Chennai Court May 1998 Judgments
Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Investment Trust of India Ltd ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-26-1998
Reported in: (1998)62TTJ(Mad)763
ORDERP. K. BANSAL, AM:These appeals, the former by the Revenue and the latter by the assessee, are consolidated and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience.ITA No. 32471Mad/19892. The first ground of appeal is general in nature. The second ground of appeal regarding the allowance by the CIT(A) of the assessee's claim for investment allowance stands dismissed as it is fully covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Shaan Finance (P) Ltd. (1998) 146 CTR (SC) 110: (1998) 97 Taxman 435 (SC).3. The third ground of appeal relates to the deletion of the disallowance of Rs. 3,13,582 by the CIT(A), which was incurred by the assessee for publication of statutory insertion for the purpose of inviting deposits from the public. The learned Departmental Representative relied on the order of the AO. After hearing both the sides we are inclined to agree with the CIT(A). Under law statutory insertions are required to be published in the newspapers ...
Tag this Judgment!Tamil Manila Thozhilalar Sangam, Rep. by Its General Secretary K. Nity ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-05-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)CTC1; (1998)IIMLJ580
ORDERJudgement Pronounced by Shivaraj Patil, J.1. These cases are placed before us for disposal on reference made by a Division Bench of this Court on 10.1.1996.2. The question that came up for consideration before the Division Bench was, whether the canteen run in the second respondent factory, which is statutorily obligatory, can be treated as part and parcel of the establishment of the management, or it can be treated as an independent entity, not coming under the management, and thereby the workmen working therein not becoming the members of the establishment of the management.3. A Division Bench of this Court, in Workmen Employed in the Canteen Run by S.R.F. Ltd., Madras v. Government of Tamil Nadu and others, 1995 (1) L.L.N. 487 took the view that the canteen is run by the contractor or a co-operative society; the employer in relation to the workers engaged in the canteen will be the contractor or the society, as the case may be, and not the proprietor of the factory, and in such...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›