Chennai Court December 2002 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Textool Co. Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-03-2002
Reported in: (2004)186CTR(Mad)501
N.V. Balasubramanian, J.1. The Tribunal has stated a case at the instance of the Revenue and referred the following question of law in relation to the assessment year 1986-87 of the assessee:-Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in allowing depreciation on the capitalised amount payable in installments, in respect of capitalised assets under the deferred payment scheme? 2. The assessee is a company and it has borrowed some loans under the deferred payment scheme. The assessee capitalised the future interest payable on loans availed by the assessee and claimed depreciation on the capitalised value. The Assessing Officer in his assessment proceedings, did not allow the capitalisation of future interest payable in view of Explanation 8 to Section 43(1) of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on appeal allowed the appeal preferred by the assessee directing the Assessi...
NLC Contractors' Sangam Reg. No. 77/92-SA rep. by Its General Secretar ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-03-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)CTC161
ORDERR. Balasubramanian, J. 1. The writ petitioner challenges the validity of Condition No. 16 found incorporated in the tender floated by the first respondent calling for bids in respect of 'Annual Maintenance Contract' (AMC) as violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and being opposed to principles of public tender laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. The Neyveli Lignite Corporation, hereinafter referred to as the 'Corporation', annually invites persons to submit tenders for awarding Annual Maintenance Contracts (AMC) and non-Maintenance Contracts (NMC). 'NMC' contracts are described as 'A' Schedule contracts and 'AMC' contracts are described as 'B' Schedule contracts. There is an annexure to the tender form issued for awarding 'AMC' contracts, Condition No. 16 with the note meant only for 'B' Schedule contracts is under attack in the writ petition, condition No. 16 in the tender is extracted hereunder:'16. Cases of Equal Binding: In case of equal bidding, th...
Cit Vs. Ponni Sugars and Chemicals Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-03-2002
Reported in: [2003]260ITR605(Mad); [2003]129TAXMAN231(Mad)
N.V. Balasubramanian, J.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has stated a case and referred the following questions of law in relation to the assessment years 1986-87 to 1988-89 :'1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the incentive provided by the Government of India and also subsidy given by the State Government are capital receipts not liable to tax?2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal is correct in law in holding that there is diversion of income and the said receipts cannot be treated as part of the income of the assessee?3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the amounts transferred to Molasses Storage Fund under statutory obligation will not form part of the assessees total income?'2. Insofar as the first question of law referred to us is concerned, it is fairly stated by the counsel for the revenue that the incen...
Cit Vs. Textool Co. Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-03-2002
Reported in: [2003]263ITR523(Mad)
N.V. Balasubramanian, J.The Tribunal has stated a case at the instance of the revenue and referred the following question of law in relation to the assessment year 1986-87 of the assessee :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in allowing depreciation on the capitalised amount payable in instalments, in respect of capitalised assets under the deferred payment scheme ?'2. The assessee is a company and it has borrowed some loans under the deferred payment scheme. The assessee capitalised the future interest payable on loans availed of by the assessee and claimed depreciation on the capitalised value. The assessing officer in his assessment proceedings, did not allow the capitalisation of future interest payable in view of Explanation 8 to section 43(1) of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The Commissioner (Appeals) on appeal allowed the appeal preferred by the assessee directing the assessing officer t...
E.K. Haj Mohammadmeera Sahib and Sons Vs. the Regional Director, Emplo ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-03-2002
Reported in: [2003(96)FLR1174]; (2003)ILLJ1041Mad; (2003)1MLJ497
R. Jayasimha Babu, J. 1. The employer is in appeal. The employer contends that the wages paid to casual labour employed in unloading raw hides and skins brought to its factory premises by the transporter is not an expenditure on which an employer is liable to pay any contribution. The employer claims that it is the driver of the lorry who brings workmen required for unloading the raw hides and skins, such unloading being done within the premises of the factory and that the transportation charges which includes the payments to be made to those labourers is paid to the driver who in turn disburses the wages to the casual labourers employed for the purpose of unloading. 2. The learned single Judge has disbelieved the claim of the appellant that the casual labourer engaged for unloading were in fact hired by the driver of the lorry. The learned Judge has taken the view that as the bringing of raw hides and skins to the appellant's factory premises is a continuing requirement in order to ke...
Om Sindhoori Capital Investments Ltd. Vs. Joint Cit
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-03-2002
Reported in: [2003]130TAXMAN392(Mad)
ORDERN.V. Balasubramanian, J.In connection with the balance of tax of Rs. 17,86,464 and interest or Rs. 16,76,850 the learned counsel for the assessee has produced before us a chart, which shows that the tax amount due as on date is Rs. 14,86,464 and the interest payable is Rs. 16,76,850.2. We heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned senior standing counsel for the revenue. We are of the view that the interests of justice would be met by directing the petitioner herein to pay the balance amount of tax of Rs. 14,86,464 by instalments of Rs. 75,000 per mensem and the first instalment shall be paid on or before 15-12-2002 and the subsequent instalments shall be paid on or before 15th of every succeeding month till the balance of tax amount is paid in full. There will be stay of the collection of the interest amount of Rs. 16,76,850 pending disposal of the Tax Case. However, it is made clear that if the petitioner commits default in the payment of any one of the instalm...
Cwt Vs. L. Dorairaj
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-03-2002
Reported in: [2003]130TAXMAN490(Mad)
ORDERN.V. Balasubramanian, J.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has stated the case and referred the following question of law in relation to the assessment years 1974-75 & 1975-76 for our consideration.'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in deleting the additional wealth tax charged on urban properties when the ownership of the properties vests with the appellant?'2. Mr. Philip George undertakes to file vakalat for the respondent.3. Mrs. Pushya Sitharaman, learned senior standing counsel appearing for the revenue fairly submitted that the issue raised in the question is covered against the revenue by the decision of this court in CWT v. C. G. Radhakrishnan : [1994]210ITR1016(Mad) . It is relevant to notice that the Full Bench of the Karnataka High Court in CWT v. D.M. Srinivas : [2001]248ITR406(KAR) has followed the view taken by this court in C.G. Radhakrishnan's case (supra) and held as under :'...Therefore, while computing the ne...
Cit Vs. New Horizon Sugar Mills (P) Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-03-2002
Reported in: [2003]129TAXMAN229(Mad)
ORDERN.V. Balasubramanian, J.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has stated the case and referred the following question of law in relation to the assessment year 1985-86 of the assessee for our consideration :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the amount set apart by the assessee towards Molasses Storage Reserve Fund should be excluded from its total income?'2. It is stated by Mrs. Pushya Sitaraman, learned senior standing counsel appearing for the revenue that the issue raised in the question is covered against the revenue by the decision of this court against the CIT v. New Horizon Sugar Mills (P) Ltd. : [2000]244ITR738(Mad) , wherein this court has held that the amount set apart towards molasses storage reserve fund is liable to be excluded from the total income of the assessee.3. Accordingly, following the said decision, we answer the question of law referred to us in the affirmative in favour of the assessee ...
Cit Vs. Viners Industries
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-03-2002
Reported in: [2003]130TAXMAN492(Mad)
N.V. Balasubramanian, J.In pursuance of the directions of this court, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has stated a case and referred the following question of law :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the income of the trust should not be assessed in the status of association of persons?'2. The assessment years involved are 1985-86 to 1989-90.3. Learned counsel appearing for the revenue in his fairness submits that the issue raised in the common questions is covered against the revenue by the decision of this court in CIT v. Venu Suresh Sheela Trust : [1998]233ITR99(Mad) . We are of the view that it is a case of a Trust and the shares of the beneficiaries are specified and known and, therefore, it cannot be assessed as association of persons under the provisions of section 161 and 161(1A) of the Income Tax Act. We have also taken a similar view in T.C. Nos. 210 and 211 of 1998 [CIT v. M/s. Mecca Trust] dat...
Cit Vs. Paulson Litho Works
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-03-2002
Reported in: [2003]132TAXMAN57(Mad)
K. Raviraja Pandian, J.Pursuant to the order of this court dated 13-3-1998 in T.C.P. Nos. 441 to 444 of 1997, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal set out the case and referred the following questions of law for our consideration :'1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal erred in law in not holding that the amounts of sales tax on printing receipts collected by the assessee formed part of the assessees trading receipts in view of the ratio of the Supreme Courts decisions in the case of Chowringhee Sales Bureau (P) Ltd v. CIT : [1973]87ITR542(SC) and Sinclair Murray Co. (P) Ltd v. CIT : [1974]97ITR615(SC) ?2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the essentials of the deposits are present in this case, overlooking that the liability of the assessee to return the amount to the parties arises only if and when the High Court allows the petition filed by the assessee in thi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »