{"id":39871,"date":"2004-10-14T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2004-10-13T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-velimalai-rubber-co-ltd-vs-state-of-tamilnadu-on-14-october-2004"},"modified":"2017-03-26T11:32:20","modified_gmt":"2017-03-26T06:02:20","slug":"ms-velimalai-rubber-co-ltd-vs-state-of-tamilnadu-on-14-october-2004","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-velimalai-rubber-co-ltd-vs-state-of-tamilnadu-on-14-october-2004","title":{"rendered":"M\/S. Velimalai Rubber Co. Ltd vs State Of Tamilnadu on 14 October, 2004"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">M\/S. Velimalai Rubber Co. Ltd vs State Of Tamilnadu on 14 October, 2004<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS\n\nDATED: 14\/10\/2004\n\nCORAM\n\nTHE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE P.D.DINAKARAN\nAND\nTHE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE S.R.SINGHARAVELU\n\nTax Case (Revision) No.509 of 1999\n\nM\/s. Velimalai Rubber Co. Ltd.,\nrep. by its Mg. Director\nA. Jacob                        ....  Applicant\n\n-Vs-\n\nState of Tamilnadu\nrep. by Commissioner of Agricultural\nIncome tax Chennai - 600 005.   .... Respondent\n\n        Revision  Application  filed  under   Section   54(1)   of   Tamilnadu\nAgricultural  Income  Tax  Act,  1955  to  revise  the  order of the Tamilnadu\nAgricultural Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai in ATA 38  of  1995  dated\n27.7.99.\n\n!For Applicant :  Mr.  K.C.Rajappa\n\n^For Respondent:  Mr.  T.Ayyasami, Spl.G.P.(T)\n\n:O R D E R\n<\/pre>\n<p>(Order of the Court was made by P.D.DINAKARAN,J)<br \/>\n        The above revision  is  filed  against  the  order  of  the  Tamilnadu<br \/>\nAgricultural  Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai dated 27th July 1999 made<br \/>\nin A.T.A.No.38 of 1995 disallowing the  items  claimed  by  the  applicant  as<br \/>\nallowance of deduction under Section 5(e) of the Tamilnadu Agricultural Income<br \/>\nTax Act , in short, TNAIT Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>        2.1.  In brief, the assessment is relating to the year 1992-93.    The<br \/>\napplicant  declared  the  net  income  of  Rs.17,11,140\/-  for  the above said<br \/>\nassessment year.  The assessing officer found that certain expenses claimed by<br \/>\nthe applicant are not allowable under Section 5(e) of the TNAIT  Act,  as  the<br \/>\ndetails were not forthcoming by an order dated 25.02.1993.\n<\/p>\n<p>        2.2.  Against the said disallowance of certain expenses, the applicant<br \/>\npreferred   an  appeal  before  the  Assistant  Commissioner  of  Agricultural<br \/>\nIncome-Tax, Grade-I, Nagercoil,  who  confirmed  the  view  of  the  assessing<br \/>\nofficer by an order dated 13.01.1995.\n<\/p>\n<p>        2.3.   Hence,  further  appeal  was  preferred  before  the  Tamilnadu<br \/>\nAgricultural Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal against the order of the  Assistant<br \/>\nCommissioner of   Agricultural   Income-Tax  dated  13.01.1995.    Before  the<br \/>\nAppellate Tribunal, the applicant claimed following allowances  and  the  same<br \/>\nwere either allowed or rejected are as here under:<br \/>\n&#8220;Head Office Expenses:\n<\/p>\n<p>        a)  Rent  paid  to  Managing  Director&#8217;s  residence  to  the  tune  of<br \/>\nRs.13,800\/- and the same was allowed;\n<\/p>\n<p>        b) Postage and Telephone expenses to the tune  of  Rs.24,378\/-,  which<br \/>\nwas also allowed;\n<\/p>\n<p>        c) Subscriptions and donations to the tune of Rs.16,062\/-, as there is<br \/>\nno  clear  details  regarding  this  expenditure, the Tribunal disallowed this<br \/>\nclaim.\n<\/p>\n<p>        d) Advertisement charges to the tune of Rs.7,700\/-,  as  there  is  no<br \/>\ndirect  nexus  with  company&#8217;s  agricultural activity, this claim was also not<br \/>\nallowed;\n<\/p>\n<p>        e) Travelling expenses to the  tune  of  Rs.18,939.50,  the  same  was<br \/>\nallowed;\n<\/p>\n<p>        f)  Contribution to Superannuation fund to the tune of Rs.13,800\/- was<br \/>\nalso allowed;\n<\/p>\n<p>        g) Disallowance of 3% difference, which works out to  Rs.20,044\/-,  as<br \/>\nthe details were not furnished, the same was disallowed;\n<\/p>\n<p>        h)  Disallowance  of  18%  relating  to  non-plantation  crops in Head<br \/>\nOffice, which works out to Rs.1,16,658\/-, for want of details,  the  same  was<br \/>\ndisallowed;\n<\/p>\n<p>Estate Expenses:\n<\/p>\n<p>        a)  Disallowance  of  18E  relating  to non-plantation crops in estate<br \/>\nexpenses, as the details  are  not  sufficient  to  find  out  whether  it  is<br \/>\nallowable or not, this claim was disallowed;\n<\/p>\n<p>        b)  Property  tax  to  the  tune  of Rs.11,295\/- following the earlier<br \/>\nassessment years, this claim was allowed;\n<\/p>\n<p>        c) Repair and Maintenance of Building  to  the  tune  of  Rs.17,326\/-,<br \/>\nwhich was disallowed;\n<\/p>\n<p>        d)  Repairs  to  Machinery to the tune of Rs.9,393.80 , which was also<br \/>\nnot allowed;\n<\/p>\n<p>        e) Repairs and Maintenance  of  Roads  to  the  tune  of  Rs.7,202.69,<br \/>\nfinding  that  certain percentage towards expenditure for repairs and roads is<br \/>\nnot allowable and disallowed this expenditure for exemption;\n<\/p>\n<p>        f) Repairs and Maintenance of Vehicles to the tune of Rs.30,714.32, as<br \/>\nthis Court held that the expenditure both in plantation and nonplantation area<br \/>\nare comprehensive and inseparable, this claim was disallowed;\n<\/p>\n<p>        g) Repairs and Maintenance of others to the tune  of  Rs.21,893\/-  was<br \/>\nalso disallowed;\n<\/p>\n<p>        h) Professional Tax to the tune of Rs.250\/-, which was allowed;\n<\/p>\n<p>        i)  Postage  and Telephone Charges to the tune of Rs.3,512.50, finding<br \/>\nthat this expenditure was incurred only in connection  with  the  agricultural<br \/>\noperation, this claim was allowed;\n<\/p>\n<p>        j) Sales Tax due to the tune of Rs.4,26,248\/-, as the case relating to<br \/>\nthis expenditure was pending before the Supreme Court, this claim was remanded<br \/>\nto the Agricultural Income-tax Officer;\n<\/p>\n<p>        k)  Depreciation  value  to  the  tune of Rs.1,07,078.30 in respect to<br \/>\nEstate, as the details furnished are not sufficient to  examine  whether  this<br \/>\nexpenditure is allowable or not, this expense was disallowed; and\n<\/p>\n<p>        l)  Depreciation  value  to  the tune of Rs.2,970\/- in respect to Head<br \/>\nOffice was also disallowed.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>        3.  Aggrieved  by  the  following  disallowed  claims,  the  applicant<br \/>\npreferred this revision.\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Head Office Expenses:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>        i) Subscriptions and donations to the tune of Rs.16,062\/-;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>        ii) Advertisement charges to the tune of Rs.7,700\/-;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>        iii)Disallowance of 3% difference, which works out to<br \/>\n        Rs.20,044\/-;and\n<\/p>\n<p>        iv)Disallowance of 18% relating to non-plantation crops in      Head<br \/>\nOffice, which works out to Rs.1,16,658\/-;\n<\/p>\n<p>Estate Expenses:\n<\/p>\n<p>        i) Disallowance of 18E relating to non-plantation crops in      estate<br \/>\nexpenses;\n<\/p>\n<p>        ii)Repair and Maintenance of Building to the tune of<br \/>\nRs.17,3 26\/-;\n<\/p>\n<p>        iii)Repairs to Machinery to the tune of Rs.9,393.80;\n<\/p>\n<p>        iv)Repairs and Maintenance of Roads to the tune of<br \/>\nRs.7,202 .69;\n<\/p>\n<p>        v)Repairs and Maintenance of Vehicles to the tune of    Rs.30,714.3 2;\n<\/p>\n<p>        vi)Repairs and Maintenance of others to the tune of<br \/>\nRs.21,89 3\/-;\n<\/p>\n<p>        vii)Depreciation value to the tune of Rs.1,07,078.30 in respect     to<br \/>\nEstate; and\n<\/p>\n<p>        viii)Depreciation value to the tune of Rs.2,970\/- in respect    to<br \/>\nHead Office.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>        4.   Mr.K.C.Rajappa,  learned  counsel  appearing  for  the  applicant<br \/>\ncontends  that  in  view  of the amended Act (Act 40 of 1991), which came into<br \/>\neffect from 1.4.1992, there is no liability to pay tax for nonplantation  area<br \/>\nand  therefore,  allowing  the  deduction  proportionate to the plantation and<br \/>\nnon-plantation area is not permissible in law, as the question of  paying  the<br \/>\ntax does not arise in the case of nonplantation area.\n<\/p>\n<p>        5.   Per  contra,  Mr.T.Ayyasamy,  learned  Special Government Pleader<br \/>\nappearing for the respondent contends that  unless  and  until  the  applicant<br \/>\nestablishes  and  substantiates  his  claim  that the deduction claimed by him<br \/>\nunder Section 5(e) of the TNAIT Act and such expenditure were incurred by  him<br \/>\nin  the  previous year wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the land from<br \/>\nwhich the agricultural income is derived, he is not entitled for the deduction<br \/>\nas claimed.\n<\/p>\n<p>        6.  We have given careful consideration to  the  submissions  on  both<br \/>\nsides.\n<\/p>\n<p>        7.   It  is  settled  proposition that the expenditure incurred by the<br \/>\nassessee by way of corporation tax, advertisement  expenses,  subscription  to<br \/>\nclubs  and  legal expenses are not deductible under Section 5( e) of the TNAIT<br \/>\nAct, as the expenditure was  not  incurred  wholly  and  exclusively  for  the<br \/>\npurposes  of land from which the agricultural income is derived as held in <a href=\"\/doc\/932413\/\">New<br \/>\nAmbadi Estates P.  Ltd., V.  State of Tamilnadu<\/a> reported in 1994 (207) ITR 874<br \/>\nand Puthutotam Estates (1943) Ltd.  V.  State of Tamilnadu  reported  in  1994<br \/>\n(207) ITR  878.    The view taken in the above said decisions is in conformity<br \/>\nwith the ratio laid in <a href=\"\/doc\/1731981\/\">Kil Kotagiri Tea and  Coffee  Estates  Co.    Ltd.,  V.<br \/>\nGovernment  of  Madras<\/a>  reported  in  1974  (96) ITR 165 wherein it is held as<br \/>\nfollows :\n<\/p>\n<p>        &#8220;These decisions show that the expression  &#8216;for  the  purpose  of  the<br \/>\nland&#8217; covers a wide range of expenses taking in not only the expenses incurred<br \/>\nactually  for  deriving  agricultural  income, but also expenses which are not<br \/>\ndirectly incurred for deriving agricultural income but expended in  connection<br \/>\nwith  the  lands which do not have any relationship to the agricultural income<br \/>\nderived in the previous year.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>        8.  In the instant case, the petitioner is cultivating both plantation<br \/>\nand non-plantation crops.  Therefore, they are comprehensive  and  inseparable<br \/>\nexpenses  incurred by them in the above headings sought to be deducted and the<br \/>\nsame are not wholly and exclusively incurred for the purpose of the land, from<br \/>\nwhich agricultural income is derived, namely, the land which  is  declared  by<br \/>\nthe applicant itself, namely, the plantation area alone.\n<\/p>\n<p>        9.   That  apart,  the  assessing officer, appellate authority and the<br \/>\nTribunal have concurrently arrived at a conclusion that there is no sufficient<br \/>\nmaterials placed before them to substantiate that the said expenses are wholly<br \/>\nand exclusively incurred for the plantation area.  In the absence of any  such<br \/>\nmaterials and in view of the law laid down in the decisions referred supra, we<br \/>\ndo  not  find  any  reason  to  interfere  with  the  order  of  the Tribunal.<br \/>\nAccordingly, this revision stands dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>Index:Yes<br \/>\nInternet:Yes<\/p>\n<p>sl<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court M\/S. Velimalai Rubber Co. Ltd vs State Of Tamilnadu on 14 October, 2004 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 14\/10\/2004 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE P.D.DINAKARAN AND THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE S.R.SINGHARAVELU Tax Case (Revision) No.509 of 1999 M\/s. Velimalai Rubber Co. Ltd., rep. by its Mg. Director A. [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-39871","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>M\/S. Velimalai Rubber Co. Ltd vs State Of Tamilnadu on 14 October, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-velimalai-rubber-co-ltd-vs-state-of-tamilnadu-on-14-october-2004\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M\/S. Velimalai Rubber Co. Ltd vs State Of Tamilnadu on 14 October, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-velimalai-rubber-co-ltd-vs-state-of-tamilnadu-on-14-october-2004\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2004-10-13T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-03-26T06:02:20+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-velimalai-rubber-co-ltd-vs-state-of-tamilnadu-on-14-october-2004#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-velimalai-rubber-co-ltd-vs-state-of-tamilnadu-on-14-october-2004\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M\\\/S. Velimalai Rubber Co. Ltd vs State Of Tamilnadu on 14 October, 2004\",\"datePublished\":\"2004-10-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-03-26T06:02:20+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-velimalai-rubber-co-ltd-vs-state-of-tamilnadu-on-14-october-2004\"},\"wordCount\":1298,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-velimalai-rubber-co-ltd-vs-state-of-tamilnadu-on-14-october-2004#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-velimalai-rubber-co-ltd-vs-state-of-tamilnadu-on-14-october-2004\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-velimalai-rubber-co-ltd-vs-state-of-tamilnadu-on-14-october-2004\",\"name\":\"M\\\/S. Velimalai Rubber Co. Ltd vs State Of Tamilnadu on 14 October, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2004-10-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-03-26T06:02:20+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-velimalai-rubber-co-ltd-vs-state-of-tamilnadu-on-14-october-2004#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-velimalai-rubber-co-ltd-vs-state-of-tamilnadu-on-14-october-2004\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-velimalai-rubber-co-ltd-vs-state-of-tamilnadu-on-14-october-2004#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M\\\/S. Velimalai Rubber Co. Ltd vs State Of Tamilnadu on 14 October, 2004\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"M\/S. Velimalai Rubber Co. Ltd vs State Of Tamilnadu on 14 October, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-velimalai-rubber-co-ltd-vs-state-of-tamilnadu-on-14-october-2004","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M\/S. Velimalai Rubber Co. Ltd vs State Of Tamilnadu on 14 October, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-velimalai-rubber-co-ltd-vs-state-of-tamilnadu-on-14-october-2004","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2004-10-13T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-03-26T06:02:20+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-velimalai-rubber-co-ltd-vs-state-of-tamilnadu-on-14-october-2004#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-velimalai-rubber-co-ltd-vs-state-of-tamilnadu-on-14-october-2004"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M\/S. Velimalai Rubber Co. Ltd vs State Of Tamilnadu on 14 October, 2004","datePublished":"2004-10-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-03-26T06:02:20+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-velimalai-rubber-co-ltd-vs-state-of-tamilnadu-on-14-october-2004"},"wordCount":1298,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-velimalai-rubber-co-ltd-vs-state-of-tamilnadu-on-14-october-2004#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-velimalai-rubber-co-ltd-vs-state-of-tamilnadu-on-14-october-2004","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-velimalai-rubber-co-ltd-vs-state-of-tamilnadu-on-14-october-2004","name":"M\/S. Velimalai Rubber Co. Ltd vs State Of Tamilnadu on 14 October, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2004-10-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-03-26T06:02:20+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-velimalai-rubber-co-ltd-vs-state-of-tamilnadu-on-14-october-2004#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-velimalai-rubber-co-ltd-vs-state-of-tamilnadu-on-14-october-2004"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-velimalai-rubber-co-ltd-vs-state-of-tamilnadu-on-14-october-2004#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M\/S. Velimalai Rubber Co. Ltd vs State Of Tamilnadu on 14 October, 2004"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/39871","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=39871"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/39871\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=39871"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=39871"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=39871"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}