Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: December 25 to December 31, 2023

Citations: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 407 To 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 413

NOMINAL INDEX

Pandiarajan C v The District Collector and Others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 407

University of Madras v Dr. UT Manisundar (Died) and others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 408

M/s.Cognizant Technology Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 409

PK Mukmuthu Sha v PS Mohammed Afrin Banu, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 410

R Suresh Kumar v The Principal Secretary to Government, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 411

A Vasanthi v S Jayakumar, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 412

M/s.Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd. Versus DCIT, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 413

REPORT

'Can't Restrain A Person From Performing Religious Duties': Madras HC Asks HR&CE Dept To Conduct Temple Festival Including People Of All Castes

Case Title: Pandiarajan C v The District Collector and Others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 407

The Madras High Court recently directed the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) Department to conduct the Margazhi festival in the Arulmighu Chelliyaramman Temple in Virudhunagar District while ensuring that all the devotees including people belonging to the scheduled caste community are permitted in the temple.

The court passed this direction while hearing a plea of a man alleging that the scheduled caste members were not being permitted inside the temple.

Justice B Pugalendhi further directed the Tahsildar to ascertain if any issue of untouchability prevailed in the Village and submit a report to the District Collector for taking appropriate action. The court also stressed that no person or any group could restrain a person from performing his religious duties which was a right guaranteed under the constitution.

High Court Asks Madras University To Frame Statutes To Govern Service Conditions Of Employees To Bring Transparency In Appointment & Promotion

Case Title: University of Madras v Dr. UT Manisundar (Died) and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 408

The Madras High Court recently directed the Madras University to frame statutes to govern the service conditions of its employees. The court added that it was painful that the University, with such a stature and standing and having been established a century ago did not have any such service conditions already in place.

The bench of Justice R Suresh Kumar and Justice K Kumaresh Babu directed the University to frame the guidelines within six months and also directed the State Government to govern the service conditions of the employees. The court also pointed out that such regulation would not govern the teaching faculty as they are governed by the University Grants Commission.

Cognizant Technology Rs. 19,000 Crore Buyback Dividend Distribution Tax Controversy: Madras High Court Stays Rs.9403.09 Crores Demand

Case Title: M/s.Cognizant Technology Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 409

The Madras High Court has stayed the tax demand of Rs. 9403.09 crore in the case of Cognizant Technology's Rs. 19,000 crore buyback dividend distribution tax controversy.

The bench of Justice R. Mahadevan and Justice Mohammed Shaffiq has directed that the assessee, Cognizant Technology, make a payment of Rs. 1500 crores in cash or give a letter to the bank to remit Rs. 1500 crores to the credit of the respondent or department from the fixed deposits available and furnish property security for the balance tax liability with interest and penalty to the respondent within a period of four weeks. On the payment and deposit of title deeds pertaining to the property, the department shall release the lien on the remaining fixed deposits lying in the banks.

Although Islamic Law Allows Polygamous Marriage, Husband Must Treat All Wives Equally: Madras High Court Allows Dissolution of Marriage By First Wife

Case Title: PK Mukmuthu Sha v PS Mohammed Afrin Banu

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 410

The Madras High Court recently observed that although Islamic Law allowed a husband to have polygamous marriages, he was obligated to treat all the wives equally.

The bench of Justice RMT Teekaa Raman and Justice PB Balaji thus confirmed a family court order allowing dissolution of marriage finding that the husband had treated the wife with cruelty by not treating her on par and equally with the second wife.

State Govt Has Power To Appoint Public Prosecutors Besides Regular Cadre: Madras HC Dismisses Plea Challenging Prosecutors' Appointment

Case Title: R Suresh Kumar v The Principal Secretary to Government

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 411

The Madras High Court recently upheld the State Government's power to appoint Public Prosecutors and Additional Public Prosecutors under Section 24 (6A) of the CrPC. The court added that this power was dehors the regular cadre and the appointment of special Public Prosecutors for particular cases.

The bench of Justice M Sundar and Justice R Sakthivel was hearing a plea by Advocate, Suresh Kumar challenging the appointment of Public Prosecutors and Additional Public Prosecutors in District courts within the territorial jurisdiction of the Madurai bench. It was contended that the Government was appointing District Public Prosecutors and Additional Public Prosecutors without taking recourse to recruitment of cadre Public Prosecutors/Additional Public Prosecutors.

Relook At Compensation In Hit & Run Cases; Avoid Closing FIRs For Non-Filing Final Reports Within Prescribed Time: Madras High Court Tells State

Case Title: A Vasanthi v S Jayakumar

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 412

The Madras High Court recently directed the State government to re-look the scheme for payment of compensation to victims in hit-and-run cases. Noting that the compensation that was currently being awarded was terribly low compared to the compensation awarded to road accident victims under the Motor Vehicles Act, the court added that this prompted people to plant vehicles to claim higher compensation.

Justice R Subramaniam and Justice N Senthil Kumar also noted that in some cases, the police connived with the victims of road accidents as the investigation relating to road traffic accidents was not done as seriously as in other crimes and thus resulted in slackness. To avoid these situations, the court also suggested the Director General of Police ensure that FIRs are not closed for non-filing of final reports within the time prescribed under Section 468 of CrPC thus requiring the police to file a final report in all cases.

Empty Liquor Bottles Can't Be Included In Scrap, TCS Not Applicable: Madras High Court

Case Title: M/s.Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd. Versus DCIT

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 413

The Madras High Court has held that empty liquor bottles cannot be included in scrap, and TCS is not applicable.

The bench of Justice C. Saravanan has observed that the petitioner is neither the owner of the bottle nor generates scrap as is contemplated under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The activity of opening and uncorking is not a “mechanical working of material." Therefore, the invocation of Sections 206C, 206CC, and 206CCA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was wholly misplaced and unwarranted under the circumstances against the petitioner for the alleged failure to collect tax at 1% on 99% of the license fee payable to the government and 1% retained as agency commission.