Court : Chennai
Decided on : Feb-11-1988
Reported in : [1989]175ITR93(Mad)
M.N. Chandurkar, C.J. 1. In these three tax cases which are being disposed of by this common judgment, three questions fall for consideration. These are as follows : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the payment of Rs. 50,000 made by the assessee to Pioneer Construction Company, Vijayawada, under the 'Dissolution deed' dated January 1, 1966, was allowable as deduction in computing the income of the assessee for the assessment year 1969-70 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in cancelling the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax under section 263 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961f, for the assessment year 1967-68 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the payment of Rs. 50,000 made by the assessee to Pioneer Construction Company, Vijayawada, under the 'dissolution deed' dated Jan...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jan-20-1988
Reported in : (1989)1MLJ425
Srinivasan, J.1. The appellant is aggrieved by the dismissal of the Writ petition for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the third respondent not to implement the notice dated 24.8.1987, issued under Section 9-A, of the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), until the dispute is resolved by way of settlement or adjudication. The facts set out in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, Co the extent necessary, are as hereunder:The last settlement between the appellant union and the third respondent management dated 12.11.1982 expired on 31.12.1984. The union placed a charter of demands on 213.1985, after terminating the settlement under Section 19 of the Act. Conciliation efforts failed and the concerned Labour Officer sent his failure report dated 8.9.1987 to the Government, which sent a notice to the union on 19.10.1987 to the effect that the failure report was received by the Government on 6.10.1987. The Management had issued a notice unde...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Oct-04-1988
Reported in : (1989)2MLJ517
ORDERBellie, J.1. The issue for decision in this Letters Patent Appeal is with regard to the coverage of Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (Act 34 of 1948) (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The appellant, Messrs. Heatly and Gresham (India) Limited is a public limited company and it is in occupation of the third floor of the Indian Chamber Buildings, Madras. It deals with machine tools, civil engineering and material handling equipments, oil burners, etc., Oil burners are assembled and manufactured in its factory at Sahibabad in Uttar Pradesh which has been covered under the Employees State Insurance Act. The other materials are purchased from manufacturers, stored in godowns and despatched from the stores directly to the parties. In Madras, the said premises is a branch office as also in Calcutta, Bombay, Delhi and Ahmedabad. The Tamil Nadu Government issued a notification in G.O.Ms. No. 1008, dated 22-12-1976 extending the provisions of the Employees State Insurance Act to certa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Oct-04-1988
Reported in : (1999)IIILLJ278Mad
Bellie, J.1. The issue for decision in this Letters Patent Appeal is with regard to the coverage of Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (Act 34 of 1948) (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The appellant, Messrs. Heatly and Gresham (India) Limited is a public limited company and it is in occupation of the third floor of the Indian Chamber Buildings, Madras. It deals with machine tools, civil engineering and material handling equipments, oil burners, etc. Oil burners are assembled and manufactured in its factory at Sahibabad in Uttar Pradesh which has been covered under the Employees' State Insurance Act. The other materials are purchased from manufacturers, stored in godowns and despatched from the stores directly to the parties. In Madras, the said premises is a branch office as also in Calcutta, Bombay, Delhi and Ahmedabad. The Tamil Nadu Government issued a notification in G. O. Ms. No. 1008, dated December 22, 1976 extending the provisions of the Employees' State Insurance Act to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Sep-14-1988
Reported in : (1989)ILLJ269Mad
ORDER1. The facts of the case which are not in dispute lie in a very short compass. The petitioner was serving as the Headmaster in Hajee Mansoorsha Oriental Arabic High School, the correspondent of which is the third respondent herein. He was dismissed from service by an order dated 1st January 1988 with effect from 4th January 1988. The order of dismissal set out the following six reasons therefor :- 1) Misbehaviour with a lady teacher by name Sumathi Elizabeth; 2) English coaching to X Std. students was insufficient; 3) Using bad words when speaking to students; 4) Insulting the organizer of Nutritious Meals Centre of Sulthan Ahamed Primary School; 5) Compelling the teachers improperly and getting their signatures : and 6) Non-co-operation with the management and misuse of power thereby causing confusion and disturbance to the proceedings in school and speaking in loud voice openly degrading the management. 2. Admittedly, no notice was given to the petitioner calling upon him to exp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jan-13-1988
Reported in : (1988)67CTR(Mad)289; [1988]170ITR238(Mad)
..... application of the act is related back to a period anterior to the date on which the act was enacted. it may be recalled that the effect of section 25fff was that the liability to pay compensation arose in respect of undertakings closed on or after november 28, 1956, under section 25ff by an act which came into force on june 6, 1957, but with retrospective effect from november 28, 1956 ..... the assessable income of the taxpayer. the tax advantage results from the reduction of income. 85. where a taxpayer pays a premium on a qualifying insurance policy, he incurs expenditure. the tax statute entitles the taxpayer to reduction of tax liability. the tax advantage results from the expenditure ..... any real loss, and which gain is intended not to be taxable. like the particles these assets have a very short life. having served their purpose, they cancel each other out and disappear. at the end of the series of operations, the taxpayer' ..... 1985]154itr148(sc) , was considered by the privy council in irc v. challenge corporation ltd. [1987] 2 wlr 24 in the context of section 99 of the income-tax act, 1976, of new zealand. section 99 provided for certain agreements purporting to alter the incidence of tax to be void. under ..... any relevance at all while deciding the validity of section 171(9) of the act because that decision was rendered prior to the enactment of section 171(9). it appears to us that there is much substance in this argument. 43. it is true that in kalloomal's case : [1982]133itr690 .....
Tag this Judgment!