Chennai Court December 2001 Judgments
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Tmt. Rajakumari and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-10-2001
Reported in: III(2002)ACC23
Prabha Sridevan, J.1. The insurer is the appellant. An order was passed against the appellant for a sum of Rs. 1,84,800/-. The claimant was the mother of the deceased. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal found that the driver of the bus belonging to the second respondent was negligent. The award was passed only against the insurer and not the second respondent/insured.2. Mr. R. Yashod Vardhan, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant would first submit that the event was not an accident, but an act of God because the accident occurred on account of the tree that fell down on the road and not because of the negligence of the driver. His next submission was the quantum fixed was excessive since the Court below failed to see the claimant was the mother and, therefore, a lower multiplier ought to have been applied. He also submitted that if this Court came to the conclusion that the insurer cannot raise any ground regarding quantum, the error in the award shall be rectified by invoking O...
Tag this Judgment!Cwt Vs. P.D. Jai Shankar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-10-2001
Reported in: (2002)178CTR(Mad)408
R. Jayasimha Babu, J.The questions referred to us at the instance of the revenue for the assessment years 1985-86 to 1987-88 are :1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in cancelling the order under section 25(2) passed by CWT on the ground that there was non-inclusion of compensation and interest amount by the assessee in net wealth ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in not concluding that the element of enhanced compensation receivable along with accrued interest are asset so as to be includible in the net wealth of the assessee following the Supreme Court's ruling in the case of Rama Bai v. CIT & Ors. : [1990]181ITR400(SC) ?2. The enhanced compensation along with interest accrued therein payable by the State for the acquisition of the petitioner's land, the enhancement having been effected in an award, on a reference made under the Land Acquisition Act, was sought to be i...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. Elgi Equipment Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-10-2001
Reported in: (2002)176CTR(Mad)305
R. Jayasimha Babu, J.One question has been referred to us at the instance of the revenue and two questions have been referred at the instance of the assessee. The assessment years are 1981-82 to 1983-84. The assessee is a manufacturer of air compressors, air horns, hydraulic lifts, car washers, etc. The assessee during the assessment year 1981-82 had changed its method of accounting in respect of the export cash assistance, from accrual to actual basis and followed mercantile system in respect of other items. Such a changeover was made for a better understanding of the profit earned by the assessee. As the amount was not being regularly received without any variation between the amount sought for and the amount granted, it was considered convenient to follow the accrual basis as the method of accounting, in respect of the export cash assistance.2. The assessing officer took the view that it was impermissible for the assessee to change the mode of accounting in that manner. That view wa...
Tag this Judgment!Shipping Corporation Represented by Its General Manager, Mumbai and an ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-2001
Reported in: (2002)1MLJ430
ORDER1. The Shipping Corporation of India has filed all these revisions. The petitioner is the defendant in O.S.No. 5100 of 2001. Interim injunction was granted restraining the termination of agency in I.A.No. 14780 of 2001. C.R.P.No. 3278 of 2001 is against the order passed in I.A.No. 15301 of 2001 which was for suspension of the interim injunction granted in I.A.No. 14780 of 2001. C.R.P.SR.No. 85896 of 2001 is filed invoking Article 227 of the Constitution of India for dismissing the suit O.S.No. 5100 of 2001. CR.P.SR.No. 85899 of 2001 is filed invoking Article 227 of the Constitution of India for dismissing the suit O.S.No. 4849 of 2001, which is also filed by the respondent. 2. The petitioner appointed the respondent herein as its Steamship agent. The agreement which forms the substratum of the relationship between the parties is dated 3.6.1988. According to the agreement, Article 31, the appointment of the respondent would be in force for a period of six months subject to review a...
Tag this Judgment!The Warden Cum Principal, Students Hostel, Government Engineering Coll ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-2001
Reported in: [2002(92)FLR1148]; (2002)1MLJ330
ORDER1. Aggrieved by the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Labour (Authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948), dated 24.5.94. in M.W.No. 70 of 1993, granting minimum rates of wages to the applicants 1 to 43 respondents 2 to 44 herein, as fixed by the Government in G.O. (2D) No. 43 dated 7.10.91, the Warden-cum-Principal, Students' Hostel, Government Engineering College, Salem has filed the above writ petition.2. According to the petitioner, the Government Engineering College, Salem is an institution run by the Government of Tamil Nadu. The curriculum imparted by the petitioner college to the students of that college is in accordance with the instructions of the University of Madras and for all other administrative purposes, the petitioner college follows the various circulars, notifications and instructions issued by the Director of Technical Education, Government of Tamil Nadu, Madras-25. Hostel facilities are provided to the students studying in the college and a Mess also functi...
Tag this Judgment!Senthamarai Vs. S. Krishnaraj and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ2375
ORDER1. S. Krishnaraj, the husband becomes an approver against his own wife Senthamarai in a criminal proceeding. Having failed in her attempt to prevent the trial Court from tendering pardon to her husband and declaring him as an approver, the petitioner/wife is before this Court through this criminal revision petition challenging the order granting pardon. 2. On the complaint of one Dhanalakshmi Ammal, a case was registered against the petitioner Senthamarai and her husband Krishnaraj and others alleging that they fabricated false and forged documents, the Will and Deed of Assumption with forged signature of the said Dhanalakshtni Animal and her husband Nataraj Chettiar in order to get the entire properties in favour of Senthamarai and to have total control over the Institutions run by the Trust and got it registered with the Sub-Registrar at Rajapalayam on 4.7.1995. After finishing investigation, on 18.11.1999 the charge sheet was filed against Senthamarai/wife, Krishnaraj/husband, ...
Tag this Judgment!Ramu and Co. Vs. Egmore Benefit Society Ltd. and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-2001
Reported in: [2002]255ITR120(Mad)
ORDER UNDER SECTION 269UDDifference between sale price and market value more than 15 per centCatch Note:Merely because sale price was less than the market value by 15 per cent, Income Tax Department was not legally bound to purchase immovable property--Unless the authorities came to the conclusion that there were good reasons for acquiring the property' the right of pre-emptive purchase cannot be acquired by the department.Ratio:Merely because sale price was less than the market value by 15 per cent, Income Tax Department was not legally bound to purchase immovable property--Unless the authorities came to the conclusion that there were good reasons for acquiring the property' the right of pre-emptive purchase cannot be acquired by the department.Application:Also to current assessment year.Decision:In favour of department.1Cases Referred:C. B. Gautam v. Union of India (1993) 199 ITR 530 (SC)Income Tax Act 1961 s.269UD A.K. Rajan, J.1. The petition has been filed to review the order pass...
Tag this Judgment!The South India Hosiery Manufacturers Association Vs. Textiles Committ ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-2001
Reported in: AIR2002Mad220; (2002)1MLJ391
ORDERP. Sathasivam, J. 1. The South India Hosiery Manufacturers Association has filed the above writ petition to issue a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents from subjecting the members of the petitioner Association to the liability of payment of Cess under the provisions of Section 5-A of the Textiles Committee Act, 1963, read with Rules 4 to 8 of the Textiles Committee (Cess) Rules, 1975. 2. It is seen that the members of the petitioner Association are the manufacturers of textiles (garments) and they have registered as members in the Association. The Textiles Committee Act and Cess Rules, 1975 have been notified in the Official Gazette of India and it is obligatory on the part of each and every manufacturer of textiles to file monthly returns under Rule 4 of the Textiles Committee (Cess) Rules. 1975. The levy of Cess is meant to be a one stage ad-valorem levy, payable at any stage or when the final clearance takes place from the mills. According to the petitioner, the quantit...
Tag this Judgment!Guindy Machine Tools P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-06-2001
Reported in: (2002)176CTR(Mad)56; [2002]254ITR780(Mad)
R. Jayasimha Babu, J.1. Two questions have been referred to us one at the instance of the assessee and one at the instance of the Revenue. The assessment year is 1986-87.2. The question referred to us at the instance of the assessee who is a manufacturer of machine tools is,'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the interest paid under Section 139(8) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is to be allowed as a deduction under Section 80V and Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'3. This question is required to be answered against the assessee in the light of the decision of the Supreme-Court in the case of Bharat Commerce and Industries Ltd. v. CIT : [1998]230ITR733(SC) , wherein it was held that interest levied under Section 139 of the Income-tax Act for delay in filing the return and interest levied under Section 215 of the Act for failure to pay the advance tax up to the statutory percentage, are not allowable deductions as 'business expenditure' under Section 37 o...
Tag this Judgment!Sankar Pandi Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-06-2001
Reported in: 2002(83)ECC22; 2002(141)ELT635(Mad)
ORDERP.K. Misra, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner in this Writ Petition is aggrieved by the orders passed directing the petitioner to pay penalty regarding payment of redemption value for the articles which are brought from Singapore. Subsequently, the petitioner contended that he is no longer interested to take return for the purpose of use or consumption within India, but he wanted to re-export the same. Therefore, he prayed that he need not pay any redemption value. No order has been passed in the revision petition where such prayer has been made. Hence, the present Writ Petition has been filed.3. It appears that the question relating to re-export is covered by the decision of the Supreme Court rendered in the case of Siemens Limited v. Collector of Customs reported in S.C . Keeping in view the abovesaid decision there cannot be any doubt that the petitioner is entitled to re-export the articles in question and for the abovesaid purpose, it is not nec...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »