Chennai Court August 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. Associated Electrical Agencies
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-16-2007
Reported in: (2008)214CTR(Mad)518; [2007]295ITR496(Mad)
K. Raviraja Pandian, J.1. The assessee was an unregistered firm. For the asst. yr. 1991-92, the assessment of the assessee was completed under Section 143(3) of the IT Act on 29th March, 1994 on a total income of Rs. 36,27,580. In the course of assessment proceedings, the AO noticed from the P&L; a/c that the assessee has claimed a sum of Rs. 3,27,895 towards bonus, however, in the balance sheet as on 31st March, 1991, the assessee has shown a sum of Rs. 84,01,475.98 ps. under the head 'Accounts payable'. The AO called for the details regarding payment of bonus. The assessee's representative stated that the bonus was paid to the staff on 31st Oct., 2001 after drawing the cash from the bank. On verification of the accounts, the AO found that though there was cash withdrawal from the bank on 31st Oct., 2001, there was no entry in the books of account relating to disbursement of bonus and even the vouchers did not contain the date of receipt except in a few cases wherein the date of recei...
Tvl. E.i. Dupont (i) (P) Ltd., Represented by Its Power of Attorney, M ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-16-2007
Reported in: (2008)12VST235(Mad)
ORDERM. Jaichandren, J.1. Mr. R. Mahadevan, the learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the respondent.2. With the consent of the learned Counsels appearing on either side, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.3. It is submitted that the petitioner is a registered dealer on the files of the respondent, both under The Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, and The Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The petitioner is a dealer in Paints, Plastic Raw Materials etc. It is further submitted that during the year 2003-2004, the petitioner has effected interstate and branch transfer and consignment sales outside the state.4. It is also submitted that with regard to interstate sales effected, the tax was paid at 4% as against Form C declaration, as prescribed under The Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, and the petitioner has claimed exemption on branch transfer and consignment sales on condition of production of Form F declaration.5. The respondent by an order, dated 6.2....
Ferrari Shoes (India) Pvt. Ltd., Represented by Its Director Mustafa Y ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-16-2007
Reported in: (2008)12VST310(Mad)
ORDERM. Jaichandren, J.1. Mr. Haja Nazirudeen, the learned Special Government Pleader (Tax) takes notice for the respondent in both the writ petitions.2. With the consent of the learned Counsels appearing on either side, these writ petitions are taken up for final disposal.3. It is stated that the petitioners are registered under the Companies Act, having their registered office at 112/113, SIDCO Industrial Estate, Coimbatore. The petitioners are registered dealers under The Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, and The Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. They are also registered as a small scale industry, recognised by the Department of Industries, Government of Tamil Nadu. The petitioners are making footwear costing below Rs. 100/- and are effecting both local as well as interstate sales. Sale of such footwear is exempted from payment of tax as it is an item falling under Sl. No. 25 of part B of the third schedule of The Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959.4. The petitioners have filed...
The Income Tax Officer Vs. K.M. Pachiappan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-16-2007
Reported in: [2009]311ITR31(Mad)
K. Raviraja Pandian, J.1. These appeals are filed by the revenue aggrieved by the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 07.12.2000, framing the following questions of law:1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in not considering the Explanation 2 to Section 147 which provides that the assessing officer can reopen the assessments even if the assessments have not been completed under Section 143 and only intimation had been sent, if the conditions laid under Section 147 are fulfilled2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in not considering that the addition of incentive bonus to the total income is proper or not, in view of the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. E.A. Rajendran reported in : [1999]235ITR514(Mad) in which it has been held that no deduction except what has been allowed under Section 16, is admissible2. The facts, as culled out from the sta...
P. Chinnathai Selva Rani Vs. State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by Its Secretary ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-16-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)CTC67
K. Mohan Ram, J.1. The unsuccessful plaintiff in O.S.No.591 of 2002 on the file of the VI Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai is the appellant in the above second appeal.2. For the sake of convenience the parties are referred to as per their ranking in the suit.3. The short facts that are necessary for the disposal of the above appeal are as follows:The case of the plaintiff is that in the plaintiff's SSLC book her date of birth is mentioned as 09.02.1954; the said entry was made on the basis of the declaration given by her father; the plaintiff is the third child of her parents; the plaintiff is working as headmistress in SBOA School and Junior College, Anna Nagar, Chennai - 101; when the plaintiff went to Tuticorin to see her mother on 03.12.2000, the plaintiff's mother informed her casually that her date of birth was 09.02.1956; on further probe being made by the plaintiff she came to know that her father had declared her age mistakenly while admitting her in the school; ther...
Mohan Jewellery Vs. Vummidi Bangaru Mohan Jewellers
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-14-2007
Reported in: LC2007(3)402
M. Jeyapaul, J.1. The suit is filed seeking permanent injunction restraining the defendants or their agents from in any manner infringing the plaintiffs' well established trade mark 'MOHAN JEWELLERY' and passing off their jewellery by using the word 'MOHAN' as part of trade mark and the trading style as and for the plaintiffs' jewellery and also for directing the defendants to surrender the entire stock of unused offending 'Ummidi Bangaru MOHAN JEWELLERS', Bill Books, Invoices and Labels together with the blocks and dyes, etc. for destruction and to render a true and correct accounts of income earned by the defendant by using the offending word 'MOHAN' as part of their trade mark and trading style.2. The plaintiffs allege that they are leading manufacturers of precious metals including gold jewellery. They have honestly conceived and adopted the trade mark and trading style 'MOHAN JEWELLERY' since 15.11.1961. The plaintiffs have become distinctive. They have spent considerable amounts ...
The Tamil Nadu Co-operative Milk Producers' Federation Ltd. rep. by It ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-14-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)CTC13; (2007)6MLJ780
Elipe Dharmarao, J.1. This writ appeal is filed against the order dated 08.12.2000 passed by the learned single Judge made in W.P. No. 11742 of 1993, which was filed against the order of termination of services of the petitioner by the Managing Director of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Milk Producers' Federation Limited [for short, 'Federation'] through proceedings dated 18.6.1993 on the ground that his initial appointment in the Federation was found to be illegal.2. By proceedings dated 27.5.1989 passed by the Managing Director of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Milk Producers' Federation Limited [for short 'Federation'], the petitioner was appointed as Deputy Manager (Marketing). Thereafter, the matter was placed in the Personnel Committee of the Federation for ratification of the action of the then Managing Director in having appointed the writ petitioner, who was the only candidate sponsored by the Institute of Rural Management, Anand. The Personnel Committee, in its 17th Meeting held on...
S. Sivaraj Vs. the Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Forest Plantation Cor ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-14-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)CTC579; [2008(116)FLR83]; (2008)ILLJ972Mad; (2008)1MLJ268
D. Murugesan, J.1. The appellant, while he was working as a Forest Watcher in the Tamil Nadu Forest Plantation Corporation Limited, was transferred to Keelsevur Beat (Panruti Range) from Semakottai Beat (Vridhachalam Region) and was relieved on 6.7.90. He applied for sick leave on 16.7.90 for a period of 30 days from 10.7.90 to 8.8.90. It appears that he extended the said leave again for the periods from 9.8.90 to 7.9.90, 8.9.90 to 7.10.90, 8.10.90 to 7.11.90 and 8.11.90 to 23.11.90 by subsequent leave applications except, according to the respondents, submitting the leave application for the period from 8.10.90 to 7.11.90. Placing reliance on Regulation 16 of the Tamil Nadu Forest Plantation Corporation (Leave) Regulations, 1977, it was ordered that the appellant was no more an employee of the Corporation by the proceedings of the Managing Director of the respondent Corporation dated 14.10.90.2. The said order was questioned by the appellant before the learned single Judge. By the imp...
K. Kannappan Vs. C.S. Selvaraj (Deceased) and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-13-2007
Reported in: (2007)5MLJ108
P.K. Misra, J.1. Checkered history of the litigation is required to be noticed as briefly as possible. The present appellant and his father had filed C.S. No. 243 of 1980 in the Original Side of the High Court of Madras for specific performance of the contract for sale dated 13.12.1978. Learned single Judge of this Court by judgment dated 20.9.1982, decreed the said suit. The defendants, however, filed O.S.A. No. 213 of 1982. The Division Bench by judgment dated 28.11.1990, allowed the appeal and remanded the matter to the learned single Judge for re-hearing. Thereafter, by judgment dated 18.1.1994, the suit was again decreed with costs and since the amount required to be paid was already in court deposit, learned single Judge directed the defendants to execute the sale deed within a period of two weeks. The defendants again filed O.S.A. No. 89 of 1994. The Division Bench by judgment dated 23.11.2001, while confirming the findings of the learned single Judge and dismissing the O.S.A., ...
Commissioner of Income-tax-i Vs. S.M.S. Gardens
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-13-2007
Reported in: [2009]311ITR16(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 'B', Chennai in I.T.A. No. 2682/MDS/1995 dated 23.10.2003. On 19.07.2004, this Court admitted the appeal and formulated the following substantial questions of law:1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the Assessing Officer was not justified in excluding the cost of lifts, Excalators, EPABX etc., since those assets were not purchased by the assessee but were owned by a Sister Concern?2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in upholding the order of the CIT (Appeals) wherein only the cost of Swimming Pool has been reduced though the cost has rightly been arrived at by excluding the cost incurred by the Sister Concern in respect of certain assets and the Assessi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »