Chennai Court August 2007 Judgments
A. Thangaraj Vs. the Presiding Officer, Labour Court and the Managemen ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-30-2007
Reported in: (2008)IILLJ471Mad
S. Palanivelu, J.1. Writ petitioner has filed this Appeal, against the order of a learned single Judge of this Court, made in W.P. No. 22470 of 1993.2. The appellant/workman has filed W.P. No. 22470 of 1993 for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records relating to the award in I.D. No. 235 of 1990, dated 23.04.1993, passed by first respondent, quash the same and consequently to direct the second respondent/Management to reinstate the petitioner with back wages and all other consequent benefits.3. The case of the appellant was that he was appointed as a Trainee with the second respondent management on 22.12.1983; he was a probationer from 1.1.1985; his services were confirmed from 1.1.1986 in the post of Boiler Operator; his last drawn wages were Rs.1,027/- per month; he was a key trade union activist, who organised the Sri Chakra Tyres Division of the Sundaram Industries Employees Union, and that the TVS corporate group has been attempting to deter genuine trade unionis...
Tag this Judgment!Castrol India Ltd. Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by Its Secretary, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-30-2007
Reported in: (2008)15VST173(Mad)
ORDERM. Jaichandren, J.1. Mr. R. Mahadevan, learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice for the respondents. 2. With the consent of the learned Counsels appearing for the parties concerned, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.3. Heard Mr. S. Raghunathan learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. R. Mahadevan, Additional Government Pleader for Tax for the respondents.4. It is submitted that the petitioner is engaged inter alia in the business of manufacture and sale of lubricating oils and greases. The petitioner effects stock transfers of its products to their various branches situated outside the State of Tamil Nadu and avails of an exemption from the payment of tax on such stock transfer. The petitioner also effects inter state sales of their products to various customers outside the State of Tamil Nadu against 'C' Forms and against credit notes. 5. For the assessment year 1995-96 the petitioner has declared the turnover on stock transfer ...
Tag this Judgment!G. Sarath Raj Vs. Government of Tamilnadu Rep. by Its Principal Secret ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-29-2007
Reported in: (2007)5MLJ1409
K. Suguna, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by a successful candidate in the selection process for appointment to the post of Civil Judge (Junior Division/Judicial Magistrate-I Class) in the Tamil Nadu State Judicial Service.2. According to the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, when applications have been called for, for appointment to the post of Civil Judge (Junior Division/Judicial Magistrate I-Class) in the year 2003, the petitioner also applied for the same under the Scheduled caste quota. The petitioner got through in the selection process. However, by the order of the third respondent dated 16.9.2005, the petitioner was informed that his request for publication of withheld result relating to the appointment to the post of Civil Judge(Junior Division/Judicial Magistrate I-Class) in the Tamil Nadu State Judicial Service 2002-2003 will arise only on receipt of clarification sought for from the Government regarding the communal status to be awarded to those ...
Tag this Judgment!Evangelical Church of India Rep. by Its Secretary, Rev. Dr. D. Sundar ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-29-2007
Reported in: (2007)6MLJ798
ORDERA. Kulasekaran, J.1. All these writ petitions are filed for similar relief against the respondents, pleading identical grounds, hence, they are disposed of by this common order.2. The petitioner in WP No. 9426 of 2005 has prayed for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the notification published in the official gazzette of Tamil Nadu Government dated 01.08.2001 in connection with (Letter No. SE/GCC/CNI/Tech/CHD/F.T. & D 2001-22/D 635/2001 DT. 21.05.2001) proceedings No. VI-3(b)/21/2001 of the second respondent and quash the same and direct the respondents to cancel all approvals, sanctions and measures in connection with the scheme and not to lay over-head electricity lines above or across Plot No. R-21, Ambattur Phase I & II Scheme of TNHB in S.No. 49/part in Ayapakkam Village of Tiruvallur District.3. The petitioner in WP No. 11347 of 2007 has prayed for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the notification pu...
Tag this Judgment!Majri Steels Vs. Commercial Tax Officer and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-29-2007
Reported in: (2007)9VST433(Mad)
ORDERV. Ramasubramanian, J.1. The petitioner is a registered dealer under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. The Government of Tamil Nadu introduced the value added tax under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 with effect from January 1, 2007 in the State of Tamil Nadu.2. Under the Act, all the registered dealers are obliged to submit an application for obtaining fresh certificate of registration on or before January 31, 2007 and a grace time up to February 15, 2007 was allowed.3. On the ground that the petitioner failed to apply even before the expiry of the grace time, the first respondent issued the impugned order dated May 31, 2007, cancelling the TIN assigned to the petitioner under the Act. Challenging the said order, the petitioner has come up with the present writ petition.4. Heard Mr. P. Rajkumar, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the Mr. Pala. Ramasamy, the learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents.5. There is no dispute about the fact tha...
Tag this Judgment!St. Joseph's Estate Vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-29-2007
Reported in: [2009]310ITR451(Mad)
Chitra Venkataraman, J.1. The above tax case revisions are filed against the order of the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai. The assessment years relating to 2000-01 and 1999-2000.2. The assessee claimed exemption under Section 4(b) of the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1955. By order dated July 31, 2000, in respect of the assessment year 2000-01, the assessing authority noted that the assessee is registered as a charitable institution under the provisions of Section 12A(a) of the Central Income-tax Act, 1961. On the inspection conducted on July 28, 2000, the assessing authority pointed out that the petitioner herein runs the society for educational and charitable purposes for all persons irrespective of religion, race, caste, community or social status. It is also stated that a large portion of the society's income is spent on the training of young priests all over India. In the circumstances, the assessing authority granted the exemption.3. On th...
Tag this Judgment!Minor P. Athulya Rep. by Father and Natural Guardian N. Pavithran Vs. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-29-2007
Reported in: (2007)6MLJ904
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. The appellant, who studied for seven years in Jawahar Navodhya Residential School, Palloor, Mahe, a region within the Union Territory of Pondicherry, claimed reservation as resident of 'Mahe' for admission in engineering course through Joint Entrance Test, 2006, held by the Central Admission Committee of the Government of Pondicherry. Having not allowed such benefit of reservation on the ground that she is not a resident of Mahe, unsuccessfully challenged the order passed by the 1st respondent in No. 59/STOM/T3/Misc/05 dated 25th July, 2006, giving rise to the present appeal.2. According to the appellant, she was born on 19th Aug., 1988, in Mahe region of Union Territory of Pondicherry, brought up at Mahe, having studied from Pre-KG to 5th standard and 6th standard to 12th standard. She studied 6th to 12th standard at Jawahar Navodhya Residential School at Mahe, as a resident student and the said school did not admit students unless they are local residents. She...
Tag this Judgment!Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, by Its Junior Engineer O and M, Melpatti ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-29-2007
Reported in: (2007)6MLJ42
K. Mohan Ram, J.1. The unsuccessful defendant in O.S.No. 631 of 1999 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Gudiyattam, has filed the above second appeal.2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking in the suit.3. The case of the plaintiffs is as follows:The 1st plaintiff had set up flour mill and obtained electricity service connection bearing No. 120 from the defendant Electricity Board; in 1996 the 1st plaintiff's unit was recognised as a tiny unit by the Government of Tamilnadu and certificate to that effect was issued; the tariff to the 1st plaintiff's service connection was classified under Tariff III-A; the second plaintiff started a business of hulling paddy, soapanut power and decorticating of groundnut in October 1998 and the same was recognised as tiny unit and the second plaintiff got the electricity service connection No. 193 which was classified under Tariff III-A; while so according to the plaintiffs the defendant without issuing an...
Tag this Judgment!Central Tobacco Research Institute Rep. by Its Head Vs. the Regional P ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-29-2007
Reported in: (2008)ILLJ96Mad
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. The appellant - Central Tobacco Research Institute, Vedasandur, (hereinafter referred to as 'Research Institute'), is a Central Government body under the control of Indian Council for Agricultural Research (ICAR). It was remitting the employers and employees share of the contribution under the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Provident Fund Act). The share of the employees having been deducted since Nov., 1990 onwards, it was remitting both the employees and employers share since Nov., 1990. Later on, the employers share of contribution was also remitted for the period Aug., 1982 to Oct., 1990.2. The respondent, Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Madurai, initially asked the appellant to deposit its contribution for the period from 1.7.1965 to July, 1982, but it was not deposited by the appellant Research Institute on the ground that it was liable to pay its share only from 1st Aug., 1982. Havi...
Tag this Judgment!The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Secit Spa Societa Ecologica Ilalian ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-29-2007
Reported in: [2009]316ITR378(Mad)
K. Raviraja Pandian, J.1. The assessment year is 2001-2002. The appeal is filed by the revenue against the order of the Appellate Tribunal dated 23.3.2007 made in I.T.A.NO.2931/Madras/04 by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras. 2. The facts as culled out from the statement of facts stated by the revenue are as follows:The assessee is a non-resident Company carrying on business of construction, erection and commissioning of liquid waste treatment plants and following the completed contract method of accounting. The assessee filed its return for the assessment year 2001-2002 declaring a loss of Rs.94,47,870/- and claimed a sum of Rs.1,05,91,411/- towards provision for expenditure. The assessing officer disallowed the provision for expenditure on the ground that the amount claimed by the assessee was based on estimates by the Management in proportion to the stage of completion. The accounting standard AS-7 does not permit any negative work in progress to be allowed, but the claim mad...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »