Chennai Court July 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.
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. S. Annamalai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-15-2002
Reported in: (2003)181CTR(Mad)450; [2002]258ITR675(Mad)
V.S. Sirpurkar, J.1. Rule returnable forthwith in T. C. No. 170 of 2001. Mr. Janardhana Raja accepts notice for the assessee in T. C. No. 170 of 2001.2. At the outset, the respondent's counsel points out to us, a circular by the Department bearing F. No. 279/126/98-ITJ, dated March 27, 2000, whereby the limits are fixed for filing the appeals or the references, as the case may be, bythe Department. Mr. P. P. S. Janardhana Raja points out and it is not controverted that in the present appeals, the tax liability is shorter than those limits fixed by the circular. There is nothing pointed out to us that the appeals can be covered under the four exceptions given in that circular and that is not the case of the Department also. In that view, we are of the clear opinion that the Department could not have filed these appeals. Such a view has been taken by the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Cameo Colour Co. : [2002]254ITR565(Bom) . We respectfully agree with that view. Even on the mer...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Madura Coats Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-15-2002
Reported in: [2003]263ITR241(Mad)
N.V. Balasubramanian, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has stated a case under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and referred the following questions of law in relation to the assessment year 1980-81 of the assessee :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the claim of the assessee for weighted deduction under Section 35B in respect of bank charges of Rs. 8,68,600 has to be conceded ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the disallowance under Sections 40A(5) and 40(c) was rightly made by the Assessing Officer in respect of the expenditure incurred on the company cars which were used for the personal purposes of the employees and directors ?3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 81,810 incurred by the assessee for shifting its administrative office from Madurai to Bangalore as a result of amalgamation of three companies having number of activities in various centres was allowable as ...
Kancheepuram Central Co-operative Bank Staff Union Vs. Government of T ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-15-2002
Reported in: (2003)ILLJ698Mad
ORDERK.P. Sivasubramaniam, J. 1. In Writ Petition No. 7059 of 1995, the petitioner prays for the issue of a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records of the third respondent Kancheepuram Central Co-operative Bank relating to its proceedings, dated April 15, 1995, and to quash the same, and for mandamus to direct the third respondent not to resort to direct recruitment to the post of Senior Assistants (are designated as Assistants) and Assistant Managers, without complying with the provisions of Sections 9-A and 33(1)(a) of the Industrial Disputes Act. 2. In Writ Petition No. 7060 of 1995, the petitioner prays for the issue of a writ of mandamus to direct the first respondent to refer the industrial dispute between the petitioner-union and third respondent regarding the filling up of the post of senior Assistants, Assistant Manager, under the second proviso to Section 10(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act. 3. A preliminary objection which is taken by the learned counsel for...
Cit Vs. Madura Coats Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-15-2002
Reported in: [2002]125TAXMAN48(Mad)
ORDERN.V. Balasubramanian, J. The Tribunal has stated a case under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and referred the following questions of law in relation to the assessment year 1980-81 of the assessee :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the claim of the assessee for weighted deduction under section 35B in respect of bank charges of Rs. 8,68,600 has to be conceded ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the disallowance under sections 40A(5) and 40(c) was rightly made by the assessing officer in respect of the expenditure incurred on the company cars which were used for the personal purposes of the employees and directors ?3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 81,810 incurred by the assessee for shifting its administrative office from Madurai to Bangalore as a result of amalgamation of three companies having number of activities in various centr...
Assistant Commissioner of Income Vs. R.K. Narayan
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chennai
Decided on: Jul-12-2002
Reported in: (2006)101TTJ(Chennai)1056
1. This appeal is by the Revenue directed against the order of the learned CIT(A), Coimbatore, dt. 5th April, 1989 relating to the asst.yr. 1987-88. The assessee is no more.2. We have heard the learned Departmental Representative. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a distinguished author of several English books which are published in India and outside. Some of his famous books are The Guide, Waiting for Mahatma, Bachelor of Arts, Swami and Friends, The English Teacher, etc. For the past several years, in his capacity as a professional writer, he was associated with an English writer, Mr. Graham Greene. Mr. Graham Greene is a writer of great eminence who has held the first place in English Literature for over half a century and has written over a 100 books and thousands of articles. The assessee and Shri Graham Greene were in touch with each other through correspondence and also meeting each other often in London. The assessee used to preserve all the letters receive...
R. Dorathy Vs. Thangayyan Josephraj,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-12-2002
Reported in: (2002)3MLJ23
1. The opening lines of the judgment of the First Bench of this Court in A.A.O. No.173 of 1969 on 16-07-1975 with regard to the subject matter of the appeal can be repeated today.'This is an unfortunate litigation which is dragged on for nearly a quarter of a century and still there is no immediate prospect of its coming to a satisfactory end.' This appeal arises out of an order passed in an application un der S. 30 of the Land Acquisition Act. 2. The appellants are the claimants. Their claim was resisted by the second respondent on the ground that he had obtained a preliminary decree in a suit for recovery of amounts due on a mortgage and therefore, S. 73(2) of the Transfer of Property Act would apply and he is entitled to lay his claim on the compensation money. The appellant objected to this on two grounds; one was that after the preliminary decree no effort had been taken by the respondent to obtain a final decree and therefore, the right to execute the mortgage decree had become b...
The New India Assurance Company Limited, Trichy by Divisional Manager, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-12-2002
Reported in: [2002]112CompCas7(Mad); (2002)3MLJ39
Prabha Sridevan, J. 1. The appellant-Insurance Company raises two questions. One is the question of limitation and the other is the question of liability. Two clauses in the Insurance Policy, Ex-B1 are relevant to decide this case. For deciding the question of limitation one looks at the third paragraph of Clause 9: 'It is also hereby further expressly agreed and declared that if the Company shall disclaim liability to the insured for any claim hereunder and such claim shall not, within 12 Calendar months from the date of such disclaimer have been made the subject matter of a suit in Court of law, then the claim shall for all purposes be deemed to have been abandoned and shall not thereafter be recoverable hereunder.' 2. For deciding the question of liability. Coverage (A) is relevant. 'Fire and Allied Perils and Theft(buildings and contents) Insurance: If (1) any of the property described under Coverage 'A' in the Schedule hereto belonging to the insured whilst or held in trust on the...
Meirs Pharma India Pvt. Ltd Rep. by Its Director Vs. Union of India (U ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-12-2002
Reported in: 2004(165)ELT24(Mad)
V.S. Sirpurkar, J.1. Petitioner is a company, registered under the Companies Act. It took advantage of the scheme framed by the Government of India, known as 'Export Promotion Capital Good Scheme' under which, the capital goods for manufacturing purposes were allowed to be imported with a concessional rate of duty. There was an export obligation attached to the said concession to the effect that the importer would be liable to export goods worth three times the value of the machinery within four years from the date of first clearance of the machinery.2. A licence was obtained by the petitioner for import of some machinery, the details of which are given in paragraph 3 of the affidavit filed in support of the petition. The value of the said machinery was DM.5,12,126 whereas the export obligation attached to the said licence was US$906262 which was to be fulfilled within four years of the first date of clearance of the consignment which was on 2-12-1991. For the purpose of this, the comp...
The Management of Tiruchengode Agricultural Producers Co-operative Mar ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-12-2002
Reported in: (2002)IIILLJ802Mad; (2002)3MLJ157
ORDERP. Sathasivam, J.1. The Management of Tiruchengode Agricultural Producers Co.operative Marketing Society Ltd., aggrieved by the order of the Inspector of Labour (Authority constituted under the Tamil Nadu Industrial Establishments (Conferment of Permanent Status to Workmen) Act, 1981 in C.P.S.A.No.8319 of 1992 dated 27.09.1995, has filed the above writ petition to quash the same on various grounds.2. The case of the petitioner Society is briefly stated hereunder:The petitioner, the Tiruchengode Agricultural Producers Co.operative Marketing Society is a Co.operative Society governed by the Tamil Nadu Co.operative Societies Act, 1983. The function of the petitioner Society includes the marketing of the agricultural produce such as cotton, groundnut, gingelly, castor seeds, coconuts etc., for fetching maximum fair price to the farmers. The distribution of agricultural inputs like seeds, fertilizers, pesticides, agricultural implements etc., to the farmers and grant of loans to the fa...
K.S. Geetha Vs. Stanleybuck and Dr. P. Sedhu Ammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-12-2002
Reported in: (2002)2MLJ823
ORDERA.S. Venkatachalamoorthy, J.1. Plaintiff in O.S.1545 of 1999 on the file of I Additional Subordinate Court, Coimbatore is the petitioner herein. The above revision has been preferred against the order allowing I.A.1094 of 2000, petition filed under Order VII Rule 11 read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure rejecting the plaint.2. Petitioner as plaintiff filed the above suit against the respondents herein on the file of Subordinate Court, Coimbatore, praying the Court to grant a decree for specific performance of the contract dated 5.6.1995 and directing the respondents herein to execute the sale deed on receiving the consideration as detailed in the plaint and free of all encumbrances in respect of an extent of 9 acres of lands after adjusting the amount of Rs.21,92,000/- paid as advance either to the plaintiff or her nominees and if they commit default to have the sale deed executed and registered by the Court at the cost of the plaintiff at the first instance to be recov...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »