Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 21 to 40 of 464 Records
-
1957 (12) TMI 23 - SUPREME COURT
Export and Import
... ... ... ... ..... ven though it was imposed on railborne goods entering the municipal area. It is a noticeable feature of s. 66(1) that apart from the terminal tax there are 14 other heads of taxation imposable by the Municipality and in the case of each one of these 14 heads the tax is on some activity which takes place within the jurisdictional limits of the Municipality. This supports the contention of the appellant that the terminal tax leviable under cl. (o) properly construed must have reference to some activity within the municipal area i.e., the entry for the purpose of remaining within that area or commencement of journey from that area. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the terminal tax under s. 66(1)(o) is not leviable on goods which are in transit and are only carried across the limits of the Municipality, and would therefore allow this appeal, reverse the decision of the Nagpur High Court. The appellant will have its costs in this court and in the High Court. Appeal allowed.
-
1957 (12) TMI 22 - SUPREME COURT
... ... ... ... ..... retrospective. Vide the observations of Lord Denman C. J. in The Queen v. St. Mary, Whitechapel ( 1848 12 Q. B. 120; 116 E.R.811.) and The Queen v. Christchurch ( 1848 12 Q.B, 149; 116 E.R. 823, 825.). This contention must also be rejected. (IV) Lastly, it was contended that the impugned orders were not passed by the competent authorities under the Security Rules, and that they were, therefore, void. This contention is based on the fact that the authority competent to pass the orders under R. 3 is, as regards the present appellants, the General Manager, and that the impugned orders were actually communicated to them by the Deputy Manager. But it has been found as a fact that the orders had been actually passed by the General Manager, and that finding must be accepted. In the result, the appeals fail, and are dismissed with costs. The appellants who were permitted to file the appeals in forma pauperis will also pay the court fees payable to the Government. Appeals dismissed.
-
1957 (12) TMI 21 - PUNJAB HIGH COURT
... ... ... ... ..... " Thus the sentence in the ruling, " a notice issued under this section, therefore, pertains to those items only which have escaped assessment and to no others ", unless torn out from their factual context, cannot be deemed to throw any light on the question to be answered in this case. After having given most anxious consideration to the various grounds advanced before us, and for the reasons stated above, the question referred to this Court must be answered in the affirmative. We are, therefore, of the view that in the circumstances of the case, when a notice is issued under section 34, based on a certain item of income that had escaped assessment, it is permissible for the Income-tax authorities to include other items in the assessment, in addition to the item which had initiated and resulted in the notice under section 34. The assessee shall pay costs to the Department which we assess at ₹ 250. BHANDARI, C.J.--I agree. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1957 (12) TMI 20 - SUPREME COURT
... ... ... ... ..... n not of the appellant but of the Legislature, which gave the employees certain rights which they did not have before, and what it can give, it can also take away or modify, and we do not see how the employers are aggrieved by it. We are of opinion that no valid grounds exist on which s. 3(1) and 3(2)(a) of the impugned Act could be attacked as unconstitutional, and they must accordingly be held to be valid. 43. In the result, we hold, in modification of the order of the Court below, that the provisions of the impugned Act are unconstitutional and void in so far as they relate to unpaid accumulations , but that they are valid as regards fines ; and an appropriate writ will issue against the respondents in the terms stated above. The appeal succeeds in part, but as it is stated that unpaid accumulations form by far the most substantial portion of the claim, we direct the respondents to pay half the costs of the appellant here and in the Court below. 44. Appeal allowed in part.
-
1957 (12) TMI 19 - MYSORE HIGH COURT
... ... ... ... ..... determined after notice to the assessees, it is not repugnant to rules of natural justice to provide that the validity of assessment shall not be questioned at the stage of realisation of the tax . The prohibition in section 22 of the Act applies to all persons in respect of whom any assessment has been made or any order has been passed by any assessing authority under the Act and the Rules there is no discrimination as between persons falling under that category. Having regard to all these circumstances, we are not satisfied that there is any substance in the contention that section 22 of the Act offends Article 14 of the Constitution. We answer the question referred to us as follows Section 22 of the Mysore Sales Tax Act, 1948, is not ultra vires of the Constitution or the Code of Criminal Procedure and that the accused is not entitled to question any assessment or order made by the assessing authority under the Act or the Rules thereunder. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1957 (12) TMI 18 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ... ... ... ..... It is very significant that in such cases the right of the plaintiffs are only to get a commission on the transactions effected directly by the Mills with the dealers. Clause (13) makes the delivery effective at Ahmedabad itself and clause (20) entitles them to get a commission only on the value of the goods sold ex-mills Ahmedabad. There is no clause in the agreement from which we can infer that the plaintiffs carry on a business of buying or selling goods within the State of Madras. Therefore, this contention of the learned Government Pleader also fails. 39.. The contention of the Government on the question of limitation is devoid of any substance. 40.. In the result, the decrees and judgments of the learned Subordinate Judge are confirmed and these three appeals dismissed. The plaintiffs will get from the State the entire costs of printed papers in all the three appeals but the plaintiffs will get advocate s fee in this Court only in A.S. 1238 of 1953. Appeals dismissed.
-
1957 (12) TMI 17 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ... ... ... ..... k related to the business transacted in the shop or whether they related exclusively to the private affairs of the accused. The conduct of the accused in withholding the book from P.W.1 and thus preventing and obstructing him from the exercise of his right as the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer to inspect the book, leads to the irresistible inference that the book in question really contained entries relating to the business in the shop. Such prevention and obstruction amount to an offence punishment under section 15, clauses (c) and (h) of the Act. Since the punishment is also provided for by section 15 itself, there is no necessity to invoke the aid of section 186 of the Penal Code. The conviction recorded under section 15(c) and (h) read along with section 14(2) of the Sales Tax Act is proper and it calls for no interference. The sentence has only been lenient and it also does not merit any interference. 5.. In the result this revision case is dismissed. Petition dismissed.
-
1957 (12) TMI 16 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ... ... ... ..... ose once an assessment has been made, if an assessee is to be additionally assessed, action has to be taken within three calendar years but where the matter is already started on either the return of the assessee or for want of return by the assessee, the proceedings cannot be said to be hit by any rule of limitation, because no rule of limitation has been so provided. 20.. In our opinion, without going into the rulings which have been cited dealing with income-tax matters-and we have already said that the Income-tax Act is a statute of a different kind-section 11-A was not applicable to the two cases before us. In applying the rule of limitation contained in sections 11-A and 11(5) to these cases the learned single Judge was in error. We accordingly set aside the order of the learned single Judge and allow the appeals with costs. Counsel s fee Rs. 50 in each case. Appeals allowed. Kailash Nath and Another v. State of U.P. and Others 1957 (8 S.T.C. 358 A.I.R. 1957 S.C. 790).
-
1957 (12) TMI 15 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB
Company Membership of, Meeting and Proceedings Power of Company Law Board to Order Meeting to be Called
-
1957 (12) TMI 14 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Meetings and proceedings Company Law Boards power to call annual general meeting and Accounts Annual accounts and balance sheet
-
1957 (11) TMI 37 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ... ... ... ..... s offered by Prabhakar and Co. The amount of damages will be calculated and awarded accordingly. The parties will file a memo of calculation on this basis. 19. As regards Rs. 715-8-0 claimed as compensation for the delay in the completion of the work. P.W. 1 himself says that it is sought to be recovered as a penalty. There is absolutely no evidence to show that any loss or injury was caused to the plaintiff on account of the delay. It Is well settled that Courts will give damages for breach of contract only by way of compensation for loss suffered and not by way of punishment. We therefore disallow the plaintiff's claim for Rs. 715-8-0 as it is clearly a penalty. 20. In the result the appeal is allowed to the extent mentioned above, with proportionate costs in this Court. As regards costs in the lower court the defendant will pay the plaintiff costs proportionate to the amount decreed to the plaintiff. The lower Court's order as to costs will be modified accordingly.
-
1957 (11) TMI 36 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ... ... ... ..... al working as envisaged by the learned Advocate General several unlocked for developments, may arise clogging rather than facilitating the speedy winding up. It is a question of balance of convenience and inconvenience. As the French proverb has it "We cannot make an omelette without breaking or scrambling a few eggs." parliament has considered that the balance of convenience lay in centralising in the company Court the disposal of all these claims by or against a Banking company, relating to winding up. It is not for us to legislate but only to declare the law. Therefore, this contention can have no bearing on the decision of these appeals. 21. In the result, the conclusions of both the courts below are correct and these second appeals have got to be dismissed and are hereby dismissed with costs of the second respondent (Mr. Chary). Advocate fee ₹ 500 to be divided among the appellants. Costs of respondent 1 to come out of the estate. Leave asked and granted.
-
1957 (11) TMI 35 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
... ... ... ... ..... con-text, in which that declaration was made, the above meaning can be attached to it. Really, what was intended by the learned Subordinate Judge appears to be that, as the property was defendant No. 2's, the plaintiff was entitled to attach it as his (defendant No. 2's) property. That also follows from the declaration, properly made, that defendant No. 1 was defendant No. 2's benamdar for that property and the dismissal of her claim, also properly, made The effect would, necessarily, be revival of the attachment before judgment subject, of course, to the remedies, if any, of the defendants of the Money Suit to have it cancelled or set aside in accordance with law. We do not think that anything more was meant by the learned Subordinate Judge by the declaration, to which exception has been taken by Dr. Sen Gupta, as stated above. 17. In the above view, we dismiss this appeal with costs, the hearing fee being assessed at 30 gold mohurs. P.K. Sarkar, J. 18. I agree.
-
1957 (11) TMI 34 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ... ... ... ..... ute was enacted. Under a certain Act, an accused was liable to enhanced punishment in the case of a second or subsequent conviction and it was held that previous convictions even though recorded before the Act came into force could be taken into consideration; In re Frederick Austin 1912 8 Cri App Rep 169 (N). Under a regulation come into force after the offence in question had been committed enhanced punishment was provided for the offence and In re Frank Ephraim Oliver (1942) 29 Cri App Rep 137 (O), it was held that the accused was liable to enhanced punishment. Similarly under the Amendment Act, the District Judge has the power now to revise an order of the Court of Small Causes even though it was passed before the Amendment Act came into force. 12. This application for the reasons stated cannot be granted by this Court now and must be rejected. No order about costs. Mirza Nasir Ullah Beg, J. 13. I agree. BY THE COURT 14. We dismiss this application. No orders about costs.
-
1957 (11) TMI 33 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ... ... ... ..... ounsel for the appellant and Mr. K.L. Kapur counsel for the Punjab & Sind Bank, Limited, have stated before me today that the parties have settled the dispute and in case the appeal is to be allowed the insurance money may be divided between the Bank and the appellant in the ratio of 75 per cent, and 25 per cent, respectively and decrees passed accordingly in favour of the appellant for ₹ 24,500/- and in favour of the Punjab and Sind Bank, Limited for ₹ 73,500/- against the Hartford Fire Insurance Co., Limited. 22. In the result, I pass a decree in favour of the appellant, Messrs. Chuni Lal Dwarka Nath, for ₹ 24,500/- against the Hartford Fire Insurance Company, and I also pass a decree for ₹ 73,500/- in favour of the Punjab" and Sind Bank, Limited, Dehradun, against the Hartford Fire Insurance Company. 23. For the reasons stated above, this appeal is allowed with costs throughout. The costs of the appellant shall be borne by respondent No. 1.
-
1957 (11) TMI 32 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ... ... ... ..... ncome of the previous year with reference to the income so assessed and a refund of the excess tax, if any, already paid. If the Income-tax Officer has to take action in this manner for granting this relief, it stands to reason that a time limit should be imposed for a claim to be made in that behalf, as the task of making a proper assessment for the relevant period might become increasingly difficult with the lapse of time." It is possible to conceive of cases where it may not be to the advantage of the assessee to make the claim. That is why he is given the option to make it or not. It is not alleged that the petitioner made a claim within the period of one year. Therefore, he did not exercise his option within the time limited by sub-section (5) of section 25 of the Act. Accordingly, his claim could not be recognised by the Officer and was rightly rejected. The petitioner is not entitled to the relief he asks for in this petition. The petition is dismissed with costs.
-
1957 (11) TMI 31 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ... ... ... ..... in that sub-section as have not expired, by instalments which may be revised according to the proviso to sub-section (2)"; and sub-section (8) of section 18A "Where, on making the regular assessment, the Income-tax Officer finds that no payment of tax has been made in accordance with the foregoing provisions of this section, interest calculated in the manner laid down in sub-section (6) shall be added to the tax as determined on the basis of the regular assessment." It is admitted that the provisions of sub-section (3) have not been complied with and it is evident from sub-section (8) that the Income-tax Officer had the duty to add to the tax interest calculated in the manner laid down in sub-section (6). The failure to discharge this duty in Exhibit D is, a I understand it, nothing more or other than an obvious error apparent from the record of the assessment. 8. Such being my conclusion this petition should fail and has to be dismissed. Judgment accordingly.
-
1957 (11) TMI 30 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
... ... ... ... ..... for, chips and ballast, and that the same quarries produce stones which may be of rectangular shape or of some other regular dimensions and they also produce stones of irregular shapes which are used for the purpose of manufacturing chips and ballast. We may point out that these are matters of fact into which we do not wish to and cannot possibly enter for the purpose of deciding the present application. If the contention of the petitioners is that the charge of royalty on these stones cannot be equitably based on any such distinction as is sought by the State to be enforced, and that the levy of royalty on chips and ballast is altogether unreasonable or unconscionable and out of all proportion to the market value thereof we leave it to the petitioners to represent the matter to the State or to have it 'fought out in regular courts of law. 12. For the reasons mentioned above, we find that there is no force in this application, and, consequently, we dismiss it with costs.
-
1957 (11) TMI 29 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ... ... ... ..... ukayya, 1941 Mad WN 775 (AIR 1042 Mad 30) CE). Undoubtedly the facts of this case are somewhat similar to the facts of the present case. But in the Madras case the learned Judge was not required to interpret the effect of Section 46 of the Provincial Insolvency Act. The decision rested on other considerations and hence is of no assistance. 11. It is unnecessary for me to decide finally the last contention raised by the learned counsel for the respondent that the mutual dealings between the insolvent and the respondent got themselves adjusted as on the date of insolvency. It is true that the relevant date for working out the mutual dealings is the date of insolvency. But it is difficult to accept his contention that there was any adjustment on the date of the insolvency. There is no support for this contention either from the wording of the section or from any decided case. In the result this revision petition fails and is dismissed with costs. 12. Revision petition dismissed.
-
1957 (11) TMI 28 - PATNA HIGH COURT
... ... ... ... ..... terised as being confidential in section 54(1) of the Income-tax Act and to obtain certified copies thereof under section 76 of the Evidence Act. I am also of the opinion that apart from the assessee such documents cannot be produced in evidence by any other person unless they come within the exceptions laid down in sub-section (3) of section 54 of the Income-tax Act. In that view of the matter, the order of the learned Subordinate Judge was perfectly justified and must be upheld. Moreover, the petitioner has not made any statement in her revision application as to how she could obtain the copies and as to how, in fact, she was entitled to use them. It is not stated what interest she had in the shop during the lifetime of her husband who, as already stated, was alleged to be a working partner in that shop. In that view of the matter also, the application has to fail. The result, therefore, is that the application fails and is dismissed with costs. V. Ramaswami, C.J.-I agree.
........
|