Chennai Court November 2004 Judgments
Auro Food Ltd. Vs. Cit and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-18-2004
Reported in: (2005)197CTR(Mad)658
P. Sathasivam, J.The writ appeal is filed against the order of the learned single judge dated 9-9-1997, made in W.P. No. 15177 of 1988 (see : [1999]239ITR548(Mad) ), in and by which the learned judge confirmed the order dated 7-11-1988, of the CITfirst respondent herein.For convenience, we shall refer to the parties as arrayed before the learned single judge.The petitioner-M/s. Auro Food Ltd., Pondicherry filed a petition under section 220(2A) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), on 3-9-1988, for waiver of interest before the CIT, Madras. It is the case of the petitioner that it had a claim for deduction under section 80J of the Act for a larger quantum than that was finally decided. Till the issue was settled by the Supreme Court in its decision in Lohia Machines Ltd. v. UOI : [1985]152ITR308(SC) , the petitioner pointed out that it had in its favour the decision of the Madras High Court. In the waiver petition, it is also stated that the demand was not outs...
Tag this Judgment!P. Anand Narsimha Raj and ors. Vs. the Director, National Institute of ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-18-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)CTC761; (2005)1MLJ182
ORDERP.D. Dinakaran, J. 1. The appellants, who joined in part time B.E. Course in the second respondent College, filed writ petitions (W.P. Nos. 1042, 801 and 797 of 2004 respectively) for issue of a writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to permit the appellants herein to write the examinations of V and VI Semester as arrears in the examination of VII Semester, and also to permit them' to attend the classes for VII Semester Examinations.2. Concededly, permission was refused to the appellants to write the examinations of V and VI Semester as arrears in the examination of VII Semester as there was shortage in their attendance.3. Under such circumstances, the learned Single Judge, while refusing to grant the relief as prayed for, gave liberty to the appellants to approach the authorities concerned and seek permission to sit along with the regular students for the said course, and dismissed the writ petitions (W.P. Nos. 1042, 801 and 797 of 2004 respectively) by order dated 28.9.2004,...
Tag this Judgment!T. Sivakumar Vs. K. Prabhakaran
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-17-2004
Reported in: 2004(5)CTC675
ORDERS. Sardar Zackria Hussain, J.1. The tenant is the revision petitioner and the revision is filed against the eviction ordered by the learned Rent Controller in R.C.O.P. No. 2093 of 2000 and as confirmed by the learned Rent Control Appellate Authority in R.C.A. No. 410 of 2002 as per the judgment dated 31.12.2002 from the petition non-residential premises on the ground of own use and occupation by the son of the respondent/landlord.2. The respondent/landlord filed the Rent Control Original Petition seeking eviction of the revision petitioner/tenant from the petition non-residential premises bearing door No. 1, Nagarathinammal Colony, Govindhan Road, West Mambalam, Chennai-33, which is a portion measuring an extent of 100 square feet in the ground floor on the ground of wilful default in payment of rent and on which ground the learned Rent Controller refused to order eviction and which has been confirmed by the learned Rent Control Appellate Authority. The other ground for eviction i...
Tag this Judgment!Rathinam Vs. State, Rep. by Its Secretary to Government, Prohibition a ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-17-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)CTC516; 2005(101)ECC659
ORDERP.D. Dinakaran, J.1. The petitioner is the wife of one Murugan alias Mottai Murugan (hereinafter referred to as 'the detenu'), who was ordered to be detained by an order 22.7.2004 of the first respondent herein branding him as a Drug Offender under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug-Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Slum-Grabbers Act, 1982 (for brevity the 'Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982'), of course based on a ground case said to have taken place on 9.7.2004 at 7.00 a.m. when the police party, on the information of their informant, caught hold of the detenu and found the detenu holding a yellow colour bag. When the bag was opened it was found that the bag contained an object wrapped up in the newspaper. The newspaper was unfolded and the object was found to be 1 Kg. of Ganja. The police party, following the procedures, sent two samples of 25 Grams each of Ganja for chemical examination and the balanc...
Tag this Judgment!Maheswari Vs. the Commissioner of Police and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-17-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)CTC649
ORDERS.R. Singharavelu, J.1. The petitioner is the wife of the detenu and she challenges the order of detention dated 16.07.2004, passed by the first respondent under the provisions of Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982, detaining him, after he was identified as a Goonda, since he had come to the adverse notice of the authorities on earlier occasions and that on 28.06.2004, he acted in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and that if he is let to remain at large, he will indulge in activities prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and therefore, there is a compelling necessity to detain him under the provisions of Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982.2. The occurrence of the ground case was said to have been taken place at 4 p.m. on 28.6.2004. One Thiru. Selvam was coming by walk near Bharathiar Nagar, Alagappan Nagar, Muthupatti Main Road. At that time, the detenu came there in a Hero Honda Motor cycle, threatened the informant (Thiru. Selvam), attempted to take money from his ...
Tag this Judgment!Deputy Commissioner of Vs. Govindlal M. Parikh
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chennai
Decided on: Nov-16-2004
Reported in: (2005)94TTJ(Chennai)690
1. These are three appeals by the Department on the identical issue of whether membership of a stock exchange would result in an asset held by the assessee for purposes of the WT Act, 1957. According to the CIT(A), the Madras Stock Exchange Ltd. allowed the assessee a privilege and did not confer on the assessee any property which could be transferred.Copies of the memorandum and articles of association of the Madras Stock Exchange have been filed. The articles of association under the head "membership" stated that the number of members shall be limited to 400. It provided that other than nominated members, admission of members would be by calling of applications by means of advertisement and from persons found to be eligible for membership. The subscribers to the memorandum of association shall be admitted to the membership.Clause 4 of the articles of association under the head "membership" reads as under: "4. The membership shall constitute a personal permission from the exchange to...
Tag this Judgment!National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Chitra and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-16-2004
Reported in: 2005ACJ609; 2004(5)CTC485
P. Sathasivam, J.1. By consent of both parties, the main appeal itself is taken up for disposal.2. Aggrieved by the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal(II Additional District Judge), Krishnagiri dated 06.05.2003 made in M.A.C.T.O.P. No. 1769 of 2001, National Insurance company Limited, Dharmapuri has filed the above appeal.3. Heard both sides.4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has raised the only contention that inasmuch as the accident occurred in a private quarry, as per the terms of policy, the respondents 1 to 5-claimants are not liable to pay compensation.5. With reference to the said contention, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 5-claimants submitted that in view of the fact that in the place of accident the public have access and in the light of the decision of this Court reported in : (2000)1MLJ280 (G.BHUVANESWARI AND THREE ORS. V. M.SORNAKUMAR AND TWO ORS.), the Tribunal is justified in granting compensation in favour of the claimants.6. T...
Tag this Judgment!Shanmughasundaram and Vs. Jothi and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-16-2004
Reported in: I(2005)ACC435; 2004(5)CTC609
P. Sathasivam, J.1. The owner and the Insurance Company of the vehicle in question, are the appellants in the above appeal.2. In respect of death of one Thiruvengadam, his parents and brothers have prayed for compensation of Rs. 3 lakhs before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (Sub Court), Vridhachalam. The second claimant was examined as P.W.1 and the first claimant was examined as P.W.2 and also one Ramanathan as P.W.3, besides marking Exs.B-1 to B-12. On the side of the respondents, no oral evidence was let in and no document was also produced. The Tribunal, on appreciation of materials placed, after holding that the accident was caused due to the negligence of the vehicle in question, passed an award of Rs. 2,20,000/- with interest at 15% per annum and the same has to be deposited within sixty days from the date of order, failing which the award amount shall carry interest at the rate of 18% per annum. Aggrieved by the same, as stated earlier, the present appeal has been filed by...
Tag this Judgment!S. Ashok and ors. Vs. the Tamilnadu Mercantile Bank Ltd. and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-16-2004
Reported in: [2005]127CompCas351(Mad); 2005(1)CTC202; (2005)1MLJ238; [2005]61SCL106(Mad)
ORDERP.D. Dinakaran, J.1. The above appeal is directed against the order dated 13.7.2004 made in C. P. No. 15 of 2003 on the file of the Company Law Board, Additional Principal Bench, Chennai on the following substantial question of law:'Whether the Company Law board was correct in law in the various findings arrived at by it and whether the order of the Company Law Board is sustainable in law ?'2.1. Brief facts of the case sans unnecessary details are as under:The Central Government of India, second respondent herein, in order to prevent oppression and mismanagement, invoking the power conferred under Section 408 read with Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act sought for appointment of majority Directors on the Board of the first respondent Bank before the Company Law Board.2.2. After hearing all necessary parties, the Company Law Board satisfied that the Board of directors had not been constituted in accordance with law for the first respondent Bank directed the second, responden...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. N. Kaasivisalam Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chennai
Decided on: Nov-12-2004
Reported in: (2005)93TTJ(Chennai)537
1. These are cross-appeals by the assessee and by the Department for the same set of assessment years. Considering this aspect the appeals have been grouped together and are being disposed of by this common order, 2. For the asst. yrs. 1995-96 to 1997-98 the challenge by the assessee is with regard to the reopening of the assessments as well as with regard to the common issue for all the years of the allowability of deduction under Section 54F of the IT Act, 1961. The grievance of the Department for the various assessment years is common and is with reference to the decision of the CIT(A) wherein he has held that the sale of plot resulted in capital gains and not business income as assessed by the AO. Considering the common issue for all the assessment years, the appeals have been grouped together and the arguments of the parties were made on that basis and the result is the order made in the following paragraphs.3. The learned counsel for the assessee, Shri Devanathan, made submissio...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »