Chennai Court May 2004 Judgments
M.S. Ummar Sahib Vs. M.P. Stanes and S. Richards
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-25-2004
Reported in: (2004)3MLJ150
ORDERS. Sardar Zackria Hussain, J.1. The tenant is the revision petitioner in both the Civil Revision Petitions. These Civil Revision Petitions are directed against the order of eviction passed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority in Rent Control Appeals preferred by landlords against the denial of eviction by the Rent Controller on the grounds of own use and occupation and for demolition and reconstruction as sought in the Rent Control Original Petitions and also on the ground of denial of title in respect of the superstructure, which was not sought for in the petitions. Aggrieved at the order of eviction, as a whole, passed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority, the tenant has filed these revision petitions.2. The respondent in C.R.P. No. 1569 of 2000, who filed R.C.O.P. No. 353 of 1997, is the father of the respondent in C.R.P. No. 1570 of 2000, who filed R.C.O.P. No. 351 of 1997, and both of them claim that they are the owners of the petition non-residential building, which is...
Tag this Judgment!C.T. Meyammai Vs. S. Mohamed Kamil, Proprietor Fashion 'N' Style
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-25-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)CTC27; (2004)3MLJ215
ORDERS. Sardar Zackria Hussain, J.1. The landlady is the revision petitioner in this Civil Revision Petition. This Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the judgment passed in the Rent Control Appeal preferred by tenant, which was allowed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority setting aside the eviction of the tenant from the petition non-residential premises in the ground floor bearing Door No. 108 Usman Road, T.Nagar, Chennai - 17, ordered by the Rent Controller on the ground of wilful default in payment of rent.2. The landlady as petitioner filed the Rent Control Original Petition stating that the respondent is a tenant under the petitioner in respect of a portion in the ground floor in the premises bearing Door No. 108 Usman Road, T.Nagar, Chennai - 17, and is carrying on business in textile shop on a monthly rent of Rs.900/-. The respondent is irregular in payment of rent and inspite of repeated demands, he used to pay the rent by cheques belatedly. The respondent issued...
Tag this Judgment!Shanthi Alloys Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by Its Authorized Signatory, Mr. P. Rav ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-25-2004
Reported in: 2004(176)ELT87(Mad); (2004)4MLJ46
B. Subhashan Reddy, C.J.1. This writ appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge in a matter arising under Customs Act, 1962. The appellant, which is a Private Limited Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 having its factory in Andhra Pradesh, manufactures steel ingots using imported non-alloy steel m`ing scrap (NASMS). The appellant is registered with the Central Excise Department and also obtained necessary Import-Export Code from the Ministry of Commerce for the purpose of its imports. Whenever goods are imported, the Bills of Entry has to be filed with the Customs authorities and goods have to be cleared on payment of appropriate customs duty. The appellant had imported 46 containers, and insofar as 39 containers are concerned the Customs Duty was assessed at Rs.11,85,174/- under Section 17 of the Customs Act and for other 7 containers the customs duty is still to be assessed. The customs duty is computed on the basis of the concessions given in the ...
Tag this Judgment!R.M.S. Mahendra Gupta Vs. Mrs. Shri Chinni Subbiah Chetty Charities, R ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-24-2004
Reported in: (2005)3MLJ345
ORDERS. Sardar Zackria Hussain, J.1. The revision petitioner is the defendant in O.S. No. 6740 of 2001 on the file of the V Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai. The revision is directed against the dismissal of the petition I.A. No. 1678 of 2004 filed by the revision petitioner under Section 7 Rule 11(a) and (d) of C.P.C., as per order dated 30.4.2004.2. The respondent trust as plaintiff filed the ejectment suit against the revision petitioner for vacant possession of the suit property, arrears of rent and past and future damages. The two items of suit properties are in Villivakkam, Chennai. It is claimed that the plaintiff trust is the owner of the suit properties and which trust has been formulated as per the registered Will dated 22.12.1894. The suit properties had been leased to one R.M. Subramania Chetty as per registered lease deed dated 31.3.1968 for running business of kerosene bunk, in which he erected the kerosene bunk with underground tank, pumping machine with a smal...
Tag this Judgment!Shriram Chits and Investments (P) Vs. Asstt. Cit
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chennai
Decided on: May-21-2004
Reported in: (2005)2SOT838(Chennai)
Both the appeals of the assessee relate to the assessment years 1988-89 and 1989-90. Since common issue arises for consideration in both the appeals, we heard the same together and disposing of the appeals by this common order.The only issue arises for consideration in both the appeals is regarding levy of interest under section 220(2) of the Income Tax Act.The facts of the case are as follows: The assessee is a registered company under the Companies Act, 1956. For the assessment years under consideration, the assessment was completed determining the total income including levy of interest under sections 217 and 234B of the Income Tax Act.Demand notice was also issued under section 156 of the Income Tax Act and the same was served on the assessee specifying the sum payable.Since the assessee has not paid the specified sum in the demand notice the assessing officer levied interest under section 220(2) of the Income Tax Act. The assessee is challenging the levy of interest under section...
Tag this Judgment!M.V. Ganesh and Mrs. Rajee Viswambaran Vs. the Commercial Tax Officer,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-18-2004
Reported in: [2005]141STC236(Mad)
ORDERA.S. Venkatachalamoorthy, J.1. The petitioners, who received notice in Form No.I under the Revenue Recovery Act, stating that a sum of Rs.9,92,025/- is due towards tax and penalty in respect of the assessment year 1986-87, approached the Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal by filing O.P.No.560 of 2000 and disputing their liability contending that after receiving the said notice, they approached the High Court of Kerala, filed writ petition on the ground that there was no tax due and payable by them to the Commercial Tax Department and that the Recovery proceedings are void. The case of the petitioners is, after filing the writ petition, they understood that arrack blending licence was obtained in the name of one S.Sewak from the Commissioner (Prohibition and Excise), Madras and in which the late M.S.Viswambaran, the father of the first petitioner and husband of the second petitioner was also a partner and some arrears of sales tax was stated to be due. As per the provisions of th...
Tag this Judgment!Philips India Limited Vs. the Assistant Commissioner (Ct),
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-18-2004
Reported in: [2004]137STC134(Mad)
P.K. Misra, J.1. In order to appreciate the contentions raised on behalf of the parties, it is necessary to notice the relevant provisions in a historical perspective. Section 2(1)(a) of the Tamil Nadu Additional Sales Tax Act, as it stood prior to 1.8.1996, was to the following effect:-' Section 2: Levy of additional tax in the case of certain dealers. -- (1)(a) The tax payable under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (Tamil Nadu Act 1 of 1959) (hereinafter in this section referred to as the said Act), shall, in the case of a dealer whose taxable turnover for a year exceeds ten lakhs of rupees, be increased by an additional tax calculated at the following rates, namely : Rate of Tax(i) Where the taxable turnover 1.5 per cent of the exceeds ten lakhs of rupees, taxable turnover but does not exceed one crore of rupees :Provided that no additional tax shall be payable under this item for the first ten lakhs of rupees of the taxable turnover.(ii) Where the taxable turnover 2 per c...
Tag this Judgment!Murthuzaviya Oriental High School Rep. by Its Hony. Correspondent Vs. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-18-2004
Reported in: (2004)3MLJ282
ORDERA.S. Venkatachalamoorthy, J.1. According to the petitioner, Murthuzaviya Educational and Cultural Foundation of South India is a Society registered under Societies Registration Act. The said Society is running the petitioner school, which is called Murthuzaviya Oriental High School. The Society has also established several educational institutions including technical, vocational, social and cultural institutions, apart from running the petitioner school. The petitioner school has been in existence for over four decades and has been rendering great services to the public and is advancing the cause of public interest. The school is located in Big Street, Triplicane, Madras-5. The space and accommodation that is now available has been insufficient, particularly in view of the ever increasing demand for admission of students year after year. The petitioner thought some more space is required and that the adjoining lands situated at R.S.No.2769/1 of Mylapore-Triplicane Taluk and situat...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. P.R. Prabhakar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-18-2004
Reported in: (2005)198CTR(Mad)492; [2005]276ITR176(Mad)
P.K. Misra, J.1. The following questions have been referred to the High Court pursuant to the order dated September 13, 1996, in T. C. P. No. 42 of 1996 :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee is entitled to deduction under Section 80HHC of the Income-tax Act, even though the export business resulted in a loss of Rs. 6,372 ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that commission and brokerage for procuring export contracts for other exporters is exempt under Section 80HHC of the Act on the ground that the same is export profits ?'2. The matter relates to the assessment year 1990-91. For the aforesaid assessment year, the gross total income derived by the assessee as commission and brokerage for procuring export contracts for other exporters was to the tune of Rs. 56,69,321. The assessee had also exported goods outside India to the extent of ...
Tag this Judgment!Getit Informdiary Ltd. Vs. Principal Gen. Man. Telecommunications, Bha ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-17-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Mad413
ORDERV. Kanagaraj, J.1. The above application has been filed praying to grant an injunction restraining the respondent from invoking the (1) Bank Guarantee No. 27/2000 dated 26-12-2000. (2) Bank Guarantee No. 15/1998-99, dated 4-12-1998, (3) Bank Guarantee No. 64/2000, dated 24-1-2000 and (4) Bank Guarantee No. 64/2001, dated 7-1-2002, pending adjudication of the dispute by arbitration.2. In the affidavit filed in support of the above application, the applicant would submit that the respondent issued an advertisement inviting bids for printing and publication of Telephone Directories with yellow pages for the Coimbatore Telecom District and pursuant to the tenders submitted by various parties, the contract was awarded to the applicant herein: that accordingly, an agreement was entered into on 3-8-1998 between the applicant (which was then known as M&N; Publications Limited) and . the respondent: that the contract was for compiling, printing, binding and supplying copies of Coimbatore T...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »