Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.31 seconds)
Documents citing N.P.R. Narayanan And Others vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 17 August, 1990

R.M. Adaikalavan And Ors. vs State Of Tamil Nadu And Anr. on 25 September, 1997

1. The correctness of the decision rendered by a Division Bench of the Court in the case of R. Anandakumar & Ors. vs. State of Tamil Nadu (1992) 196 ITR 219 (Mad), having doubted by another Division Bench of this Court in the case of N. P. R. Narayanan & Ors. vs. State of Tamil Nadu (1993) 199 ITR 155 (Mad), these cases have been referred to the Full Bench for determining the true scope of s. 65(3) of the TN Agrl. IT Act, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') as it stood prior to its deletion by the Tamil Nadu Act 36 of 1992 w.e.f. 1st April, 1992.
Madras High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

R. M. Adaikalavan & Ors. vs State Of Tamil Nadu & Anr. on 25 September, 1997

The correctness of the decision rendered by a Division Bench of the Court in the case of R. Anandakumar & Ors. vs. State of Tamil Nadu (1992) 196 ITR 219 (Mad), having doubted by another Division Bench of this Court in the case of N. P. R. Narayanan & Ors. vs. State of Tamil Nadu (1993) 199 ITR 155 (Mad), these cases have been referred to the Full Bench for determining the true scope of s. 65(3) of the TN Agrl. IT Act, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) as it stood prior to its deletion by the Tamil Nadu Act 36 of 1992 w.e.f. 1st April, 1992.
Madras High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

T. Jayaraman And Others vs State Of Tamilnadu on 1 October, 1997

9. The answer to the question posed above, we rather feel, cannot be any one, except an "emphatic 'no'" on the face of the decision rendered by the Full Bench of this court in an unreported decision in the case of N.P.R. Narayanan v. State of Tamil Nadu, represented by the Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, Chennai in T.C. No. 427 of 1990, etc., and batch dated September 25, 1997 - since reported as R. M. Adaikalavan v. State of Tamil Nadu [1998] 230 ITR 663. The Full Bench held that (page 674) "the absence of individual holding of land by a partner of a registered firm or of an unregistered firm treated as registered, does not disentitle such a partner from applying for composition of agricultural income tax under section 65(3) of the Act."
Madras High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1