Chennai Court January 2016 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax, Chennai Vs. Farida Leather Company
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-20-2016
M. Jaichandren, J. 1. This Tax Case Appeal has been filed by the Revenue, as against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'B' Bench, Chennai, dated 10.04.2014, made in I.T.A.No.85/Mds/2014. Brief facts: ” 2. The assessee is a firm, engaged in leather business, under the name and style of M/s.Farida Leather Company. The said company filed the return of income for the assessment year 2010-11, on 04.10.2010, admitting a total income of Rs.15,02,222/-. The return of income was processed and later scrutiny assessment was made and during completion of assessment, the Assessing Officer disallowed a deduction of Rs.52,17,014/-, being the commission paid to foreign agents, under Section 40(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). 2.1 Aggrieved over the order passed by the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT (A)). 2.2 The CIT (A) allowed the appeal by the assessee and deleted...
Tag this Judgment!S. Manikandamariappan Proprietor Sree Krishna Carbide rep by his power ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-20-2016
(Prayer: Writ Appeal has been filed under clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order of the learned single Judge of this Court dated 24.8.2009 in W.P.No.11471 of 2003.) M. Jaichandren, J. 1. This writ appeal has been filed against the order passed by the learned single Judge of this Court, dated 24.8.2009, in W.P.No.11471 of 2003. The learned single Judge of this Court had passed the order, dated 24.8.2009, closing the writ petition recording the statement made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the entire arrears of tax, for the assessment years 1998-1999 and 1999-2000, had been paid. However, it had been observed that, if upon verification, the respondent had found that the entire amount due from the appellant had not been paid, it would be open to the respondent to proceed with the auction, afresh, after issuing a notice to the petitioner informing him about the balance amount due to be paid by him. 2. At this stage of the hearing of the writ appeal, the...
Tag this Judgment!R. Nagarajan (M/49) Vs. State Rep. by Inspector of Police, Erode Distr ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-20-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the conviction and sentence passed in S.C.No.138 of 2014 dated 09-07-2014 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Mahalir Needhi Mandram, Erode.) 1. The convictions and sentences dated 09-07-2014 passed in S.C.No.138 of 2014 by the Mahalir Fast Track Court, Erode are being challenged in the present criminal appeal. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the accused during the relevant period has served as a Pharmacist in Kattupullampalayam Government Primary Health Centre. Since the accused knows Allopathy medicines has run a Clinic under the name and style of 'Nagaraj Clinic' in Karattupalayam. The accused has used to give treatment to patients. On 15-09-2012, at about 7:00 a.m., the defacto complainant has brought her female child by name Anusree aged one and a quarter years(1 1/4) to the Clinic of the accused. The accused has administered an injection to the said child. The defacto complainant has ...
Tag this Judgment!P. Venkata Rao, Vellore District and Others Vs. Venkatesan, I.A.S., Th ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-19-2016
(Prayer: Contempt Petition No. 935 of 2015:- Contempt petition filed under Section 11 of Contempt of Courts Act praying to punish the respondent for wilfully and wantonly disobeying the order of this Court dated 25.04.2014 passed in WPN o. 11859 of 2014. Review Applications: Review Applications are filed under Order 47 Rule 1 read with Section 114 of Civil Procedure Code praying to review the order dated 25.04.2014 made in WP No. 11859 of 2014 passed by this Court.) Common Order 1. The contempt petition No. 935 of 2015 has been filed by the writ petitioner in WP No. 11859 of 2014 complaining non-compliance of the order dated 25.04.2014 passed by this Court in WP No. 11859 of 2014 by the sole respondent therein and to initiate contempt proceedings thereof. Review application Nos. 197 and 210 of 2015 have been filed by third parties to WP No. 11859 of 2014 seeking to review the order dated 25.04.2014 passed by this Court in WP No. 11859 of 2014. Review Application No. 192 of 2015 has bee...
Tag this Judgment!Indira Kumari and Another Vs. The State Represented by The Deputy Supe ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-19-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C., seeking the relief to call for the records and quash the proceedings in Spl.C.C. No.1 of 2014 pending on the file of X Additional Special Judge Court, Singaravelar Maligai, Chennai for offences under Sections 120-B r/w 409, 409 r/w 109 IPC, 13(2) r/w 13(1)(c) and (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 r/w 109, 409, 409 r/w 109 IPC r/w 13(1)(C) and (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 and 13(2)r/w 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 r/w 109 IPC.) 1. This Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482, Cr.P.C., praying to call for records relating to Special Calendar Case No.1 of 2014 pending on the file of the X Additional Special Judge, Chennai and quash the same. 2. It is averred in the petition that the petitioners have been arrayed as accused Nos.3 and 4 in Spl.C.C.No.1 of 2014. The respondent has already conducted investigation and ultimately found that there are no materials to...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai Vs. Vishnukumar Traders Private Lim ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-19-2016
(Prayer: Appeal presented has been filed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Chennai `C' Bench, dated 7.8.2015, in ITA No.1328/MDS/2015.) M. Jaichandren, J. 1. This Tax Case Appeal has been filed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal C Bench, Chennai, dated 7.8.2015, made in I.T.A.No.1328/Mds./2015. 2. The brief facts of the case, necessary for the disposal of the appeal are as follows: 2.1) The assessee had filed its return of income, for the assessment year 2010-2011, on 21.9.2010, declaring a total income of Rs.1,29,46,970/-. The return was processed, under Section 143(1) of the Act and a notice, under Section 143(2) of the Act, had been issued and served on the assessee. During the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings, it had been observed that the assessee had claimed deduction, under Section 80IA(4) to the tune of Rs.66,61,342/-. A show cause notice, dated 7.2.2013, had been issued to the assessee and the assessee had been asked to explain...
Tag this Judgment!Maharajan @ Arun Maharajan and Another Vs. State rep. by Assistant Com ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-19-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal under Section 374(2), Cr.P.C., against the judgment dated 24-07-2015 in S.C.No.277 of 2006 by the Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Chennai and to set aside the conviction imposed upon the appellants/accused.) 1. This criminal appeal has been directed against the convictions and sentences dated 24th July 2015 passed in Sessions Case No.277 of 2006 by the Mahala Neethi Manram, Chennai. 2. In the present case, a mother of two young children has been driven to commit suicide due to importunity of her husband and in laws and consequently, her young children have lost their maternal huddling. 3. The conspectus of the case of the prosecution is that accused Nos.2 and 3 are the parents of the first accused. The first accused has married the deceased Krishna Kumari on 25-05-2001. At the time of marriage, the parents of the deceased have given gold jewels and house-hold articles as dowry. After lapse of six months from the date of marriage since the said Krishna Kumari has ...
Tag this Judgment!K. Ponnammal and Others Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by Secretary ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-19-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a Writ ofdeclaration, to declare that the Land Acquisition Proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in respect of the petitioners lands comprised in Survey No.27/4 measuring an extent of 80 cents of No.83, Nerkundram Village, Saidapet Taluk, Chengai MGR District, Now Tiruvallur District as lapsed in view of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Re-Settlement Act, 2013.) 1. The first petitioner submits that an extent of about 80 cents (0.32.5 Hecs.) was owned by her husband N.Kasi Viswanathan in No.83, Nerkundram Village, Saidapet Taluk, Chengai MGR District, now Thiruvallur District. The lands in question were subject matter of acquisition as early as 07.04.1995 when the Government by G.O.Ms.No.441 HUD issued notification under Section 4(1) and proposed to acquire a total extent of 1.42 acres (0.57.5 hecs) comprised in S...
Tag this Judgment!M/s. Arihant Unitech Reality Projects Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissi ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-19-2016
(Prayer: This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of Certiorari to call for the impugned proceedings of the first respondent in RC/1353/2015/2007-2008 dated 30.10.2015 and quash the same as the expenses incurred by the petitioner for the development of vacant plots/land for sale were subjected to tax treating the same as deemed sale value of goods and so passed without authority of law, contrary to the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act and also in violation of the principles of natural justice.) Common Judgment: (M. Jaichandren, J.) W.P.No.39378 of 2015 to W.P.No.39385 of 2015 and W.A. No.22 of 2016 to W.A.No.29 of 2016: 1. Since the issues involved in all the writ petitions and the writ appeals are similar in nature, they have been taken up together and a common Judgment is being passed. 2. The writ petitions in W.P.No.39378 of 2015, W.P.No.39379 of 2015, W.P.No.39380 of 2015, W.P.No.39381 of 2015, W.P.No.39382 ...
Tag this Judgment!M/s. Surana and Surana Vs. Kamal Babbar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-19-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C., against the judgment made in C.C.No.5079 of 1999 dated 21.07.2003 on the file of the VIII Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai.) 1. This Criminal Appeal has been directed against the dismissal order dated 21.7.2013 passed in Calendar Case No.5079 of 1999 by the VIII Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai. 2. The appellant herein, as complainant, has filed the complaint in question under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and the same has been taken on file in Calendar Case No.5079 of 1999, wherein the present respondent has been shown as sole accused. 3. It is averred in the petition that the petitioner has appeared as a counsel in a Civil Suit for the accused and towards his fees, the accused has given 2 cheques, each for a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- on 26.04.1999. The accused has also given one more cheque in favour of the complainant and all the cheques have been put into the concerned bank for co...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »