Chennai Court October 2012 Judgments

Tvl.Rajaguru Spinning Mills (P) Ltd., Rep. by the Managing Director Vs ...

Court: Chennai

(Prayer:Petition filed seeking for a writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to clarify the rate of tax under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 for the requisition made by the petitioners in Form VV dated 18.05.2012, within time frame.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the Government Advocate appearing for the respondents. 2. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that it would suffice, if the second respondent is directed to issue the necessary clarifications, as per the request made by the petitioner, on 18.05.2012, within a specified period. 3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents has no objection for such an order being passed by this Court. 4. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on either side, the second respondent is directed to issue the necessary clarifications as requested by the petitioner, by its c...

M/S. R.K. Industries-iv, Represented by Its Partner Ajay Agarwal, Chen ...

Court: Chennai

(Prayer:Petition filed seeking for a writ of Mandamus to direct the Respondent to sanction the drawback claim pertaining to Shipping Bill Nos.3266778 dated 18.04.2011 and 6184134 dated 10.11.2011 along with interest the rate of 6% per annum in terms of Section 75A of the Customs Act, 1962.) 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent. 2. At this stage of the hearing of the Writ Petition, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that it would suffice, if the drawback claims filed by the petitioner are directed to be considered, by the respondent, in respect of the Shipping Bill Nos.3266778, dated 18.04.2011 and 6184134, dated 10.11.2011, and to pass appropriate orders thereon, within a specified period. 3. In view of the limited relief prayed for by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, this Court finds it appropriate to direct the respondent to consider the dr...

Seetharam Singh Vs. the State Rep. by Inspector of Police

Court: Chennai

Reported in: 2013(1)MLJ(Crl)254

(PRAYER: Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397 read with 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code against the Judgement rendered by the learned Additional District Cum Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Vellore, dated 24.10.2008 by confirming the Judgement rendered by learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Vellore in C.C.No.56/2007 dated 28.03.2008 by convicting the Petitioner for the offence under section 408 read with 35, 477A, read with 35, to undergo one year imprisonment for both the offences and Rs.500 as fine, the said judgement is liable to be set aside.) This revision petition is filed against the judgment rendered by the learned Additional District Cum Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Vellore, in C.A.No.80 of 2008, dated 24.10.2008 by confirming the judgment rendered by learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Vellore in C.C.No.56/2007 dated 28.03.2008 by convicting the revision petitioner for the offence under section 408 read with 35, 477A, read with 35, and sentencing him to un...

M/S. Narendra Solvex Pvt Limited Represented by Its Director, Coimbato ...

Court: Chennai

(Prayer: Petition filed seeking for a writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the respondent in CST No.965462/11-12 and quash the proceedings dt.31.07.2012 issued therein.) 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent. 2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that the respondent had issued the impugned notice, dated 31.07.2012, relating to the Central Sales Tax Assessment year 2011-2012. He had further submitted that the petitioner is not in a position to raise the necessary objections, in respect of the said impugned notice, dated 31.07.2012, as the petitioner is not in possession of the documents, which had been seized by the respondent, during the inspection conducted in the business premises of the petitioner, on 26.09.2011 and 27.09.2011. 3. The learned counsel had further submitted that the respondent had not furnished the necessary information, relating to the D-3 p...

Sterling and Wilson Limited Rep. by Its Senior Manager K. Anand Babu V ...

Court: Chennai

(Prayer: Petition filed seeking for a Writ of Certiorari to call for the impugned proceedings of the respondent passed in G.D.No.4861 of 2012-2013 dated 2.10.2012 and quash the same.) 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate for taxes, appearing on behalf of the respondent. 2. By consent of both the parties, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. 3. In view of the similar orders passed by this Court, in a number of writ petitions, including the order, dated 21.12.2010, made in W.P.No.29050 of 2010, the following order is passed: i) The petitioner shall pay the amount of tax of Rs.36,374/-demanded by the authority, while passing the detention order. ii) On payment of such tax amount, the goods detained shall be released and the same shall be subject to the final adjudication order, which may be passed by the authority concerned. iii) It is made clear that, while making recovery of the tax amount due, the amount of tax alrea...

S. Vasundra Vs. Escorts Finance Limited

Court: Chennai

(PRAYER : Criminal Revision is filed under Sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C., to call for the entire records in connection with C.A.No.246 of 2003, on the file of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-II, Chennai and set-aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the learned Fast Track Court-II, Chennai, dated 25.05.2005 confirmed the conviction and sentence imposed by the learned XIV Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai in C.C.No.968 of 2000, dated 16.07.2003.) The revision petitioner / appellant / accused has preferred the present revision in Crl.R.C.No.833 of 2005 against the judgment passed in C.A.No.246 of 2003, on the file of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-II, Chennai, confirming the conviction and sentence passed in C.C.No.968 of 2000, on the file of XIV Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai. 2. The respondent / complainant's case is as follows:- The accused, in order to discharge the dues payable to the complainant, issued a cheque ...

M/S. Sri Devi Oil Mills Ltd. and Another Vs. the Customs Excise and Se ...

Court: Chennai

(This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the case in impugned final orders Nos.904 & 905/06 dated 25.09.2006 passed by the 1st respondent herein and to quash the said final orders and consequently direct the 1st respondent to pass the fresh order directing the Commissioner (Appeals) to hear the appeals without insisting upon the pre deposit of the 50% of the amount confirmed by the adjudicating authority.) (This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the case in impugned final orders Nos.904 & 905/06 dated 25.09.2006 passed by the 1st respondent herein and to quash the said final orders and consequently direct the 1st respondent to pass the fresh order directing the Commissioner (Appeals) to hear the appeals without insisting upon the pre deposit...

P.K. Shankar Vs. the Secretary to Government Industries Department and ...

Court: Chennai

(Prayer: Petition filed seeking for a writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to grant lease for quarrying Grey Colour granite infavour of the petitioner pursuant to the application dated 01.12.2011.) 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 2.At this stage of the hearing of the Writ Petition, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents had placed before this Court the proceedings of the District Collector, Krishnagiri, the third respondent herein, dated 25.05.2012, rejecting the request of the petitioner for the grant of lease for quarrying grey colour granite, as per his application, dated 01.12.2011. The copy of the said proceedings had also been handed over to the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3.In such circumstances, this Writ Petition stands dismissed, as infructuous. However, it is made clear that it would be open to the petitioner to challenge the proceedings o...

M/S. Deegee Orchards Private Limited Represented by Its Director Coimb ...

Court: Chennai

(Prayer: Petition filed seeking for a writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the respondent in CST No.965463/10-11 and quash the proceedings dt.31.07.2012 issued therein.) 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent. 2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that the respondent had issued the impugned notice, dated 31.07.2012, relating to the Central Sales Tax Assessment year 2010-2011. He had further submitted that the petitioner is not in a position to raise the necessary objections, in respect of the said impugned notice, dated 31.07.2012, as the petitioner is not in possession of the documents, which had been seized by the respondent, during the inspection conducted in the business premises of the petitioner, on 26.09.2011 and 27.09.2011. 3. The learned counsel had further submitted that the respondent had not furnished the necessary information, relating to the D-3 p...

M/S. Sree Rajendra Textiles, Rep by Its Partner Amarish, Karnataka Vs. ...

Court: Chennai

(Prayer: Petition filed seeking for a writ of Mandamus to direct and hold that the contracted value, payable and paid to the supplier of imported goods is the transaction value as defined under Section 14(1) of the Customs Act in so far as the import of "thrown silk yarn in hanks of Vietnam Origin" by the petitioner under the contract No.10 ZS 225 dated 10-07-2010, covered under Bills of Entry Nos.7918620 dated 11.09.2012 and B.E.No.7993641 dated 20-9-2012 on the imports thro' Chennai Port, release the same.) 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that this Court had passed orders, in similar matters, directing the provisional release of the goods in question, subject to the following conditions: "(1) The petitioner shall pay the entire amount of duty, to the department, forthwith, as per the declared value, which may be based...