Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Sorted by: recent Court: chennai Page 11 of about 27,565 results (0.161 seconds)

Mar 12 2015 (HC)

Community Action for Rural Vs. 1.The Secretary,

Court : Chennai

..... to the petitioner. the petitioner has also availed similar loans from rmk and the same has been repaid regularly.5. the income tax department advised the petitioner that they would not get exemption under section 80-g of the income tax act, if they carry on the lending activities. the petitioner was finding very difficult to collect the loans distributed to women self ..... .2. the petitioner is a non-governmental organization, registered under the tamil nadu societies registration act 27 of 1975 in the year 1982. the petitioner is registered with the commissioner of income tax under section 12-a and exempted under section 80-g of the income tax act. the petitioner also registered with the ministry of home affairs, government of india under the ..... foreign contribution regulation act, 1976. the aim and object of the petitioner is to undertake rural development ..... in such a manner as to affect the fundamental rights of persons residing or carrying on business within the jurisdiction of such high court vide., k.s.rashid ahmed v. income tax investigation commission, air1951punj. 74; m.k.ranganathan v. madras electric tramways (1904) ltd., air1952mad.659; aswini kumar sinha v. deputy collector of central excise and land customs, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 10 2015 (HC)

1.Imayam Trust Vs. 1.Balakumar

Court : Chennai

..... to the trust under section 80g (5) of the income tax act, 1961. the above documents are sought to be filed to prove ..... photo copy of letter dated 6.03.2006 issued by the commissioner of income tax-i trichy informing xmayam trust?. that the trust is registered as ?.public charitable trust?. under section 12aa of the income tax act 1961. 2) photocopy of letter dated 6.03.2006 issued by the commissioner of income tax-i, trichy informing xmayam trust?. that exemption was granted in respect of donations ..... that the trust is a public trust and the documents are public documents and this court can take judicial note of those documents under sections 57 and 74 of the indian evidence act, whereas miss.j.anandavalli, counsel for revision petitioner ..... this court takes judicial note under sections 57 and 74 of the evidence act. technical approach should be avoided in the matters involving administration of trust. the received documents make, prima facie, clear that the trust is a public trust. moreover, contrary to their own stand before income tax department,the revision petitioners have taken a contra stand before civil court and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 04 2014 (HC)

Sri Devi Muthumarriamman Koil Vs. the Inspector of Police

Court : Chennai

..... stated that the firs.defendant had shown that he became the owner of 4 grounds as residuary legatee in all his returns filed under income tax act, wealth tax act and urban land tax act, etc.in the earlier suits filed in c.s.no.88 of 1989 and 89 of 1989, these documents were not challenged. ..... right to construct the buildings. there was an extraordinary delay in filing the suit. hence the discretionary relief under section 42 of the old limitation act cannot be granted. even if any declaration is given, that would be a futile declaration. though the title of the property was disputed, no ..... declaratory relief and consequential relief under section 34 of the specific relief act was also sought for. where there is no prayer for declaration of title, the title to the property cannot be agitated. the plaintiffs are not ..... properties. the cause of action is only for denial of title and not for sale of the property. under section 34 of the specific relief act, it is only discretionary and a mere declaratory relief does not serve any purpose. the plaintiffs have not satisfied the three conditions for getting declaratory ..... the judgment of the supreme court in vinay krishna v. keshav chandra reported in 1993 supp (3) scc129 wherein section 42 of the specific relief act, 1877 was considered. it was held that if plaintiff was not in exclusive possession of the property because there are two other persons and tenants .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 21 2014 (HC)

Ponnammal Vs. Nagappan

Court : Chennai

..... for the respondent also would submit that as per the decision in krishna janardhan bhat versus dattatraya g. hedge [air2008sc1325, there is stipulation under the income tax act for the issuance of demand drafts in transaction involving more than rs.20,000/-. however, in this case, no d.d.was given to the ..... launching a prosecution. in such view of the matter, invoking of section 23 of the indian contract act will not arise in this case. no doubt, there is a stipulation in the income tax act to pay in d.d.in transaction involving more than rs.20,000/-, but, that would not ..... , there was reciprocal promises. under those circumstances, ex.a1 came into being. it will fall under section 2(d) of the indian contract act. 42 in loganathan (a.i.r.1969 madras15 it was held that abstinence from launching a criminal prosecution for commission of an offence cannot be ..... consideration. however, in indian contract law, past consideration is a good consideration. it is also evident from section 2(d) of the indian contract act. therefore, under the indian contract law, consideration need not be passed across the table between the negotiating parties. it need not be in presents. ..... formulated the following substantial questions of law: (1) whether the defendant has rebutted the presumption of consideration as required under section 118 of negotiable instruments act as he has admitted his signature in the suit promissory note ?. (2) whether on the basis of the evidence of the scribe and attestor .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 19 2014 (HC)

Minor Shivachandiran Vs. the Managing Director

Court : Chennai

..... that every citizen had to file income tax returns. if at all the income of a person exceeds a particular limit, only such person should file return irrespective of the fact whether ..... see that every citizen had to file at least nil income returns and that filing tax returns would not pre-suppose a huge income."11. i am at a loss to understand as to how such a ground could be set out before this court. a mere reading of the relevant provisions of the income tax act would demonstrate and indicate that there is no necessity ..... an individual is entitled to live incommensurate with the status of the person concerned. here my discussion supra would show that the husband is an income tax assessee, but he has not chosen to disclose his actual income. in such a case, it could rightly be understood that the revision petitioner's wife and child are entitled to lead a decent life. in ..... revision petitioner's implied admission would evidence that he is an income tax assessee and there is no shard or shred of reasons available as to why he has not filed any of the copies of the returns before the lower court to highlight his actual income. section 106 of the indian evidence act would warrant the revision petitioner to produce such evidence, but .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 09 2014 (HC)

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Kikani Exports Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Chennai

..... value is determinable only after hearing the assessee as per the statutory provisions stated supra. there is no indication either in the provisions of section 50c of income-tax act or section 47a of the stamp act or rules made thereunder about the adoption of the guideline value. hence, the contention that the section 50c is arbitrary and violative of article 14 cannot be ..... by which the respondent, having referred the matter to the valuation cell on 17.12.2008 as per section 50c(2) of the income tax act, 1961 (for brevity, ".the act".), completed the assessment by invoking section 50c of the act by taking the value of land as determined for stamp duty purpose as the sale value, as no valuation report was received from the ..... report from the valuation officer is perfectly valid. 4.3. he would distinguish between section 50c and section 55a of the act by referring to the judgment of the bombay high court in rallis india ltd. v. deputy commissioner of income tax and others, [2006]. 284 itr159(bom). he would also rely upon the judgments in bombay metropolitan regional development authority, bombay v ..... fair market value, conferring such power to the assessing officer. while construing the said section 55a of the act, the bombay high court in rallis india ltd. v. deputy commissioner of income tax and others, [2006]. 284 itr159(bom), observing that section 55a of the act does not prohibit ascertainment of the fair market value after the assessment order is passed by the assessing .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 02 2014 (HC)

Ramanujam Vs. the District Collector

Court : Chennai

..... required as per the provisions of 269 uc and 269 ud. pointing at the above provisions of sections 269 uc and 269 ud of the income tax act, it was urged by the learned senior counsel for the appellant that the provisions were not mandatory and it was only directory and even if ..... relief of specific performance could not be granted since the alleged contract was in violation of the provisions under sections 269 uc and 269 ud of income tax act; that apart from that, the suit was hit and barred under order ii rule 2 c.p.c.; that the plaintiff has also suppressed the ..... uc and 269 ud of the income tax act were not a bar for granting a decree for specific performance and hence, the findings of the trial court were erroneous.9. the learned ..... this court, in which possession was protected by granting an order of interim injunction; that the provisions of sections 269 uc and 269 ud of income tax act were not attracted to the facts and circumstances of the case and they were directory and not mandatory and that the provisions of section 269 ..... as there was no written agreement, the appropriate authority cannot issue no objection certificate and thereby, the same is hit by section 269 uc of the income tax act. further, the actual total sale consideration has not been clearly mentioned. further more, the defendant adopted illegal tactics to obtain possession, by colluding the then .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 25 2014 (HC)

Raja Vs. the Secretary to Government

Court : Chennai

..... required as per the provisions of 269 uc and 269 ud. pointing at the above provisions of sections 269 uc and 269 ud of the income tax act, it was urged by the learned senior counsel for the appellant that the provisions were not mandatory and it was only directory and even if ..... relief of specific performance could not be granted since the alleged contract was in violation of the provisions under sections 269 uc and 269 ud of income tax act; that apart from that, the suit was hit and barred under order ii rule 2 c.p.c.; that the plaintiff has also suppressed the ..... uc and 269 ud of the income tax act were not a bar for granting a decree for specific performance and hence, the findings of the trial court were erroneous.9. the learned ..... this court, in which possession was protected by granting an order of interim injunction; that the provisions of sections 269 uc and 269 ud of income tax act were not attracted to the facts and circumstances of the case and they were directory and not mandatory and that the provisions of section 269 ..... as there was no written agreement, the appropriate authority cannot issue no objection certificate and thereby, the same is hit by section 269 uc of the income tax act. further, the actual total sale consideration has not been clearly mentioned. further more, the defendant adopted illegal tactics to obtain possession, by colluding the then .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 14 2014 (HC)

The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Aditya Ferro Alloys

Court : Chennai

..... 2, surakudi village thirunallar, karaikal. .. respondent in all the appeals tca nos.978 to 981 of 2013 u/s 260-a of the income tax act filed against the order of the income tax appellate tribunal, madras 'a' bench, dated 26.6.13 in ita no.474, 840, 871 & 872/mds/2013 for the assessment years ..... r.s.j.) (g.m.a.j.) 14.07.2014 index : yes internet : yes gln to 1. the income tax appellate tribunal madras a' bench, chennai.2. commissioner of income tax (appeals) trichy.3. the addl. commissioner of income tax thanjavur range, thanjavur. r.sudhakar, j.and g.m.akbar ali, j.gln t.c. (a) nos. 978 ..... rejected the assessee's claim for treating it as revenue expenditure.3. aggrieved by the said decision, the assessee filed an appeal before the commissioner of income tax (appeals) on all the four assessment orders, viz., 2005-2006 (re-opened), 2008-2009, 2009-2010 and 2010-2011. the commissioner (appeals), placing ..... reliance on the decision of the income tax appellate tribunal 'd' bench, chennai, in the assessee's own case for the assessment year 2004-2005, allowed the appeals recording the finding of the ..... 2007-08, we hold that the expenditure incurred on purchase of cast iron ingot moulds is revenue in nature. accordingly, we uphold the findings of the cit (appeals) and dismiss all the four appeals of the revenue.7. as regards cross objection of the assessee for the a.y. 2005-06 is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 10 2014 (HC)

Akilan Ramanathan Vs. the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Chennai

..... and proper application of mind. he would contend that the assessing officer added the amount transferred from his own bank account from delhi to chennai, under section 68 of the income tax act, as 'unexplained credit'. the petitioner in w.p.no.702 to 707 of 2014, who is the wife of the petitioner in w.p.nos.673 to 678 of 2014 ..... perused the materials available on record. 6.admittedly the petitioners are individual assessees and since there was an escapement of income, for reasons recorded as provided under section 147 of the income tax act, notice was caused to them under section 148 of the said act and after affording them an opportunity, the assessment was finalised and those assessment orders were put to challenge by ..... the said statement, the learned counsel for the petitioners would draw the attention of this court to the judgement of the rajasthan high court reported in virender singh sekhawat vs. income tax officer reported in (2013) 216 taxman 236 and the division bench judgement of the delhi high court in soul vs. dcit, reported in (2010)323 itr305and submit that in ..... . consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. msk 10.07.2014 index:yes/no internet:yes/no to 1.the joint commissioner of income tax, business range-iii, aayakar bhavan, 121, nungambakkam high road, nungambakkam, chennai-600 034 2.the commissioner of income tax, chennai-x, 6th floor, annexe building, aayakar bhavan, no.121, nungambakkam high road, nungambakkam, chennai-600 034 3.the commissioner .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //