Chennai Court April 1998 Judgments
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Seshasayee Paper and Boards Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-30-1998
Reported in: [2000]108TAXMAN464(Mad)
Balasubramanian, J.There are certain common questions of law which have been referred to us by the Tribunal, at the instance of the revenue, arising out of the assessment of the assessee for the two assessment years 1975-76 and 1976-77, and the questions of law referred read as under:'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the Commissioner had not validly assumed jurisdiction under section 263 of the Income Tax Act and, accordingly, in cancelling the order made for the assessment years 1975-76 and 1976-77 ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in law in holding that inasmuch as tile assessment was made under section 143(3), read with section 144B on the basis of the directions given by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, the order. made cannot be subject-matter of revision by the Commissioner under section 263 ?3. Whether, the Appellate Tribun...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. George Maino Exports (P.) Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-29-1998
Reported in: [2001]250ITR445(Mad)
N.V. Balasubramanian, J. 1. The question of law referred at the instance of the Revenue in so far as it relates to the assessment of the income of the assessee for the assessment year 1980-81 under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act reads as under : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the asses-see is entitled to relief under Section 32A and deduction under Section 80HH of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of its income from the processing of shrimps for export ?' 2. The issue that arises in the tax case is whether the assessee is entitled to claim relief under Section 32A as well as deduction under Section 80HH of the Act in respect of the processing of shrimps for exports on the basis that processing of shrimps would amount to manufacture. This court in the asses-see's own case in T. C. Nos. 369 and 370 of 1987 by judgment dated April 28, 1998 (CIT v. George Maijo : [2001]250ITR440(Mad) ), following the decision of the Supreme Court in Sterling Foods v. ...
Tag this Judgment!Y. Baliah Chetty Sons and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-29-1998
Reported in: [2000]244ITR870(Mad)
N.V. Balasubramanian, J.1. At the instance of the assessee, the Appellate Tribunal has stated a case and referred the following question of law for our opinion under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tri-bunal was justified in law in holding that a single assessment completed by the Income-tax Officer on the three firms constituted under the deeds of January 31, 1978, October 1, 1979 and November 1, 1979, for the assessment year 1980-81 is in accordance with law ?'2. The assessee is a registered firm. During the accounting period relevant for the assessment year 1980-81 there were changes in the constitution of the firm. The assessee-firm filed three returns of income for the period from April 1, 1979, to September 30, 1979, consisting of five partners, from October 1, 1979, to October 31, 1979, consisting of four partners and from November 1, 1979, to March 31, 1980, consisting of three partners. It is found th...
Tag this Judgment!Vijai NaraIn Products Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-29-1998
Reported in: 1998(102)ELT254(Mad)
ORDERP. Sathasivam, J.1. The petitioner is seeking a writ of declaration declaring the sub-section 2 of Section 61 of the Customs Act, 1962 as ultra vires, unconstitutional and capricious in so far as the petitioner is concerned, on various grounds.2. The case of the petitioner is briefly stated hereunder :According to them the petitioner Company is a private limited Company and it has proposed to establish a fishing net manufacturing business at Kattukuppam village in the Union Territory of Pondicherry. The firm has obtained an Import licence and imported 3 fishing net manufacturing machineries at a cost of Rs. 30 lakhs from Japan during February, 1988. The firm has approached a Financial Institution for sanction of term loan for clearing of the imported machineries and it took some time for getting the loan and hence the petitioner firm has filed Bill of Entry for warehousing with the second respondent for keeping the machineries in a Public bonded warehouse at Virugambakkam. The sec...
Tag this Judgment!S. Thangaraj Vs. Balasubramaniam and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-29-1998
Reported in: (1998)2MLJ715
S.M. Abdul Wahab, J. 1. C.R.P.No. 2673 of 1996 is against the fair and decretal order in R.C.A.No. 5 of 1994, dated 27.8.1996 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Trichy (Rent Control Appellate Authority) confirming the order of the District Munsif (Rent Controller), Trichy in R.CO.P.No. 285 of 1986, dated 30.11.1993.2. C.R.P.No. 2674 of 1996 is against the order dated 27.8.1996 in R.C.A.No. 6 of 1994 on the file of the Subordinate Judge (Rent Control Appellate Authority) Trichy, confirming the order of the District Munsif (Rent Controller) Trichy in R.CO.P.No. 39 of 1987, dated 30.11.1993.3. These two revision petitions arise out of a common order dated 27.8.1996. The petitioner in both the civil revision petitions is the same person i.e., the tenant, in respect of a building. The respondents are also the same persons in both the revision petitions and they are the landlords.4. R.CO.P.No. 285 of 1986 was filed for eviction on the ground of default, own as well as additional occupatio...
Tag this Judgment!Devchand M. Shah and anr. Vs. P. Sivapragasa Mudaliar (Died), and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-29-1998
Reported in: (1998)2MLJ751
S.M. Abdul Wahab, J.1. The appeal arise out of the judgment and decree dated 3.3.1981 in O.S. No. 2352 of 1978, on the file of the VIth Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Madras.2. The plaintiffs are the appellants. The plaintiffs have filed the suit for specific performance of a sale agreement dated 31.3.1973 for Rs. 36,000., According to the plaintiffs, the first plaintiff was a tenant under the first defendant, on a monthly rent of Rs. 150 in respect of the suit property, namely, the premises bearing door No. 300, Sydenhams Garden, Madras-7. Rs. 5,000 was paid as advance, the period for the completion of the sale agreement was three months, however extended from time to time. The first plaintiff hired the machineries from the premises to the second defendant. Hence, the first defendant filed H.R.C. No. 1847 of 1974 for eviction from the premises on the ground of subletting. The proceeding ended in a compromise. The eviction petition was withdrawn and it was agreed that the first pl...
Tag this Judgment!Tagore Educational Trust Represented by Its Chair Person Miss. M. Mala ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-29-1998
Reported in: (1998)3MLJ263
ORDERS.S. Subramani, J.1. Petitioner seeks issuance of writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records comprised in proceedings of the respondents dated 24.12.1997 in F.No. 730-52-202 (NDEG/ET/96) and quash the said proceedings and consequently direct the respondents to grant approval/permission under the AICTE Act, and the regulations framed thereunder for the Petitioner's Tagore Engineering College in respect of 6 approved Engineering courses with an annual intake of 360 students with effect from the academic year 1997-98 onwards.2. An area of 19.64 acres of land situate in Chrompet, Pallavaram Municipality, which belonged to M/s. Chrome Leather Company Ltd., was taken on lease for a period of 99 years by the petitioner on 6.3.1997. A registered lease deed was executed by the owner in favour of the petitioner. As per the deed of declaration of Trust dated 134.1997, the petitioner with intent to benefit telugu speaking public and also for carrying on charitable activities for...
Tag this Judgment!income Tax Officer Vs. Indian Airlines Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-29-1998
Reported in: (1999)65TTJ(Mad)560
ORDERRam Swarup, Vice President :The appeals preferred by the Revenue and the cross-objection filed by the assessee are consolidated together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience.2. At the outset, the authorised representative of the assessee vide his letter dated 28th Aug., 1997, has made a preliminary objection, which is reproduced below:'Sir,Re : Appeals 2366 to 2377/Chennai/1996Income Tax Officer v. Indian Airlines Ltd., Southern Regional Office, Madras.In the above matter, your kind attention is invited to the fact the above captioned appeals relate to a dispute between a Government department and a moblie sector undertaking and, therefore, such appeals can only be filed in accordance with the law laid down by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme court in the matter of ONGC v. Collector of Central Excise & Customs (1992) 04 CTR (SC) 31 and the Cabinet Secretariat circulars, issued from time to time, implement the Supreme Court directives. Honble Tribunal...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. George Maijo
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-28-1998
Reported in: [2001]250ITR440(Mad)
R. Jayasimha Babu, J. 1. The question required to be considered by us in this reference is, as to whether the processing of shrimps amounts to production or manufacture entitling the assessee to deduction under Section 80HH of the Income-tax Act, 1961 The question arises out of the assessment of the income of the respondent, George Maijo (Cuddalore), Madras, for the assessment years 1979-80 and 1980-81. The reference is made at the instance of the Revenue. 2. The assessee is engaged in the business of processing and exporting shrimps. Its claim for deduction under Section 80HH of the Act was rejected by the Income-tax Officer on the ground that such processing does not amount to production or manufacture. The Commissioner of Income-tax, however, was of the view that it does amount to manufacture and allowed the assessee's appeal. The Revenue carried the matter further in appeal to the Tribunal which agreed with the view of the Commissioner. The Tribunal relied upon the decision of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-28-1998
Reported in: [2000]244ITR521(Mad)
N.V. Balasubramanian, J. 1. The following questions of law have been referred to us for our opinion with reference to the income of the assessee for various assessment years ranging from 1970-71 to 1979-80 :Tax Cases Nos. 789 to 795 of 1987 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and having regard to the provisions of Section 37(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding and had valid materials to hold that the circuit house maintained by the assessee was not a guest housB and that the expenditure on such house and depreciation could not be disallowed under Section 37(4)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in the assessment for the assessment years 1970-71 to 1976-77 ?' Tax Cases Nos. 590 and 591 of 1987 : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is entitled to depreciation on roads inside the factory 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »