Chennai Court November 2003 Judgments
B. Govindarajan Vs. the Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-05-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)CTC535
ORDERP. Sathasivam, J.1. The petitioner is the third accused in S.C.No. 47 of 2000 on the file of Principal Sessions Judge, Nagercoil.2. The allegation against the third accused is that he joined with other three accused in the crime, conspired to commit the murder of one Velayuthaperumal and in pursuance of the conspiracy, at about 8.00 p.m. on 25.09.1999 they attacked the deceased and that the petitioner cut him on the right hand and right shoulder, while the other accused inflicted other injuries.3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner would point out that the overt act attributed against the petitioner is, he cut the deceased and inflicted injuries on the right wrist and right shoulder. He also points out that as per the evidence of Doctor, who was examined as PW4, both the said injures found on the deceased viz., injury Nos. 6 and 8, are not grievous and are simple in nature.4. The Learned Senior Counsel also points out that as per the opinion of the Doctor, the injuries said...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sree Ganesh Stores
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-05-2003
Reported in: [2004]266ITR595(Mad)
R. Jayasimha Babu J.1. The appeal is by the Revenue. It is aggrieved by the Tribunal's order which allowed as a trading loss a sum of Rs. 71,880. The respondent-assessee carries on trade in paper.2. That amount had been claimed by the assessee as bad debt. That sum, according to the assessee, was part of the sum that was due from Ananda Traders to whom the assessee had made supplies and from whom the assessee had taken possession of stock of paper valued at Rs. 21,43,724.45. The papers so taken over, according to the assessee, included paper of the value of Rs. 71,880 which had been supplied to that debtor by a third party Dena Paper.3. Subsequently, on Dena Paper demanding the payment of that sum, the assessee made the payment to Dena Paper, which also happened to be a debtor of Ananda Traders.4. The assessee's case is that the consequence of the payment made by it to Dena Paper was to increase in that amount the debt owed to it by Ananda Traders which debt in excess of the value of t...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Madras Refineries Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-05-2003
Reported in: [2004]266ITR170(Mad)
R. JAYASIMHA BABU J. 1. The assessment year is 1992-93. The assessee, Madras Refineries Limited, is a public limited company. As a good corporate citizen and as a measure of gaining goodwill of the people living in and around its industry which is to some extent a polluting industry, it provided funds for establishing drinking water facilities to the residents in the vicinity of the refinery and also provided aid to the school run for the benefit of the children of those local residents. It incurred an expenditure of Rs. 15,32,000 for that purpose.2. The Assessing Officer declined to allow that expenditure on the ground that it was not an item of expenditure incurred by the assessee for earning the income earned by it in that year.3. On appeal, the Commissioner held that the assessee may have been obliged to incur that expenditure for the good of and in the interest of the community in and around its place of business, and that activity was one which was capable of being regarded as an...
Tag this Judgment!Meenu Equipments Vs. Cit
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-05-2003
Reported in: [2004]135TAXMAN1(Mad)
R. Jayasimha Babu, J.The question is as to whether the appellant-assessee had contravened section 155(4A) and/or section 32A(5) by reason of constitution of new firm comprising of all its original partners except the deceased partner, and the widow of the deceased partner, which firm had taken over all the assets and liabilities of the firm which was dissolved on 26-10-1987 on the death of the father Balakrishna Pillai the founder of the firm that had been founded on 9-11-1976 and had comprised of himself, his three sons and his two daughters. After the demise of the father, the mother was included in his place and the remaining partners together with the mother constituted a new firm and continued to carry on the same business.2. The firm as it existed between 1976 and 26-10-1987 till the assessment year 1987 had claimed and had been allowed investment allowance to the tune of Rs. 5,80,454. It had made additions to the plant and machineries between 1981-82 and 1988-89, the value of su...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. R.S. Trust
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-04-2003
Reported in: (2004)189CTR(Mad)275; [2004]266ITR450(Mad)
R. Jayasimha Babu, J.1. The assessment year is 1983-84. The question referred to us is as to whether the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in cancelling the Commissioner's order under Section 263, and proceeding to hold that the status of the trust should not be taken as that of an association of persons.2. The assessee is a trust created under a trust deed dated September 7, 1981. In terms of the trust deed, the trustees are empowered to carry on any business and/or to engage in any trade of commercial activities which the trustees deem profitable. All the beneficiaries of the trust are minors. The business in which the trust was engaged in the relevant previous year was the business of construction of buildings.3. The Assessing Officer made the assessment, after allocating the income of the assessee among the beneficiaries of the trust. The Commissioner took the view that that manner of assessing the income was prejudicial to the Revenue, that assessment should have been made on th...
Tag this Judgment!Mr. N.G.R. Prasad, Advocate and Mr. V. Selvaraj, Advocate Vs. Governme ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-04-2003
Reported in: (2004)1MLJ181
ORDER1. W.P.SR. No. 130419 of 2003 has been filed questioning the appointment of the fifth respondent as a Judge of this Court on the ground that he did not possess the requisite qualifications of uprightness while conducting cases as an advocate.2. The recommendation for appointment of the fifth respondent as a Judge of this Court has emanated from this Court and it went through several constitutional functionaries and ultimately, the collegium of the Supreme Court, consisting of the Honourable the Chief Justice of India and two immediate senior Honourable Judges, had approved the recommendation, But the Central Government raised some queries and again, the collegium of the Supreme Court, headed by the Honourable the Chief Justice of India, had reiterated the recommendation, which was accepted by the Central Government and forwarded to His Excellency the President of India for issuing orders of appointment. It is stated that His Excellency the President of India had returned the said ...
Tag this Judgment!Kasinathan, Vs. P.A. Thangavel,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-04-2003
Reported in: II(2004)ACC672; 2005ACJ1267; (2004)1MLJ107
1. The appellants are the claimants before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Subordinate Judge), Ariyalur.2. On 13.10.1991 at 9.00 P.M. the deceased in M.C.O.P.No.563 of 1991, namely, Arumugam and the petitioner in M.C.O.P.No.2 of 1992, namely, Ananthan, were travelling in the bus belonging to the 3rd respondent-Corporation from Trichy to Madras. While so, the lorry belonging to the first respondent came behind the bus and dashed against the same as a result of which the said Arumugam died in the accident and the said Ananthan sustained injuries. Hence the claim applications were filed and awards passed by the learned Claims Tribunal after analysing the evidence and arguments of both sides.3. The learned counsel for the claimants in M.C.O.P. No.563 of 1991 has urged that the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is very meagre, that the deceased was only 20 years at the time of the accident, that had he been alive, he would have supported the family of the claimants by his con...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Best and Crompton Engineering Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-04-2003
Reported in: (2004)192CTR(Mad)519; [2004]266ITR479(Mad)
R. Jayasimha Babu, J.1. The question that requires our consideration is as to whether the Tribunal is correct in deleting the disallowance of contribution made to the employees benefit fund. The assessment years are 1982-83, 1983-84 and 1984-85.2. The employees benefit fund to which the employer made the contribution had been established for providing educational facility to the children of the members of the fund and also to render aid and assistance to the family members of the deceased members as also to provide aid to the members who need medical assistance. The fund had been established prior to March 1, 1984.3. Though the Assessing Officer declined to allow the expenditure as a deduction on the ground that such deduction is barred by Section 40A(9) read with Section 40A(1), the Commissioner allowed the same on the ground that the contribution had been made to a fund set up prior to March 1, 1984, and that similar contributions had been allowed by the Tribunal for the assessment y...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. R.S. Trust
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-04-2003
Reported in: [2004]135TAXMAN101(Mad)
R. Jayasimha Babu, J.The assessment year is 1983-84. The question referred to us is as to whether the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in cancelling the Commissioner's order under section 263, and proceeding to hold that the status of the trust should not be taken as that of Association of Persons.2. The assessee is a trust created under a trust deed dated 7-9-1981. In terms of the trust deed, the trustees are empowered to carry on any business and /or to engage in any trade of commercial activities which the trustees deem profitable. All the beneficiaries of the Trust are minors. The business in which the Trust was engaged in the relevant previous year was the business of construction of building.3. The assessing officer made the assessment, after allocating the income of the assessee among the beneficiaries of the Trust. The Commissioner took the view that that manner of assessing the income was prejudicial to the revenue, that assessment should have been made on the Trust as an A...
Tag this Judgment!Management of Indo Shell Mould Ltd. Vs. Deputy Chief Inspector of Fact ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-03-2003
Reported in: (2004)ILLJ781Mad
ORDERR. Balasubramanian, J.1. The petitioner seeks a direction in the nature of mandamus to the first respondent to dispose of its application, dated October 6, 2003, in pending Complaint No. 3710 of 2003. It appears that respondents 2 to 69 were the trainees under the petitioner's management. All of them stand terminated by termination order, dated September 18, 2003. Despite that termination order, respondents 2 to 69 have filed an application before the first respondent claiming permanent status under Rule 6(4) of the Tamil Nadu Industrial Establishments (Conferment of Permanent Status to Workmen) Rules, 1981. When proceedings stood thus, the petitioner had filed an application, dated October 6, 2003, in the earlier referred to application by the workmen stating that so long as the termination order stands, there is no question of conferring permanent status on them and therefore that application filed by the management should be taken up for disposal prior to the application filed ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »