Chennai Court July 2013 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.
M/S Fichtner Consulting the Assistant Commissioner of Engineers (India ...
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chennai
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
Abraham P. George, Accountant Member : In this appeal filed by the Revenue, it has raised four grounds of which, ground Nos.1 and 4 are general needing no adjudication. 2. Vide its ground No.2, it assails deletion of addition of ` 4.20 Crores made by the Assessing Officer for billing in excess of revenue. 3. Before us, learned A.R. submitted that this issue stood covered by the decision of co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in assessee's own case for assessment year 2007-08. A copy of the order in I.T.A. No. 481/Mds/2011 dated 18th May, 2012, was placed on record. 4. Learned D.R., on the other hand, submitted that though the issue was similar to that of assessment year 2007-08, in the said year, assessee had produced detailed bill-wise explanation to show that bills were raised by it on its clients without corresponding work being rendered. As per learned D.R., no such details were furnished for the relevant previous year. 5. We have perused the orders and heard the rival submissions. ...
M/S It Expressway Limited, Sindhur Pantheon Plaza Vs. Company Ward Ii( ...
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chennai
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
Abraham P. George, Accountant Member: In this appeal filed by the assessee, its grievance is that cost of erection of barricades and maintenance Rs.52,20,830/- was not allowed to be set off against advertisement income of Rs.30,60,000/-. 2 I.T.A. No. 795/Mds/13 2. Facts apropos are that assessee, engaged in construction of a portion of OMR from Madhya Kailash of Adyar upto Siruseri, was doing the project on build, operate and transfer basis. Expenditure incurred for construction of the road was considered by the assessee as project cost that was to be recouped from the Government of Tamil Nadu, lateron, when the road was handed over to the Government. During the road laying work, for controlling the heavy flow of traffic, barricades were erected. Cost of erection of barricades and maintaining such barricades, as per assessee, came to Rs.52,20,830/-. Assessee had placed certain advertisements on such barricades which earned it an income of `30,60,000/-. Assessee had claimed set off of b...
The Assistant / Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/S. Keesara Pla ...
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-2013
Vikas Awasthy, Judicial Member The three appeals- ITA No. 1326/Mds/2012 for the Assessment Year 2007-08, ITA No. 1327/Mds/2012 for the Assessment Year 2008-09 and ITA No. 917/Mds/2013 for the Assessment Year 2009-10 have been filed by the Revenue impugning the order of Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-III, Chennai for the respective Assessment Years. 2. Since the issue involved in all the three appeals is same, all the three appeals are taken up for adjudication together. At the request of the ld. DR, the facts are taken from ITA No. 1327/Mds/2012 relevant to the AY. 2008-09 as the assessment order for the AY. 2008-09 is detailed. The ld. AR of the assessee has not raised any objection to this request of the ld. DR. 3. The facts in brief are; the assessee is a company registered under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956 and is engaged in the business of manufacturing PY seals for dry batteries and torch lights. The assessee is manufacturing torch lights for M/s. Nippo Batteris Co....
Gmmco Limited Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-10-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :10. 07.2013 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.HARIPARANTHAMAN Writ Petition No.18672 of 2013 M/s.GMMCO Limited, Rep. By its Executive Vice President (Finance & Systems) 6, G.S.T.Road, St.Thomas Mount, Chennai 600 016. ... Petitioner vs. 1.The Government of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Chief Secretary, Fort St.George, Chennai 600 009. 2.Chennai Metro Rail Limited, Rep. By its Managing Director, Harini Towers, No.7, Coran Smith Road, Gopalapuram, Chennai 600 086. 3.Land Acquisition Officer and Special Tahsildar (LA) Chennai, Chennai Metro Rail Limited, Harini Towers, No.7, Coran Smith Road, Gopalapuram, Chennai 600 086. 4.The District Collector, Kanchipuram District, Kanchipuram 631 501. 5.The Special Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition) Tamilnadu Urban Development Project III15 MG Nagar, Poonamallee Chennai 600 056. ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of writ of...
R.V.P.Shakunthala Vs. N.Hari Narayana
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-10-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :10. 07.2013 Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.RAVICHANDRABAABU C.R.P. (NPD) No.3789 of 2009 and M.P. Nos.1 of 2009 and 1 of 2012 R.V.P.Shakunthala .. Petitioner Vs 1. N.Hari Narayana (Deceased) 2. Jyothirmayi 3. N.Suguna Mayi .. Respondents ( R2 and R3 brought on records as LR's of the deceased sole respondent vide order of the Court dated 5.6.2013 made in M.P.No.1 of 2013 in C.R.P. (NPD) No.3789 of 2009 ) Civil Revision Petition filed against the judgment and decree dated 19.10.2009 made in R.C.A No.179 of 2007 on the file of the VII Judge, Small Causes Court at Chennai against the order dated 30.11.2006 made in R.C.O.P.No.762 of 2006 on the file of the XV Judge, Small Causes Court at Chennai. For Petitioner : Mr.P.Seshadri For Respondents : Mr.S.S.Rajesh ORDER The Revision Petitioner is the tenant. She is aggrieved against the order of eviction passed by the learned Rent Controller and confirmed by the Appellate Authority on the ground o...
Krishnaveni Vs. Suptdg. Engineer of Kadamparai Electricity Generation ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-10-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :10. 07.2013 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.HARIPARANTHAMAN Writ Petition No.18660 of 2013 1 KRISHNAVENI [ PETITIONER ]. Vs 1 THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER KADAMPARAI ELECTRICITY GENERATION BLOCK MINPARAI-642101 COIMBATORE DISTRICT. [ RESPONDENT ]. Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the respondent in Letter No.019395/765/NiBi.2/ Assistant.1/Ka.Va.Ve/2013 dated 25.3.2013 and quash the same and direct the respondent to grant appointment to the daughter of the petitioner on compassionate grounds. For Petitioner : Mr.N.Anand Venkatesh For Respondents : Mr.Dileep Kumar ORDER With the consent of both parties, the Writ Petition itself is taken up for final disposal, as the matter is squarely covered by a decision of this Court.2. Heard both sides.3. The petitioner's husband was working as Serang Grade II in the Tamil Nadu Electricity Boar...
M.Kamalakannan Vs. Tahsildar of Chengam Taluk Office
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-10-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:10. 7-2013 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN Writ Petition No.18180 of 2012 and M.P.No.1 of 2012 and M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2013 M.Kamalakannan .. Petitioner Versus 1. The Tahsildar, Chengam Taluk Office, Tiruvannamalai District.2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Revenue Divisional Office, Tiruvanamalai.3. The Collector, Tiruvannamalai District, Tiruvannamalai-606604.4. The District Employment Office, Thiruvannamalai. (R4, Imleaded as per order, dated 31.7.2012, by NPVJ in Mps.1 & 1/12 in W.Ps.18180 and 18181/2012. .. Respondents Prayer: Petition filed seeking for a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to issue appointment order to the petitioner by considering the petitioner's representation dated 20.4.2012. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Sivaji For Respondents : Mr.R.Ravichandran Additional Government Pleader ORDER Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of t...
K.Murugan Vs. Managing Director Tasmac
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-10-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 10.07.2013 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE D.HARIPARANTHAMAN Writ Petition No.18691 of 2013 1 K.MURUGAN [ PETITIONER ].Vs 1 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR TASMAC ANNA SALAI, CHENNAI. 2 THE SENIOR REGIONAL MANAGER TASMAC GOUNDAMPALAYAM COIMBATORE. 3 THE DISTRICT MANAGER TASMAC ERODE. [ RESPONDENTS ].Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to pass orders on the petitioner's Appeal dated 20.11.2012 after affording opportunity to the petitioner within a stipulated period as fixed by this Honourable Court For Petitioner : Ms.J.Kavitha For Respondents : Mr.S.Muthuraj ORDER The petitioner was a Salesman in the TASMAC shop. He was dismissed from service by an order dated 19.11.2006. He preferred an appeal dated 20.11.2012 to the second respondent against the dismissal order. 2. Thereafter, he has filed this Writ Petition seeking for a direction to the second respond...
Johara Ummal Vs. S.M.Omar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-10-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATE:10. 7.2013. CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.S.RAMANATHAN A.S. Nos.927 of 1989, 141 of 1990, Cross Objection No.137 of 1995 and C.M.P.No.84 of 2006 A.S.No.927 of 1989 1. Johara Ummal (deceased) 2. Alima Ummal 3. Sulaika Ummal (Appellants 2 and 3 are brought on record as LRs of the deceased sole appellant vide order dated 14.8.2007 made in C.M.P.Nos.9488 to 9490 of 2005) Appellants vs.1. S.M.Omar 2. A.Asuma Ummal 3. T.A.Hameed Maricar 4. T.A.Sulthan Maricar 5. O.M.Ibrahim Maricar 6. O.M.Abdul Razack Maricar 7. O.M.Oli Sahib Maricar 8. O.M.Jackiria Maricar 9. Sabbia Ummal 10. Julaiga Ummal 11. Rohaya Gani 12. Mohamed Issack 13. Badurnnisa 14. Asraf Ali 15. Jahabar Maricar 16. Abdul Hamid 17. Mohamed Abdullah 18. Beevi Fathima 19. Shaik Mohammed 20. Abdul Kareem 21. Abdul Jabar (Respondents 18 to 21 are brought on record as LRs of the sole appellant vide order dated 14.8.2007 made in C.M.P.Nos.9488 to 9490 of 2005) Respondents For appellants : ...
Thalapathi Parthiban Vs. 1)The Superintending Engineer,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-10-2013
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:10. 07/2013 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR W.P(MD)No.10511 of 2013 and M.P(MD)No.1 of 2013 Thalapathi Parthiban ... Petitioner Vs 1) The Superintending Engineer, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited, Virudhunagar District. 2) The Assistant Executive Engineer, (Rural), Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited, Srivilliputhur. ... Respondents Prayer Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order dated 22.06.2013 in Ku.No.U.Se.Po./Oo/Thiruvi/Va.A./Ko Kamukkan/ A.No.76/2013 passed by the 2nd respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into the service with all consequential benefits. !For Petitioner ... Mr.R.Sathish ^For Respondents ... Mr.S.Dhayalan :ORDER Being aggrieved by the impugned order, dated 22.06....
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- Next ›
- Last »