Court : Chennai
..... held: 280. lifting the corporate veil doctrine can, therefore, be applied in tax matters even in the absence of any statutory authorisation to that effect. fera (amendment) act 29 of 1993 has no effect on the principle of lifting the corporate veil and the question as to whether it was established so as to circumvent the provision of ..... issue of the show-cause notice as stated, the appellant was put under detention under the provisions of the conservation of foreign exchange and prevention of smuggling activities act ( cofeposa act in short). the detention order was challenged before this court in hcp no.240 of 1996 and this court rendered its judgment in march 1996, in which ..... months from the date of his becoming owner thereof, and thereby contravening the provisions of section 14 of the act r/w central government's notifications dated 15.06.1977 (gsr 839) and 06.07.1978 (gsr 996) as amended; (e) transferred and also made payments of foreign exchange of pound sterling 43,23,557/- to m/s .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... failed to establish that she is entitled to claim partition in the suit properties as a coparcener by virtue of the hindu succession (tamil nadu amendment) act, 1989 (tamil nadu act 1 of 1990) and consequently, the substantial question of law formulated in this second appeal is answered against the plaintiff and in favour of the ..... not specifically pleaded that she is claiming partition in the suit properties by virtue of the above said amendment act and therefore, the question of the defendants repudiating the same in the written statement does not arise. on the other hand, when the plaintiff has come ..... acceptable and reliable evidence. therefore, to argue that the defendants has not disputed the entitlement of the plaintiff to claim partition by virtue of the above said amendment act, 1 of 1990 in the written statement, the plaintiff's case should be accepted as such, cannot be accepted. as adverted to earlier, the plaintiff has .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai Madurai
..... need to get prior permission from any authority to fill the vacancies that would arise in the sanctioned post. unless the state government suitably amends the provisions of the act and the rules making it mandatory to obtain prior permission for filling up of those sanctioned non-teaching posts, the government could not issue ..... government orders. 6.1. this court is in entire agreement with the said submission. since there is no such provision in the act and the rules to seek prior permission, the 4th respondent could not rely on the government orders/government letters imposing condition seeking permission of the state government ..... of non teaching staff. 4. the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the school is governed by the tamil nadu recognized private schools (regulation) act, 1973 and the rules 1974 framed thereunder. section 19 stipulates the qualifications and the conditions of service of employees in private schools. section 20 speaks about .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... provisions relating to arrest and detention of the defaulter. it cannot, therefore, be said that the recovery officer would act in an arbitrary manner. furthermore, section 30, after amendment by the amendment act, 2000, gives a right to any person aggrieved by an order of the recovery officer, to prefer an appeal to the tribunal. thus ..... :: air 2002 sc 1479), the supreme court noticed section 29 and section 30 substituted vide amendment act, 2000 and held as follows:- 30. by virtue of section 29 of the act, the provisions of the second and third schedules to the income tax act, 1961 and the income tax (certificate proceedings) rules, 1962, have become applicable for the ..... in poppatlal shah v. state of madras [air 1953 sc 274], this court while construing the word `sale' appearing in the madras general sales tax act, 1939 before its amendment in 1947, observed: "it is a settled rule of construction that to ascertain the legislative intent, all the constituent parts of a statutes are to be .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... village panchayat or in municipalities. however, when it was realized that the local bodies have become weak and ineffective for various reasons, the constitution was amended by the constitution (73rd amendment) act 1992 and the reservation with regard to panchayats came into force w.e.f. 24.04.1993. there is a mark difference between article 243 ..... reading into principle. moreover, we have already set out supra that we asked for lok sabha and rajya sabha debates preceding/touching upon the 73rd and 74th amendments to coi. we also had the benefit of seeing extracts of the joint committee reports, as stated supra. the fact that there is no shred of ..... sides to examine the lok sabha and rajya sabha debates and the reports of the joint committee on the constitutional bill, all pertaining to the 73rd and 74th amendments to coi (hereinafter said debates and reports for brevity) to ascertain the legislative intent qua reservation for vice presidents and vice chairmen. after so examining, learned .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... substituted with the expression "with the prior approval of the government" 20. thereafter, rule 149(1) of the tamilnadu co-operative societies rules, 1988, underwent another amendment in g.o.(ms).no.251, co-operation, food and consumer protection (cj1) department dated 07.08.2007, restoring the original position that the expression "with ..... and do not decide anything." 28. in municipal corporation of delhi v. gurnam kaur, (1989) 1 scc 101 and divisional controller, ksrtc v. mahadeva shetty, (2003) 7 scc 197, this court has observed that, "mere casual expressions carry no weight at all. not every passing expression of a judge, however eminent, can be ..... 17. in exercise of powers conferred by section 180 of the tamil nadu co-operative societies act, 1983 [tamil nadu act 30 of 1983], government have issued g.o.ms.no.212, cooperation, food and consumer protection department dated 04.07.1995, amending rule 149, as hereunder: "rule 149.- conditions of service of paid officers and servants .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... 100. in poppatlal shah v. state of madras [air 1953 sc 274], this court while construing the word `sale' appearing in the madras general sales tax act, 1939 before its amendment in 1947, observed: "it is a settled rule of construction that to ascertain the legislative intent, all the constituent parts of a statutes are to be taken ..... said statute. (vide: shri balaganesan metal v. m.n.shanmugham chettry and ors., air 1987 sc 1668; and sahakari sakhar karkhana ltd., v. collector of central excise, pune (2003) 3 scc 506)." 46. in p.valmoorthy v. authorized officer, united bank of india], rendered on 01.07.2009, the hon'ble division bench, at paragraph 10, held ..... the law. it does so employing appropriate phraseology to attain the object of legislative policy, which it seeks to achieve. (xxvi) innasiruddin v. sita ram agarwal reported in(2003) 2 scc 577, the hon'ble supreme court held as follows: 35. in a case where the statutory provision is plain and unambiguous, the court shall not interpret .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... recalled. 34. salient features: (i) it is to be noted that section 86 of the representation of people act, 1951 speaks of 'trial of election petitions'. section 86(5) of the act relates to 'the power of the high court to amend the election petition based on an application concerning the particulars of corrupt practice'. (ii) no wonder, section 86 ..... (6) of the act enjoins that, 'the trial of can election petition shall, so far as is practicable ..... 1976 has been omitted by act 46 of 1999. under the said rule, the court could direct or permit any party, to examine any party or any witness at any stage. the effect of deletion is the restoration of the status quo ante. this means that law that was prevalent prior to 1976 amendment, would govern. the principles .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... 341, 366, 354, 376, 302 and 201 read with 302 ipc and section 4 of the tamil nadu prohibition of harassment of women [amended] act, 2002. by judgment dated 29.09.2016, the trial court convicted him under sections 341, 376, 302 and 201 read with 302 ipc ..... 5 cannot be considered at all as it is an inadmissible evidence in view of the bar contained in section 54 of the evidence act, which states that in criminal proceedings the fact that the person accused of, has a bad character, is irrelevant unless the evidence ..... tied the dead body with her bicycle and threw the same into the water with a view to cause disappearance of the evidence. the act of the accused in killing the deceased would squarely fall within the first limb of section 300 ipc. therefore, the trial court was ..... the mobile number 9095763048 under ex.p.16. he has also given a certificate as required u/s.65-b of the indian evidence act. the said certificate is marked as ex.p.18. as per the said call details, on 23.11.2013, from the cell .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai Madurai
..... need to get prior permission from any authority to fill the vacancies that would arise in the sanctioned post. unless the state government suitably amends the provisions of the act and the rules making it mandatory to obtain prior permission for filling up of those sanctioned non- teaching posts, the government could not issue ..... impugned government orders. 6.1. this court is in entire agreement with the said submission. since there is no such provision in the act and the rules to seek prior permission, the 4th respondent could not rely on the impugned government orders/government letters imposing condition seeking permission of the ..... hence this writ petition. 4. the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the school is governed by the tamil nadu recognized private schools (regulation) act, 1973 and the rules 1974 framed thereunder. section 19 stipulates the qualifications and the conditions of service of employees in private schools. section 20 speaks about .....
Tag this Judgment!