12 Sep 2022 2:00 AM GMT
A weekly round-up of important cases from Madras High Court. Citations: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 384 To 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 397 NOMINAL INDEX India Yamaha Motor Private Limited Versus The Assistant Commissioner, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 384 M/s.EIH Associated Hotels Ltd. Versus The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 385 B Shanmugam and others v. Karthik...
A weekly round-up of important cases from Madras High Court.
Citations: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 384 To 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 397
India Yamaha Motor Private Limited Versus The Assistant Commissioner, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 384
M/s.EIH Associated Hotels Ltd. Versus The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 385
B Shanmugam and others v. Karthik Dasari, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 386
Dr. A Packia Raj and others v. State and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 387
Kamalanathan and others v. State and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 388
Gokul Ajith and others v. The State, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 389
Kanthan v State and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 390
K.J.Suriyanarayanan v. State and another, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 391
Jegan @ Ellamaran and others v. State and another, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 392
M Satheesh v. Secretary, Revenue Department and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 393
Melmaruvathur Adhiparasakthi Institute of Medical Sciences v. Union of India and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 394
Anandam Gundluru v. Inspector of Police, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 395
Minor V Amrutha v. Council for Architecture and another, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 396
S.Ravi Selvan v. Central Board of Indirect Taxes & customs and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 397
1. Interest Leviable On Belated Remittance of GST Even If Credit In Cash/Credit Ledgers Is Available: Madras High Court
Case Title: India Yamaha Motor Private Limited Versus The Assistant Commissioner
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 384
The Madras High Court has ruled that interest on late GST remittances is levied even if credit in electronic cash or credit ledgers is available.
The single bench of Justice Anitha Sumanth has observed that unless an assessee actually files a return and debits the respective registers, the authorities cannot be expected to assume that available credits will be set-off against tax liability.
2. Audit Objection Can't Be The Basis Of AO's 'Reasons To Believe ' That Too After Lapse Of 6 Years: Madras High Court
Case Title: M/s.EIH Associated Hotels Ltd. Versus The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 385
The Madras High Court has quashed the reassessment proceedings and held that an audit objection does not satisfy the requirement of the Assessing Officer having an independent "reason to believe" that income has escaped assessment, that too after the elapse of nearly six years.
The single bench of Justice Anitha Sumanth has observed that all materials with regard to the computation of tax under the provisions of MAT were available before the Assessing Authority during the original assessment proceedings.
3. Madras High Court Restrains ED From Proceeding Against TN Minister Senthil Balaji
Case Title: B Shanmugam and others v. Karthik Dasari
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 386
The Madras High Court recently allowed a petition moved by Minister Senthil Balaji and two others and quashed the summons issued by the Enforcement Directorate.
Justice T Raja and Justice K Kumaresh Babu made the orders after observing that the proceedings emerging from the FIRs was quashed in one case and stayed in two others. The court observed that when a stay had been granted, it would eclipse the proceedings initiated thereunder pending disposal of the suit.
4. Madras High Court Refuses To Interfere With TN Govt Order Giving Preference To In-Service Doctors In PG Admission
Case Title: Dr. A Packia Raj and others v. State and others
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 387
The Madurai bench of the Madras High Court on Monday dismissed a plea filed by three doctors seeking to set aside the GO passed by the Government of Tamil Nadu giving special preference to "In Service Doctors" in admission to Post Graduate courses.
Justice GR Swaminathan observed that a challenge to the above GO had already been decided by a division bench. The division bench had also observed that no arbitrariness can be made out from the data pertaining to only one academic year.
5. Using Land Earmarked As Waterbody For Other Purposes Detrimental To Society: Madras High Court Upholds Eviction Notices
Case Title: Kamalanathan and others v. State and others
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 388
Stressing on the importance of preserving water bodies, the Madras High Court recently stated that water bodies play a significant role in maintaining ecology and environment and usage of land earmarked as waterbody for any other purpose would be detrimental to the society at large. The court thus highlighted that it was the duty of officials to preserve and protect government lands which have been reserved for specific purposes.
The bench of Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice N Mala were disposing petitions challenging the notices issued in Form III under Rule 6(1) of the Tamil Nadu Protection of Tanks and Eviction of Encroachment Rules, 2007.
6. "Heartfelt Regret Expressed": Madras HC Grants Anticipatory Bail To BJP Workers Accused Of Throwing Slippers At Minister PTR's Car
Case title - Gokul Ajith and others v. The State
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 389
The Madras High Court recently granted anticipatory bail to 3 BJP workers who allegedly waylaid the Car of the State Finance Minister, abused and insulted him, and threw slippers toward his car bearing the national emblem on August 13, 2022.
However, the Court did term the entire incident as very unfortunate as it emphasized that the political ideologies may differ, but, while exercising the democratic right, when the same turn violent and ugly, then causality will not be the political opponent, but the society at large which every political party intends to serve and evolve.
7. Teenagers Impacted By Technology, Indulging In Sexual Offences: Madras HC Suggests State To Formulate Counselling Mechanism For Young Detenues
Case Title: Kanthan v State and others
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 390
The Madras High Court recently remarked that information technology today is posing a great challenge in upbringing of teenagers, whose minds are often affected by easily accessible pornography, misleading them and making them indulge in sexual offences without understanding its consequences.
The Madurai bench of Justice J Nisha Banu and Justice N Anand Venkatesh emphasized that whenever these teenagers are arrested, efforts should be made to attend to their mental perversity.
8. Can't Permit Accused Reexamination By Police On Its Own Merely By Registration Of Another FIR Regarding Same Occurrence: Madras HC
Case title - K.J.Suriyanarayanan v. State and another
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 391
The Madras High Court recently observed that once FIR has been registered against a person, his/her re-examination by the investigation agency on its own should not be permitted merely by registering another FIR with regard to the same occurrence.
"If such protection is not given to a suspect, then possibility of abuse of investigating powers by the police cannot be ruled out. It would result into a multiplicity of proceedings and unnecessary harassment to the accused and registration of multiple FIR's on the same occurrence would be hit by the doctrine of sameness and it would have to be obliterated, as it would amount to violation of fundamental rights of a citizen," the bench of Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan further remarked.
9. Madras High Court Quashes Case Against Men Who Allegedly Raised Slogans Against PM Over Demonetization Decision In 2016
Case title - Jegan @ Ellamaran and others v. State and another
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 392
The Madras High Court has recently quashed a case against 5 persons who had allegedly indulged in a protest and had raised various slogans against Prime Minister for announcing Demonetization.
The bench of Justice N. Sathish Kumar observed that the offences against the accused under Sections 143, 188 of IPC @ 143, 149, 353 IPC were not made out.
10. Reservation For Women In Public Employment Can Only Be Horizontal, Not Vertical: Madras High Court To TNPSC
Case Title: M Satheesh v. Secretary, Revenue Department and others
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 393
The Madras High Court has categorically held that the reservation for women in public employment can only be made horizontally and not vertically. The first bench of Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice N Mala, thus, directed the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission to amend the Tamil Nadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act of 2016 accordingly or otherwise the same would be declared ultra vires.
11. Madras High Court Directs NMC To Reconsider Direction For Govt Fee Rate In 50% Private Medical College Seats
Case Title: Melmaruvathur Adhiparasakthi Institute of Medical Sciences v. Union of India and others
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 394
In a significant judgment, the Madras High Court on Friday directed the National Medical Commission to revisit the office memorandum which directed that fees in 50% seats in Private Medical Colleges and Universities should be at the rate of Government seats. The Court said that the structure should be amended in such a way that merit is not affected.
The NMC has been asked to reconsider the Office Memorandum and if necessary issue a fresh OM. Till such exercise is completed, the present fee structure prescribed shall continue.
The bench of Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice N Mala also upheld the validity of Section 10 of the National Medical Commission Act.
12. Madras High Court Acquits Man Who Possessed 1.5 Kg Heroin Believing It To Be Wheat Flour
Case Title: Anandam Gundluru v. Inspector of Police
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 395
The Madras High Court recently directed the release of a man who was sentenced to ten years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 1,00,000 rupees for consciously possessing 1.5 kg Heroin for transportation to Kuwait. The bench of Justice G Ilanthiraiyan observed that the appellant had carried the material believing it to be wheat flour and tamarind and not a prohibited substance.
13. Madras High Court Directs TN Engg Admission Secretary To Pay ₹10 Lakhs Compensation To Student For Wrongfully Denying Her Admission
Case Title: Minor V Amrutha v. Council for Architecture and another
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 396
The Madras High Court recently directed the Tamil Nadu Engineering Admissions to pay a compensation of Rs. 10 Lakh to a student for denying her admission to the Architecture course. Justice R Subramanian also observed that the conduct of the respondent was outrageous and inexplicable in that they had acted blatantly in violation of previous court orders.
14. Formation Of ICC By Govt Dept Cannot Be Challenged Under Article 226 Of Constitution : Madras High Court
Case Title: S.Ravi Selvan v. Central Board of Indirect Taxes & customs and others
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 397
While dismissing a challenge against the formation of an Internal Complaints Committee, the Madras High Court observed that the formation of the Internal Complaints Committee was under the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965. The challenge would therefore fall within the scope of the Administrative Tribunals Act 1985 and could not be dealt with by the High Court under Article 226 of the constitution.
Justice Abdul Quddhose opined that the petitioner should have taken up the matter with the Administrative Tribunal dealing with service matters and not approach the High Court in the first instance.
1. Madras High Court Restrains Media From Revealing Identity Of Victims Of Sexual Violence, Publishing Depositions Given In Trial
Coming down heavily on the print and visual media for disclosing the names and details of the victims of sexual abuse and sexual violence during the trial, the Madras High Court restrained print and electronic media from publishing details of the victims, their family members, and the witnesses or any materials pertaining to the deposition of the victims.
The court observed that publishing such details would have an intimidating effect on the victim and would consequently lead the offenders to walk free. Thus, even though media thrives on ratings, it should not play with the lives of the people.
2. President Appoints Justice M. Duraiswamy As The Acting Chief Justice Of Madras High Court
The President has appointed Justice M. Duraiswamy, senior-most Judge of the Madras High Court as Acting Chief Justice with effect from September 13, 2022, consequent upon the retirement of Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari.
3. Madras High Court Overrules TN AG's Objection To ASG Appearing For Ex-Minister In Corruption Case
Case Title: Arappor Iyakkam v. The Director and others
Case No: WP No. 34845 of 2018
While hearing the pleas filed by Former Minister SP Velumani to quash two FIRs filed against him for alleged irregularities in awarding corporate contracts, the Advocate General for Tamil Nadu, R Shunmugasundaram raised strong objections against current ASG and Senior Advocate SV Raju appearing for the minister.
The bench of Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice N Mala was however not inclined to accept the objection raised by the AG.
4. Judges Are Softwares Of The System, Should Ensure Justice Delivery: Justice Sanjay Kishen Kaul Stresses Upon The Need To Ensure Speedy Justice
Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, on Saturday, remarked that the Judges and Lawyers were the software of the system and the duty was upon the Judges and the lawyer to innovate and ensure justice delivery. He was speaking at the Madras High Court on the occasion of laying of the foundation stone for a multi-storeyed combined court building to house the subordinate courts in Chennai and for the Commencement of renovation of the old Law College Heritage Building for the use of Madras High Court.
5. NEET Candidate Alleges Her Answer Sheet Was Swapped, Madras High Court Directs NTA To Produce Her Original OMR
The Madras High Court bench of Justice R Subramanian on Tuesday directed the National Testing Agency to produce the original OMR sheet of a candidate after she approached the court alleging that she was given another candidate's answer sheet after correction.
The petitioner, KS Bhavamirthne, who had appeared for the NEET (UG) 2022 Examination conducted by CBSE for admission into the medical course, claimed that the copy of OMR sheet that was handed over to her after publication of result was not the one filled by her during the examination.
6. BJP Functionary Booked For Sharing Controversial Tweet Moves Madras High Court Seeking Return Of Phone Seized During Investigation
The Madras High Court on Wednesday directed the Central Crime Branch to respond to a plea filed by BJP State Executive Committee member Sowdha Mani for the return of her iPhone which was seized during the investigation following objectionable retweets.
The Crime Branch informed the bench of Justice P Velmurugan that the phone had been sent to the forensic experts for examination.
7. Madras High Court CJ Munishwar Nath Bhandari Appointed As Chairman Of SAFEMA Appellate Tribunal
The President of India on Thursday appointed Madras High Court Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari as the Chairman of Appellate Tribunal under the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators Act (SAFEMA) for a period of four years or till attaining the age of seventy years or until further orders, whichever is earlier in terms of Tribunal (Conditions of Service) Rules, 2021 read with Tribunal Reforms Act 2021.
8. Obtain Prior Remarks Of Party To Be Affected Before Voicing Opinion In Media: Madras HC In Defamation Suit Against Savukku Shankar
The Madras High Court has granted interim injunction to G Square Realtors against defamatory allegations made by Youtuber Savukku Shankar. Justice CV Karthikeyan observed:
If ever anybody either through the print media or through electronic media or in any other form seeks to voice out opinion, caution should be exercised and a code should also be maintained that such opinion should be put forth in the first instance to the person who would be either directly or indirectly affected by such opinion expressed, obtain their remarks on the same and then put forward both the opinion and the remarks as an information to be disseminated to the general public and leave it to the general public to form their opinion.