Chennai Court April 2004 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.
Rajamani Vs. State Express Transport Corporation Ltd. Rep. by Its Gene ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-01-2004
Reported in: 2006ACJ2241; [2004(102)FLR1213]; (2004)IIILLJ91Mad
ORDERP.D. Dinakaran, J. 1. Aggrieved by the proceedings of the respondent dated 27.11.2002, the petitioner, who was invalidated on medical grounds for having found not suitable for the post of Conductor at the scale of pay 5185-95-7450, and was appointed as Helper in the scale of pay 3240-60-4680 as a fresh entrant in the respondent Corporation, has preferred the above writ petition for a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the order of the respondent dated 27.11.2002 and quash the same and direct the respondent to reinstate him with continuity of service with backwages safeguarding and protecting the pay and allowances earned by him.2. The petitioner challenges the impugned proceedings on the ground that he should have been appointed in some other post in the same pay scale and service benefits, of course, bringing to the notice of this Court that he suffered disability due to the accident which had taken place on 1.8.1998, during the course of his empl...
S.P.S. Jayam and Co. Vs. the Registrar, Tamilnadu Taxation Special Tri ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-01-2004
Reported in: (2004)3MLJ74; [2004]137STC117(Mad)
ORDERA.S. Venkatachalamoorthy, J.1. The petitioner seeks for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records of the first respondent in T.C.(A) No.3709 of 1997, quash the impugned order dated 09.02.2001 and to direct the 3rd respondent, his agents or subordinates not to impose sales tax on the receipts of Royalty received by the petitioner. 2. The petitioner/assessee, during the assessment year 1987-1988, allowed one Tvl.Muthu Agencies, Madurai, to use their trade-mark and for which the petitioner received a sum of Rs.7,26,835/-. In the books of accounts, this amount is shown as Royalty received. In the original assessment, the turnover relating to this transaction was exempted, accepting the claim that it was only a Royalty. Subsequently, the Assessing Authority, took the view that the said consideration was received for a transfer of right to use the trade-mark and hence, the same is taxable. The Assessing Authority issued a Notice as contemplated under law to t...
Hyderabad Industries Limited Vs. the Commercial Tax Officer and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-01-2004
Reported in: (2004)3MLJ92; [2004]136STC364(Mad)
ORDERA.S.VENKATACHALAMOORTHY, J.1. Being aggrieved by the order of the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, (Additional Bench), Chennai, in T.A.No.870 of 1993, pertaining to the assessment year 1988-1989, the Revenue filed Tax Case (Revision) No.147 of 2000 before the Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal, Chennai, and the same was allowed by an order dated 24.01.202. The writ petitioner/assessee, questioning the said order, has filed Writ Petition No.6169 of 2002.Writ Petition No.6170 of 2002 is filed by the petitioner against the order passed by the Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal in T.C.(Appeal) No.40 of 1997, which in turn was filed by the assessee/petitioner, against the order of the Joint Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Chennai, in Reference No.M3/616/95.2. The Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal, Chennai, disposed of the Tax Case (Revision) as well as the Tax Case (Appeal), by a Common Order dated 24.01.2002, since the issue involved in both the cases is common. 3. The ...
Jaigopal Garodia Foundations Vs. T.R. Srinivasan, Ias and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-01-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ2420
M. Karpagavinayagam, J. 1. On the writ petition filed as a 'Public Interest Litigation' by Jaigopal Garodia Foundations, by its Trust registered under the Indian Trust Act, by its Founder Chairman Jaigopal Garodia, to issue a writ of mandamus, the First Bench of this Court, after hearing learned counsel for the parties, by order dated 25-4-2001, directed the officials of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Departments (hereinafter referred to as 'H.R. & C.E.') of the Government of Tamil Nadu, forbearing them from permitting or allowing the sale or auction of cows by any Temple or endowment of the cows, which have been donated by devotees, so as to avoid being sent to butchery.2. Despite this order, one of the Temples, namely Arulmighu Sri Ranganathar Temple, Srirangam, which is under the control of H.R. & C.E., allegedly sold several number of cows and handed over them to persons who allegedly sent them to slaughter houses. Hence, seeking for contempt action to be taken against t...
Cit Vs. J.K. Narayanan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-01-2004
Reported in: [2007]293ITR179(Mad)
P.K. Misra, J.1. The following question has been referred to under Section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, to the High Court :Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in setting aside the assessment tantamounting to its annulment on the ground that there is no existence of undisclosed income for the purpose of an assessment to be made under Chapter XTV-B, especially when no valid return has been filed and therefore the income earned should be brought to tax as undisclosed income ?2. The facts are as follows :3. The assessee is a Hindu undivided family (specified). A search was effected on 6-2-1996, and notice under Section 158BC of the Act was issued on July 25, 1996. Subsequently, the assessee filed a return showing 'nil' undisclosed income. The assessing officer while observing that investments were considered in the hands of the assessee in his individual capacity, the Hindu undivided family had failed to file the return...
Rajamanu Vs. State Express Transport Corporation Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-01-2004
Reported in: I(2007)ACC819
P.D. Dinakaran, J.1. Aggrieved by the proceedings of the respondent dated 27.11.2002, petitioner, who was invalidated on medical grounds for having found not suitable for the post of conductor in the scale of pay Rs. 5185-95-7450 and was appointed as helper in the scale of pay Rs. 3240-60-4680 as a fresh entrant in the respondent Corporation, has preferred the above writ petition for a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records-relating to the order of respondent dated 27.11.2002 and quash the same and direct respondent to reinstate him with continuity of service with back wages safeguarding and protecting the pay and allowances earned by him.2. Petitioner challenges the impugned proceedings on the ground that he should have been appointed in some other post in the same pay scale and service benefits, of course, bringing to the notice of this Court that he suffered disability due to the accident which had taken place on 1.8.1998, during the course of his employment.3. The ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›