Chennai Court June 2007 Judgments
R. Nirmalkumar, Vs. the Registrar, Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law Univers ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-21-2007
Reported in: AIR2007Mad263
ORDERA.P. Shah, C.J.1. These writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India have been filed against the State of Tamil Nadu and the Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University for the issue of a writ of declaration or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring G.O.Ms.No. 83, Law (LS) Department, dated 19.4.2007 abolishing Common Entrance Test for admission to Law Degree Course as illegal, void and unconstitutional and to command the respondents to restore the earlier system of entrance examination which has been followed from 1985 till 2006. The Bar Council of India and Tamil Nadu State Bar Council are also impleaded as parties.2. The petitioners have filed these petitions in public interest on behalf of themselves and other similarly situated aspiring students who are willing to undertake the Law Degree. Out of four writ petitioners, three have passed Degree Course and one has passed Plus Two Examination and the writ petitioners, who have finished the graduation, have...
Tag this Judgment!D. Aravinth and ors. Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by Its Secretary ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-21-2007
Reported in: AIR2007Mad300
ORDERA.P. Shah, C.J.1. The petitioners are the students of the third respondent school. The third respondent school is a recognised private school and is under the control and supervision of the first and second respondents. The petitioners herein are the students who have successfully completed their X Standard Matriculation Education in the third respondent school in the last Academic Year. It is the case of the petitioners that the petitioners having successfully completed their X Standard Examination, submitted their applications to join in the XI Standard with the legitimate expectation and hope that they will be permitted to continue their higher secondary education in the third respondent school itself. The petitioners were patiently awaiting on the hope that the school will not weed out their own students for any reason. But to their shock and surprise, the third respondent school started admitting the students who have studied in other schools by receiving huge donations. It i...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. Electro Polychem Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-21-2007
Reported in: (2008)217CTR(Mad)371; [2007]294ITR661(Mad)
P.D. Dinakaran, J.1. The above tax case appeals are directed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in I. T. A. Nos. 1182 and 1714/Mds/2002 dated 24-3-2006, for the assessment years 1998-99 and 1999-2000 respectively, raising the following substantial questions of law. (a) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that share application money in fictitious names cannot be treated as undisclosed income of the assessee ?(b) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the enquiries can be conducted in the hands of the shareholders only, when the entire addition is because the shareholders have been found to be non-existent/fictitious persons ?2. The brief facts that led to the filing of the above appeals are as under.3. The assessee filed its returns for the assessment years 1998-99 and 1999-2000. The assessing officer made additions in respect of the share application money under ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. India Nippon Electricals Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-21-2007
Reported in: [2008]302ITR49(Mad)
P.D. Dinakaran, J.1. The above tax case appeals are directed against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in I.T.A. Nos. 2307 to 2309/97 dated August 25, 2004, for the assessment years 1991-92 to 1993-94 respectively, raising the following substantial questions of law.(a) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the issue of, whether interest received from deposit made with company/bank, and interest from the Income-tax Department are derived from the industrial undertaking, is debatable issue and the same cannot be decided vide rectification proceedings under Section 154?(b) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in not following the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Pandian Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT reported in : [2003]262ITR278(SC) the interest from deposits while computing the deduction under Section 80HH?The brief facts that led to the filing of the above appeals are as under.2...
Tag this Judgment!Krishnan Chandrasekaran, Vs. District Collector and Special Tahsildar ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-20-2007
Reported in: (2007)4MLJ1103
ORDERS. Rajeswaran, J.1. As the issue involved is one and the same in both the writ petitions, common order is being passed.2. For the sake of convenience, I am referring the facts pertaining to W.P. No. 4319 of 1999.3. W.P. No. 4319/99 was filed by one Krishnan Chandrasekaran stating that his father purchased the lands sought to be acquired by the respondents in the year 1977 by two sale deeds dated 24.5.1977 and 21.07.1977. It is his case that the property was purchased out of funds raised by disposal of their ancestral properties. After purchase of the lands, it was divided amongst his father, his mother, his two sisters and his two brothers along with the petitioners. According to the petitioner, his father met with an accident on 19.06.1997 and the lands could not be cultivated for one year because of the accident. Now the same is being cultivated and for the purpose of cultivation they spent a sum ofRs. 30,000/-.4. When the petitioner returned from Tuticorin after seeing his wife...
Tag this Judgment!G. Pushkala Vs. High Court of Judicature at Madras Rep. by Its Registr ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-20-2007
Reported in: (2007)4MLJ692
ORDERDharma Rao Elipe, J.1. While the Complainant in the domestic enquiry, which was initiated on her complaint, has filed W.P. No. 10157 of 2000 seeking a Writ of Declaration, the delinquent Officer who was inflicted with the order of compulsory retirement has filed W.P. No. 29024 of 2003 challenging the said punishment. Since both the matters are inextricably connected with each other, they were heard together for better appreciation of the facts of the case and this common order is passed.2. On the basis of the complaint dated 18.2.2000 given by the petitioner in W.P. No. 10157 of 2000 (hereinafter referred to as 'the complainant') against the petitioner in W.P. No. 29024 of 2003 (hereinafter referred to as the delinquent officer), alleging 'sexual harassment' and 'indecent behaviour' at the place of work, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the delinquent officer in which he was found guilty and the punishment of compulsory retirement from service was imposed on him. 3....
Tag this Judgment!Marimuthammal, Vs. Vaithi and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-20-2007
Reported in: (2007)4MLJ796
ORDERM. Chockalingam, J.1. An order of dismissal of an application in REA No. 435 of 1984 by the Additional Subordinate Judge, Salem, seeking to set aside the sale made in E.P. No. 322 of 1978 pursuant to a decree passed in O.S. No. 157/70, is the subject matter of challenge in this revision.2. The Court heard the learned Counsel on either side.3. Concededly, a suit was filed by the father of the respondents 4 to 10 herein namely Kandasami, in O.S. No. 157 of 1970 seeking the reliefs of specific performance and also mesne profits. It was decreed. An appeal which arose therefrom, in A.S. No. 110 of 1972, was allowed, and the specific performance decree was set aside. Following the same, an enquiry in respect of the mesne profits, was conducted, and by an order dated 23.8.1978, the mesne profits was fixed at Rs. 22,000/- pursuant to which E.P. No. 322/78 was filed on 29.11.1978. The property was brought for sale, and the auction was held on 9.9.1982. While the matter stood thus, an appli...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Siva Springs
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-20-2007
Reported in: [2008]304ITR24(Mad)
P.D. Dinakaran, J.1. The above tax case appeals are directed against the common order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated August 5, 2005, in I.T.A. Nos. 968 to 975/Mds/1999 for the assessment years 1986-87 to 1993-94, respectively.2. The Revenue is the appellant. The relevant assessment years are 1986-87 to 1993-94. The assessee claimed deduction on account of payment to one Balaji Siva, a sister concern towards packing and forwarding charges. During the reassessment under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for brevity 'the Act'), the Assessing Officer found that Balaji Siva was not an individual, but a unit of Balaji Barium Products Private Limited and its managing director is also related to all the partners of the assessee-firm and on that ground, he came to the conclusion that the amount had been paid by the assessee-firm not for any real services rendered by the said Balaji Siva, but to reduce the profits of the assessee-firm, the assessee had set it off against the a...
Tag this Judgment!Kailash Chand JaIn Vs. N. Seetharaman and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-20-2007
Reported in: I(2008)BC28
K.N. Basha, J.1. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has come forward in all these petitions seeking for a direction to set aside the impugned orders passed by the learned Magistrate, dismissed the complaints filed by the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.2. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is the complainant in all the complaints. It is also submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that in all the complaints, the date of the disputed cheques and amount borrowed by the accused and also in respect of the presentation, thereafter date of statutory notice given are clearly stated. It is also contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has followed the mandatory requirements contemplated under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. It is further contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that after recording the swor...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Asma Exports
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-20-2007
Reported in: [2008]305ITR335(Mad)
P.D. Dinakaran, J.1. The above tax case appeals are directed against the common order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated February 11, 2005, made in I.T.A. Nos. 346 and 347/Mds/1999 for the assessment years 1995-96 and 1996-97, respectively.2. The Revenue is the appellant. The relevant assessment years are 1995-96 and 1996-97. The assessee is an exporter of readymade garments. The assessee claimed deduction under Section 80HHC for both the assessment years 1995-96 and 1996-97. The Assessing Officer, while making the prima facie adjustment under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act, set off the business loss arrived at under Section 80HHC(3) and accordingly by assessment orders dated October 30, 1996, restricted the deductions to Rs. 11,29,091 and Rs. 5,03,21)9 fur the assessment years 1995-96 and 1996-97, respectively. Against the said assessment orders dated October 30, 1996, the assessee preferred appeals before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), who by a common order dated Nov...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »