Chennai Court October 2002 Judgments
Honesty Engineers and Contractors Trust Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-09-2002
Reported in: (2003)181CTR(Mad)321
ORDERR. Jayasimha Babu, J. 1. The assessee carries on business under the name of Honesty Engineering and Contractors Trust. The assessee made a declaration on the 10th of October, 1968, before the magistrate at Pondicherry declaring that business is being carried on by him for the sole benefit of the Aurobindo Ashram. Later, he executed a deed of trust on the 21st of June, 1972, in which it was set out that he was a sole trustee; that the business was held in trust and that the sole beneficiary thereof is the Aurobindo Ashram, Pondicherry. The object of the trust was stated to be the contribution to and aid in perpetuity of Shri Aurobindo Ashram Trust and its various activities and institutions including Aurobindo International Centre of Education and other charitable institutions. The trust was irrecoverable. In case of winding up or closure of the business under any circumstances and for any case whatsoever, the whole of the surplus of the assets of the business is to be offered and ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Gitanjali Mills Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-09-2002
Reported in: [2004]265ITR681(Mad)
R. Jayasimha Babu J.1. The questions referred to us at the instance or the Revenue, for our consideration are :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that the expenditure incurred by the assessee during the accounting year on replacement of machinery at Rs. 63,80,131 was amount paid on current repairs and was allowable under Section 31 of the Act ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in deducting the expenditure incurred on purchase of ring frames while computing the book profits under Section 115J ?' 2. The assessment year is 1990-91.3. The Tribunal, followed the considered order made by it for the assessment year 1979-80 in respect of the same assessee, which order has become final. T.C. P. No. 86 of 1986 filed by the Revenue seeking a reference having been rejected by it has held that the expenditure incurred by the assessee on the replacement...
Tag this Judgment!M.S. Abdul Hameed Vs. S.M. Sheik Mohammed,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-08-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Mad179; (2003)1MLJ216
ORDERV. Kanagaraj, J. 1. This revision petition filed by the petitioner in Wakf O.P. No. 22/2000 as against the fair and decretal order dated 26.4.2001 made in I.A. No. 186/2000 in the said Wakf O.P. by the Court of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Nagapattinam, on certain grounds as broughtforth in the grounds of revision petition. 2. The application in I.A. No. 186/2000 had been filed in Wakf O.P. No. 22/2000 by the defendants 1 to 5 under Section 83(5) of the Wakf Act 1995 read with Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. for want of statutory notice under section 89 of the Wakf Act thereby praying to reject the Wakf O.P. No. 22/2000. 3. The Court below i.e., the Court of Principal Subordinate Judge, Nagapattinam, in its order dated 26.4.2001 would not only trace the facts and circumstances of the case to the effect that on the part of the petitioners they would come forward to file this application on the grounds that the respondents have filed the main Wakf O.P. No. 22/2000 seeking to cancel the n...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by Its Secretary to Government, Environm ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-08-2002
Reported in: I(2003)BC216
F.M. Ibrahim Kalifulla, J.1. We heard the learned counsel for the Appellant as well as the Respondent.The short question that arises for consideration in this Writ Appeal is as to the interpretation of Clause 30 of Sandalwood Sale Notice Conditions in respect of Tirupattur Forest Sandalwood Sale Depot in North Arcot Ambedkar District in Rc.No.4255/96 S.2. The said Clause 30 reads as under:'30.The successful bidder shall not withdraw his bid provided orders accepting his bid are issued within sixty days from the date of sale. If the successful bidder withdraws his offer the sandalwood will be resold at his risk and any loss that may be sustained by the Government on that account of such resale shall be made good by the defaulter but he will not be entitled to any profit that the Government may derive from such resale.'3. As per the said clause, a successful bidder cannot withdraw his bid if his bid had been accepted within sixty days from the date of sale and orders accepting his bid ar...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. T.i. and M. Sales Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-08-2002
Reported in: (2003)181CTR(Mad)461; [2003]259ITR116(Mad)
K. Raviraja Pandian, J.1. In the above two tax cases, the common question referred to us for our opinion is as follows :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the amount received by the assessee on the termination of distributorship agreement is only a capital receipt and hence not includible in the assessee's total income ?'The assessment years are 1986-87 and 1987-88, respectively.2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a non-industrial company and has been distributing on principal to principal basis, the products of three companies, viz., (1) Tube Investments of India Limited, (2) T. I. Miller Limited, and (3) T. I. Diamond Chain Ltd., from May 1, 1964, by means of a distribution agreement entered into between them. The distribution agreement so entered into was periodically renewed and the last one was dated October 21, 1983, renewed for a period of five years from that date. The said dis...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. V.G.P. Foundation
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-08-2002
Reported in: (2003)183CTR(Mad)330; [2003]262ITR187(Mad)
R. Jayasimha Babu , J.1. The question referred to us at the instance of the Revenue is :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the amount of Rs. 53,950 was utilised for charitable purposes when there is no application for accumulation of income or option exercised by the assessee ?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the amount utilised for construction of hospital building after the close of the accounting year can be treated as application of income in the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1987-88 ?(3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the amount lying as advance with a sister concern of the assessee can be treated as not violating the provisions of Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 11(5) of the Act ?'2. The assessment year is 1...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Viswanathan and Co.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-07-2002
Reported in: (2003)181CTR(Mad)335
ORDERR. Jayasimha Babu, J.1.The question referred to us, at the instance of the Revenue, for our consideration is : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the cash assistance, duty drawback and air subsidy should be treated as income 'derived from' the industrial undertaking and included in the business income for the purpose of deduction under Section 80HH of the IT Act, 1961?' The asst. yr. is 1986-87. 2. The items referred to in the question are matters which have been considered in the decision of this Court in the case of CIT v. Jameel Leathers & Uppers (2000) 246 TR 97 (Mad). The Court held that cash assistance, duty drawback and import entitlements though undoubtedly attributable to business carried on by the assessee as the assessee would not have been in a position to receive any of those benefits, had the assessee not been carrying on business, it cannot be said that such income was 'derived from' business as to qua...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. N.S.C. Shoes
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-07-2002
Reported in: (2003)179CTR(Mad)524; [2002]258ITR749(Mad)
R. Jayasimha Babu, J.1. The question referred to us, at the instance of the Revenue, for our consideration is, 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that interest on amount deposited as guarantee fund forms part of profit derived from the export business and should be included in the profit of the assessment for computing deductions under Sections 80HH, 80HHC and 80-I ?'. The assessment year is 1986-87.2. The interest that the assessee derived on the deposits that it had made with the bank, which deposits had been made for the purpose of opening the letters of credit for the purpose of import of material, has been held by the Tribunal to be an amount which is not derived from the industrial undertaking for the purpose of Sections 80HH, 80HHC and 80-I. While that decision is correct in so far as Sections 80HH and 80-I are concerned as in the case of CIT v. Jameel Leathers and Uppers : [2000]246ITR97(Mad) , it has been he...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. V. Sekar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-07-2002
Reported in: [2003]129TAXMAN226(Mad)
K. Raviraja Pandian, J.The question referred to us at the instance of the revenue is :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that 80% of the additional conveyance allowance should be allowed as a deduction?'The assessment year is 1986-87.2. The assessee is Development Officer in Life Insurance Corporation. The assessee claimed that additional conveyance allowance received by him should be allowed as a deduction. The assessing officer rejected that claim. On appeal by the assessee, the Deputy Commissioner, following its earlier decision has held that 2096 of additional conveyance allowance should be allowed as a deduction. The Appellate Tribunal following the decision of the Tribunal held that 8096 of the additional conveyance allowance should be allowed as a deduction. Hence, the reference at the instance of the revenue.3. The issue involved in this case has already been considered by this court in the case of CIT v. P. Aran...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. Soft Beverage (P) Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-07-2002
Reported in: [2003]129TAXMAN227(Mad)
ORDERK. Raviraja Pandian, J.The question referred is,'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the increase in the credit balance in the deposit on containers account should not be regarded as partaking the character of the trading receipts of the assessee ?'The assessment year is 1987-88.2. The assessee is a company engaged in the manufacture of soft drinks in the name of Torino. In the assessment proceedings, the assessing officer found that there was increase in the security deposit in respect of bottles and crates, and the assessee also has claimed depreciation in respect of those bottles and crates and on that score, the assessing officer treated the receipt as a trade receipt.3. On appeal, the Commissioner of Appeals confirmed the same. However, the Tribunal rejected the views taken by the assessing officer and following the earlier decision of the assessees own case has accepted the contention o...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »