Chennai Court September 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.
A. Petchimuthu Vs. the Chief Executive Officer, Tamil Nadu Khadi and V ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-04-2007
Reported in: (2007)6MLJ700
ORDERK. Chandru, J.1. In W.P. No. 11316 of 2007, the petitioner challenges the order of suspension dated 28.02.2007 on the ground that the charge memo itself is under challenge in W.P. No. 10570 of 2007 and the matter is stayed by this Court. 2. The petitioner was working as a Khadi Assistant Grade I in the Tamil Nadu Khadi and Village Industries Board. During the year 1991, he was deputed to work as Village industries Co-operative Supervisor for the period from 03.5.1991 to 06.10.1991. At that time, there was a proposal to form a Society by name Adyar Electronics and Electrical Wiring, Service, Painting and Stationary Producers' Co-operative Society. Subsequently, the petitioner was transferred to Vellore on 06.10.1991. It was found that during the period in which the petitioner was working, there were some irregularities and misappropriation in the Society and the matter was investigated by Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Wing, Chennai and when the said case is pending b...
The Commissioner of Income Tax I Vs. Gobi Textiles Limited
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-04-2007
Reported in: 217(2008)CCR367
K. Raviraja Pandian, J.1. The relevant assessment year is 1996-97. The appeal is filed formulating the following substantial questions of law:1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the burden cast on the assessee by explanation 1B to Section 271(1)(c) stands discharged by the assessee providing basic information without substantiating the same?2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the onus of proving the source for the share application money is not entirely on the assessee, but largely on the assessing officer?3. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessing officer has to prove that the cash credit is unexplained or that the explanation given is not true, to make an addition under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act?2. The necessary facts as culled out from the statement of facts are as follows:For the assessment year 1996-97, the assessee Company filed its return of income on 29.11.1996 declarin...
N. Subramani Vs. T. Shantha
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-04-2007
Reported in: (2007)5MLJ1397
S. Ashok Kumar, J.1. The unsuccessful appellant/husband who has lost his case before both the courts below has preferred this Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal against the concurrent findings rejecting his case for divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion.2. The case in brief is as follows:The petitioner and respondent are husband and wife. The marriage between them was performed on 30.04.1975 at Thimmarajapuram in Thirunelveli District according to Hindu rites and customs in the presence of the elders. After the marriage, they set up their family at Chengalpattu and thereafter at Chrompet as the petitioner is working at Madras. They lived happily till the birth of a female child on 18.02.1977 at Quilon in the residence of the respondent's parents. The petitioner and the respondent are employed respectively, in Chengalpattu Medical College as Assistant and as Clerk in Chengalpattu Post Office. The respondent left the matrimonial home for the firs time on 23.03.1980, and from then...
Panchura Estates Ltd. Vs. Special Commissioner of Agricultural Income- ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-03-2007
Reported in: [2009]316ITR164(Mad)
M. Jaichandren, J.1. Mr. R. Mahadevan, the learned Additional Government pleader takes notice for the respondents.2. With the consent of learned Counsel appearing on either side, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.3. The petitioner, who was owning,an agricultural estate in the Nilgiris District was an assessee in the books of account of the second respondent, under the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1955. For the assessment year 1996-97, though the petitioner has filed the return of income showing a loss of Rs. 3,95,428, the second respondent has issued several notices, requiring the petitioner to produce the books of account for the relevant period. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner has produced the books of account for the assessment year 1996-97. After appreciating the same, the second respondent has passed the assessment order, dated August 7, 1997, determining the taxable income at Rs. 29,12,037 and levied tax of Rs. 18,92,282, which was questioned by ...
Karpagam Charity Trust Represented by Its Managing Trustee R. Vasantha ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-03-2007
Reported in: (2007)6MLJ681
ORDERV. Dhanapalan, J.1. Since the relief sought in all these eleven writ petitions is identical, these petitions are decided by this common order.2. The case of the petitioners, in a nutshell, is as under:The petitioners which are Charitable and Educational Trusts, with the intention of starting Nursing Colleges/Nursing Schools, applied to the Health & Family Welfare Department of Government of Tamil Nadu and opened Joint Fixed Deposit accounts with the Directorate of Medical Education, Chennai (DME, Chennai). The petitioners' Nursing Colleges/Schools were inspected by the DME, Chennai and Inspection Report was sent by the DME, Chennai to the State Government for grant of No Objection Certificate to the petitioners to start College/School of Nursing. The State Government too passed orders, in accordance with the regulations fixed by the Indian Nursing Council, to the effect of granting No Objection Certificate to the petitioners to start College/School of Nursing. One of the condition...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. A.N. Dyaneswaran
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-03-2007
Reported in: (2008)214CTR(Mad)482; [2008]297ITR135(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, Madras 'A' Bench, Chennai dated 29.10.2003. On 22.03.2004, this Court admitted the appeal and formulated the following substantial questions of law:1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal had enough material to hold, and was right in deleting the additions made on account of money received by the assessee from persons seeking granite mining licenses from TAMIN?2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the cash found in the assessee's office and residential premises was amounts given to the Tamil Nadu Basket Ball Association?3. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in treating the huge investments made in the names of the assessee's mother and son as not that of the assessee on the ground that since the mo...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›