Chennai Court June 2007 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 Income Tax Vs. Heera Financial Services Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-08-2007
Reported in: (2007)212CTR(Mad)532; [2008]298ITR245(Mad)
P.D. Dinakaran, J.1. The Revenue has preferred the above appeal against the order of the tribunal, Madras 'A' Bench dt. 15th Dec, 2006 in ITA No. 977/Mad/2003 for the asst. yr. 1997-98 raising the following substantial questions of law:(a) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in allowing depreciation on the film roll leased out which was not used by the lessee and returned in the same year?(b) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in allowing depreciation on an asset which was neither used nor kept ready for use, applying the theory of passive user?2.1 The relevant assessment year is 1997-98. The assessee is doing business of hire purchase and leasing finance. For the assessment year, the assessee bought positive film rolls for a sum of Rs. 6,35,982 on 30th Aug., 1996 and entered into an agreement with M/s Shivashree Pictures on 30th Aug., 1996 for leasing the films. In the P & L a/c for the period ending on 31s...
The Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Preventive Unit Vs. Buil ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-08-2007
Reported in: 2007(216)ELT355(Mad)
A.C. Arumugaperumal Adityan, J.1. By way of this appeal, the appellant challenges Judgment of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Chennai in C.A.Nos.20 to 23 of 1992 which had arisen out of a finding in C.C.No.1680 to 1683 of 1989 on the file of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate(E.O.2) Egmore, Madras-8.2. The complaint before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate(E.O.2), Egmore, Chennai was preferred by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Chennai against the accused for an offence punishable under Sections 9(1)(a)(i), 9(1)(b)(i) and 9(1)(b)(b)(i) (four counts)of Central Excise and Salt Act 1944 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for the violation of payment of excise duty to the goods manufactured and fabricated by the accused. Admittedly, the first accused is engaged in the fabrication of steel structural for BHEL, Trichy, Ashok Leyland, Welmen Incondacent India Limited, South India Carbonic Gas India Limited, S.F.India Limited, Industrial Engineerings I...
Cit Vs. A.V. Thomas Exports Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-08-2007
Reported in: [2008]296ITR603(Mad)
P.P.S. Janarthana Raja, J.1. This appeal is filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the revenue, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai Bench 'A', Chennai in ITA No. 567 (Mds.)/2003 dated 12-12-2005 raising the following substantial question of law:Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the re-assessment beyond a period of 4 years from the end of the relevant assessment year is time barred?2. The facts leading to the above substantial question of law are as under:The assessee is a domestic company in which the public are substantially interested. The assessee is engaged in the manufacture and export of garments. The relevant assessment year is 1990-91 and the corresponding accounting year ended on 31-3-1990. The original assessment was completed on 27-3-1992 on 'Nil' income. In computation of total income, deduction from the gross total income under Section 80HHC was allowed to the extent of Rs...
Church of South India Trust Association, Tiruchirapalli-thanjavur Dioc ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-07-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)CTC595; (2008)1MLJ291
ORDERS. Rajeswaran, J.1. This Revision Petition has been filed against the order dated 13.1.2004, passed in I.A. No. 2128/2003 in O.S. No. 249/1990 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Dharapuram.2. The plaintiffs in O.S. No. 249/1990 on the file of the District Munsif, Dharapuram are the revision petitioners. They are aggrieved by the order of the trial court dated 13.1.2004 by which the amendment application filed by them in I.A. No. 2128/2003 is dismissed.3. The plaintiffs filed O.S. No. 249/1990 for a declaration to declare that the suit properties belong to them and for a mandatory injunction to remove the construction put up by defendants 1 to 6 on the suit schedule properties. The plaintiffs' case is that they have been in continuous possession of the suit schedule property on the basis of the acquisition proceedings of the revenue authorities dated 2.4.1916. 7th defendant who is the Commissioner of the Dharapuram municipality filed a written statement in March 1992 stating...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Rajaram Mills P. Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-07-2007
Reported in: [2008]302ITR10(Mad)
P.D. Dinakaran, J.1. The above tax case appeals are directed against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated June 14, 2005, made in I. T. A. Nos. 858, 898 and 899/Mds/2002, for the assessment years 1996-97, 1994-95 and 1997-98, respectively, raising the following substantial questions of law:1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in allowing a deduction of the amounts spent on replacement of machinery as revenue expenditure ?2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, replacement of independent complete machinery can be treated as revenue expenditure ?3. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in deciding the issue of replacement of machinery without going into the concept of block of assets ?2. The Revenue is the appellant in all the appeals. The claim of the asses-sees with respect to the expenditure incurred on replacement of machinery as revenue expenditure was disallowed by the Ass...
B.K. Subramania Sah (Died) and ors. Vs. B.S. Ramachandran,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-07-2007
Reported in: (2007)4MLJ787
S.R. Singharavelu, J.1. This appeal arises against the judgment and decree of learned Additional District Judge of Fast Track Court-V, Madras, in passing a preliminary decree for partition of 3/4th share in suit property and injunction in favour of respondent/plaintiff; against which, this appeal was preferred by the defendant.2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are described in the plaint. Admittedly, the appellant/defendant is the father of respondent/plaintiff. Upto the month of June 1995, they were amicably living and thereafter, misunderstanding between the parties arose in respect of the relationship with the daughters of the defendant, who are the sisters of the plaintiff. There were two elder sisters, one younger sister and two younger brothers for plaintiff. D.V.Mohan Sah is the brother-in-law of the plaintiff. Under Ex.B-1, the plaintiff has produced some accounts in connection with Zari business done with Mohan Shah and that document depicts t...
Commissioner of Income Tax and ors. Vs. M.P. Purushothaman
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-07-2007
Reported in: (2007)212CTR(Mad)220
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the CIT, Central-I, Madras and 2 others (hereinafter referred to as the 'Revenue') against the order dt. 17th July, 1998, passed by the learned single Judge in Writ. Petn. No. 8779 of 1989. By the said judgment, learned single Judge held that the respondent/writ petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the 'assessee') has made out a case for waiver of interest, as was levied under Section 217 of the IT Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') and set aside the impugned decision dt. 6th Dec, 1988 in C. No. 1511/4(2 & 3)87-88/Cent-I and also directed the Revenue to waive interest as was levied on the assessee under Section 220(2) of the Act, amounting to Rs. 1,29,061.2. The questions that arise for determination in this case are:(i) Whether the assessee was entitled for waiver of interest as was levied under Section 217 of the Act for the asst. yr. 1982-83 and 1983-84; and(ii) Whether the assessee has made out a case for waiver of...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sabena Detergents (P) Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-07-2007
Reported in: (2008)214CTR(Mad)167
P.D. Dinakaran, J.1. I The above tax case appeal is preferred by the Revenue against the order of the Tribunal, dt. 23rd Nov., 2006 made in ITA. No. 1750/Mad/1999 for the asst. yr. 1996-97, raising the substantial question of law, viz.,Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the advertisement expenditure incurred for promoting the pickles manufactured by its sister-concern, for which the assessee is the distributor and selling agent, is allowable as the assessee's business expenditureunder the following facts and circumstances of the case.2. The assessment year involved in this appeal is 1996-97. The assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of trading in scouring powder, pickles, etc. During the relevant assessment year, the assessee claimed expenditure for advertisement of pickles marketed by it, which are manufactured by its sister-concerns. But, the AO noting that the advertisement expenditure includes a sum of Rs. 25,69,405 towards expenditure incurred f...
Sanghi Transport Limited Rep. by Its General Manager Vs. Oriental Insu ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-06-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)CTC496
ORDERS. Rajeswaran, J.1. This Revision Petition has been filed against the order dated 19.1.2004, passed in O.S. No. 195/2002, on the file of Addl. District Judge, Fast Track Court No. V, Chengalpattu at Tiruvallur.2. The defendant in O.S. No. 195/2002 on the file of the Addl. District Judge (Fast Track Court No. V), Chengalpattu is the revision petitioner before this Court.3. O.S. No. 195/2002 was filed by the Oriental Insurance Company against the revision petitioner herein for a judgment and a decree to pay a sum ofRs. 10,47,597/- being the amount paid to the consignee andRs. 20,398/- towards the survey fees with future interest at the rate of 9% till recovery.4. The case of the plaintiff is that Hindustan Motors Co., took out a policy of insurance for the period in respect of all its vehicles manufactured till they reached the various destination of its dealers. The defendant/revision petitioner is in the transport business and the Hindustan Motors entrusted with the defendant in A...
Karthik Electric Controls Vs. Commercial Tax Officer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-06-2007
Reported in: (2008)15VST450(Mad)
A.P. Shah, C.J.1. Admit. The learned Special Government Pleader (Taxes) waives service. By consent, the appeal is taken up for disposal.2. The appellant/firm is engaged in the manufacture of control panels and is an assessee on the file of the Commercial Tax Officer, Podanur Circle, Coimbatore. The appellant was assessed by the assessing officer on a total and taxable turnover of Rs. 28,56,370 in proceedings bearing TNGST No. 1800946/1996-97 dated February 27, 1998. At the time of original assessment, the appellant was allowed concessional rate of tax at three per cent on a turnover of Rs. 14,86,537, being the sale of control panels manufactured by them. Subsequently, a pre-revision notice dated March 26, 2002 was issued by the assessing officer on the ground that the control panels manufactured and sold by the appellant, even though are electrical equipments, they come under 'plant and machinery' and they are used to operate and control the machines and as such, they are not eligible ...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »