Chennai Court September 2001 Judgments
Ecof Detergents (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commercial Tax Officer and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-17-2001
Reported in: (2002)1MLJ174; [2004]138STC367(Mad)
ORDERR. Jayasimha Babu, J.1. Petitioners in W.P. Nos. 7299, 7300 to 7303 of 2000 Scientific Compounds and Process Pvt. Ltd., manufacture and market under the brand name 'Sabena' a powder which contains a detergent Alkyl Benzene sulphonic Acid to the extent of 2.01 per cent of the products 8.03 per cent moisture and volatile matters and 82.69 per cent matter insoluble in water. The additives added to the detergent are mainly abrasives. They are water insoluble such as talc, silica feldspar, chalk, quartz and sand. This mixture is sold in powder form and is used primarily for cleansing utensils. It is a cleansing material. This product is hand made.2. The other four petitioners, viz. M/s. Ecof Detergents (P) Ltd., M/s. Vivid Detergents (P) Ltd., M/s. Sabena Detergents (P) Ltd. and M/s. Alpha Detergents (P) Ltd., are all licensees who also manufacture the same product and market the same. All of them are the first sellers of the product.3. Scientific Compounds and Process Private Limited,...
Tag this Judgment!The Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by Its Secretary, Department of Sch ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-14-2001
Reported in: AIR2002Mad195
ORDERV.S. Sirpurkar, J.1. This common judgment will dispose of all the above mentioned writ appeals filed by the State Government challenging the judgment of the learned single Judge (S.S. Subramani, J.) whereby, the learned single Judge set aside the orders passed by the State Government refusing to give 'No Objection' for opening up Teacher Training Institutions made on behalf of number of educational institutions. Some institutions have filed writ petitions wherein they have claimed a writ to the State Government to grant 'No Objection Certificate' to start Teacher Training Institutes. W.A. No. 10300 of 1999 is filed challenging the dismissal of the writ petition of above mentioned nature while, W.A.No. 538 of 2000 is filed challenging a judgment whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed by a learned single Judge (D. Murugesan, J.) in favour of the State Government. The above-mentioned writ petitions came to be tagged along with the pending writ appeals filed b...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. A. Viswanathan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-14-2001
Reported in: [2002]256ITR227(Mad)
A. Subbulbulakshmy, J. 1. The assessee is a Hindu undivided family. It constructed a house property at M. R. C. Nagar, Santhome, Madras. The construction was completed in February, 1984, and it was occupied by the assessee for residential purpose immediately after the completion of the construction. For the assessment years 1984-85 to 1987-88, the assessee returned the value of the property at Rs. 14,92,964, Rs. 2,03,123, Rs. 1,91,663 and Rs. 1,91,663, respectively. The Wealth-tax Officer took the value of the property at Rs. 35,39,844, Rs. 40,27,951, Rs. 46,19,685 and Rs. 61,98,557, respectively, in accordance with the Valuation Officer's valuation.2. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) ordered to compute the value of the property by applying Rule 1BB for the assessment year 1984-85 and directed that the same value should be repeated for the assessment years 1985-86 to 1987-88 in view of the provisions of Section 7(4) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957.3. The Department preferred appeals t...
Tag this Judgment!Management of I.T. Diamond ChaIn Ltd. Vs. Presiding Officer, Ii Additi ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-14-2001
Reported in: (2002)IILLJ1022Mad
A. Packiakaj, J.1. This appeal arises out of the orders passed in Writ Petition No. 859 of 1991, dated July 23, 1996, dismissing the writ petition.2. The prayer in the writ petition is for quashing the award passed in I.P. No. 233 of 1984 dated May 22, 1990, and directing the reinstatement of the second respondent SriL.N. Swaminathan by name with consequential benefits, passed by the Labour Court.3. The facts of the case as disclosed in the affidavit are as follows: Sri L. Swaminathan was an employee in the category of setter operator in the bush forming Section of the petitioner-company. The work of a setter operator is to attend to the machine, feed the metal strips, start the machines and remove the finished products. It appears that in the month of August-October 1982, there was a fall in the production and hence a notice dated September 21, 1982, was issued by the works manager wherein it has been stated that the workmen concerned still persisted in wilful and deliberate slowing d...
Tag this Judgment!Management of Seeranaickenpalayam Weaver's Co-operative Production and ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-14-2001
Reported in: (2003)ILLJ666Mad
P. Sathasivam, J. 1. The writ appeal has been filed by the management against the order of the learned single Judge, dated July 5, 1996, and made in W.P. No. 7130 of 1987, wherein the learned Judge directed the management to reinstate the workman in service with consequential benefits. 2. For the convenience, we shall refer the parties as arrayed in the writ petition. The writ-petitioner was employed in the first respondent-society. He was assigned with clerical works like maintaining Tapal Register, Books, Forms, Stocks Register, Telephone Register etc. According to him, due to ill- health, he was on medical leave from July 5, 1982 to August 5, 1982. At that time, the union served charter of demand to the first respondent demanding revision of wages, filling up of existing vacancies of salesman. Since there was some misunderstanding between the petitioner and the Vice-President and another co-worker, N. Chandrasekar, they were called by the Vice-President and one of the Board of Direc...
Tag this Judgment!Popular Thread Factory Vs. Commercial Tax Officer and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-14-2001
Reported in: [2001]124STC569(Mad)
ORDERR. Jayasimha babu, J. 1. Despite the law having been declared by this Court in more than one decision that sewing thread is cotton yarn ; that it does not lose its character as such yarn by reason of the use to which it is put and that it is taxable as declared goods at single point and not multi point as general goods, the State has nevertheless sought to tax sewing thread not as declared goods but as general goods, under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959.2. The decisions of this Court are to be found in State of Tamil Nadu v. R.V. Krishniah Chetty and Sons [1994] 92 STC 262 and State of Tamil Nadu v. R.V. Krishniah Chetty and Sons [1990] 78 STC 422. Both these decisions were rendered by a Bench comprising of Mr. Justice Venkataswami and Mr. Justice Raju (as they then were). The Government was very much a party to those judgments. We are informed that those judgments have become final, no appeal having been preferred against the same. The Tribunal in this case has chosen...
Tag this Judgment!Appollo Saline Pharmaceuticals (P) Limited Vs. Deputy Commercial Tax O ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-14-2001
Reported in: [2002]125STC500(Mad)
ORDERR. Jayasimha Babu, J.1. The turnover of bottles containing intravenous fluids (I.V. fluids), manufactured and marketed by the assessee, is included in the turnover relating to the fluids, by reason of Section 3(7) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, which, inter alia, provides thus :'............where goods are sold or purchased together with the containers or packing materials the turnover of such goods shall include the price, cost or value of such containers or packing materials, and the packing charges, whether such price, cost or value or packing charges, are charged separately or not, and tax shall be levied thereon at the rate applicable to the goods contained or packed as if such containers or packing materials were the parts of the goods sold or purchased.'2. This provision thus deems the container to be part of the contents for the purpose of determination of the total turnover and provides for the levy of tax on the whole of such turnover at the rate at which...
Tag this Judgment!South India Corporation Ltd. Vs. Commercial Tax Officer and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-14-2001
Reported in: [2001]124STC654(Mad)
ORDERR. Jayasimha babu, J.1. The assessee had opted to pay tax on the total contract value in respect of civil works executed by it under contract the option having been given by Section 7C of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as 'the TNGST Act') which provision was meant as an alternative mode of discharging the liability for tax on transfer of goods involved in works contract, the levy of which is provided for under Section 3B of the Act.2. By reason of the amendment effected to the Constitution in Article 466 and the introduction of Clause (29A) thereunder, the scope of the words 'tax on the sale or purchase of goods' was expanded to include, inter alia, 'the tax on the transfer of property in goods (whether as goods or in some other forms) involved in the execution of works contract'. After that amendment to the Constitution the State Act had been amended and Section 3-B was introduced in 1986, which was recast and substituted in the year 1993 by A...
Tag this Judgment!Ruchi Worldwide Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-13-2001
Reported in: 2002(141)ELT18(Mad)
ORDERD. Murugesan, J. 1. The petitioners in W.P. Nos. 15393 to 15395 of 2001 have sought for a writ of declaration declaring the Notification No. 36/2001-Cus. (N.T.), dated 3-8-2001 issued by the 1st respondent as null and void, arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional. The petitioners have also filed W.M.P. Nos. 22829 to 22831 of 2001 for interim directions directing the respondents 2 and 3 to release the goods covered by Bill of Entry Nos. 023823 and 023831, dated 2-8-2001 and Bill of Entry No. 023862, dated 3-8-2001 respectively. The writ petitions had been admitted on 27-8-2001 and notices had been ordered in all the W.M.Ps.2. Mr. Sudhir Gupta, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners in W.P. Nos. 15393 to 15395 of 2001 in support of the directions sought for in the writ miscellaneous petitions submitted that the petitioners in W.M.P. Nos. 22829 and 22830 of 2001 submitted their bill of entries for home consumption on 2-8-2001 and the same was assessed for payment of duty. In s...
Tag this Judgment!Rallis India Limited Vs. Assistant Collector of C. Ex., Coonoor
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-13-2001
Reported in: 2002(81)ECC700; 2002(139)ELT265(Mad)
V.S. Sirpurkar, J. 1. The Writ Appeal is against the order of the learned single Judge, whereby, the writ petition was dismissed. Learned single Judge had also given a direction, while dismissing the writ petition, that the petitioner be given liberty to approach the Appellate Forum under the Act for the denial of refund, if they were advised to do so. 2. The writ petition pertained to applications made for refund of a sum of Rs. 81,81,031.48. The said refund applications seem to have been made on two dates, they being 8-12-1988 and 14-5-1990. There is a short factual background to this controversy. It is an admitted position that the claim of the petitioners was accepted right up to the Supreme Court. In fact, the claim was accepted by the Collector of Central Excise in Appeal No. 469 of 1982, dated 21-12-1983. On that basis, the petitioners also had stopped payment of duties, but were directed to pay duties on the ground that the order of the Collector dated 21-2-1983 was challenged ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »