in Tirunelveli Municipal Corporation Central Bus Stand, as illegal and in another petition he is seeking for renewal of the licence, on accepting the enhanced rent of 15% for a block period of three years.3. The petitioner in W.P.Nos.3023 & 3024 of 1998 being same, has, in one petition, sought for declaring the auction notice published in Daily Thanthi on 15.2.1998 insofar as it relates to the licence to instal weighing machines in platforms 1 to 3 of the Central bus stand, Thirunelveli and in another petition he has sought for renewal of the sai...
Tag this Judgment!G.R. Govindarajulu and Sons Charities, Coimbatore and Two Others Vs. R ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-30-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)CTC65; (1998)IIIMLJ554
ORDER1. This revision is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the proposed defendants in a suit which is proposed to be filed by the respondents herein under Section 92(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure. The respondents herein obtained leave for the institution of the suit under Section 92(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure against the petitioner.2. I do not want to give a detailed history of the litigation except for the statement that the respondents herein alleged various acts of mismanagement of the public trust.3. The petitioners herein opposed the grant of consent and the main reason for the same is that there is already a suit pending before the Court and therefore a second suit for the very same relief is unnecessary. It is also contended that in an earlier suit, the plaintiffs therein moved for some interim relief and the same was not granted as sought for by them and the proposed suit is only an another attempt to get the very same relief by filing a separat...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Baba Estates
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-30-1998
Reported in: [2000]244ITR413(Mad)
Janarthanam, J.1. The assessee--Baba Estates, Madras, filed its return of income for the assessment year 1977-78 on December 1, 1977, disclosing an income of Rs. 1,14,120 in the status of 'association of persons'.2. The assessment was later completed on September 19, 1980, under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Act No. 43 of 1961--for short 'the I. T. Act'), determining the total income at Rs. 1,57,550 and the tax being worked out at Rs. 17,595 in the status of 'association of persons',3. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee contended that since it did not carry on any business activity, but only let out its storage sheds and rooms and as the investments were made by nine members, in the capacity of 'co-owners', the provisions of Section 26 of the I. T. Act would apply and the income determined in the status of 'association of persons' has to be allocated to the respective 'co-owners' and tax has to be levied in the individual hand...
Tag this Judgment!Tamilnadu Dairy Development Corporation Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Incom ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-30-1998
Reported in: [1999]239ITR142(Mad)
R. Jayasimha Babu, J.1. The questions of law referred to us for our decision at the instance of the assessee for the assessment year 1978-79 are as under :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in disallowing the depreciation claimed in respect of building under the provisions of Section 32 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the compensation of Rs. 1 lakh paid to MCMSU is a capital expenditure and hence not allowable as deduction under the provisions of the Act ?3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the provision for urban land tax was not an allowable deduction under the Income-tax Act ?'2. Regarding question No. 1, the Tribunal and the authorities below rejected the assessee's claim for depreciation on the short ground that there was no registered sale deed of the building in res...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »