Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 60 of 844 Records
-
1967 (12) TMI 10 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Agreement for avoidance, double taxation between India and Pakistan - foreign income - in calculating the abatement under Art. V, the whole income and not half the Pakistan income should be considered for comparing the taxes payable in that Dominion with that payable in India and then, only one-half of the lower tax is payable
-
1967 (12) TMI 9 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Petitioner under article 226 of the Constitution prays to direct the Income-tax Officer, to desist from taking recovery proceedings - It is a settled rule that the court will not allow a party to succeed, on a second application, when it has previously applied for the very same thing and failed, except in case of alteration in the form of a title or jurat in the affidavit
-
1967 (12) TMI 8 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Assessee is a partnership firm carrying on business in distribution and exhibition of films - expenses incurred in connection with the Silver Jubilee run - permissible for deduction under the provisions of s. 10(2)(xv)
-
1967 (12) TMI 7 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Whether the second proviso to clause (vii) of sub-section (2) of section 10 of the Income-tax Act does not apply to the case covered by section 12(3)- Held, yes
-
1967 (12) TMI 6 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Partial partition in the HUF - business of the HUF firm, KS was taken over by a partnership - non-division of the liabilities of the business - validity of partition - Whether the business M/s. KS constituted a firm, entitled to be registered
-
1967 (12) TMI 5 - ASSAM AND NAGALAND HIGH COURT
Determining the value of the shares - s. 7 of the WT Act - Tribunal was not justified in law to follow the method involving the principle of `break-up` instead of the method involving the principle of `yield value`
-
1967 (12) TMI 4 - SUPREME COURT
Liability towards wealth-tax calculated on the basis of wealth-tax return filed by the appellant is an admissible deduction under s. 2(m) for the purpose of computation of the net wealth of the appellant - Assessee's appeal is allowed
-
1967 (12) TMI 3 - SUPREME COURT
Swiss company agreed with the assessee in consideration of payment of a `technical and research contribution for the use of its Indian patents and/or trade marks - payment made by the assessee to Ciba Ltd., Basle, in pursuance of the agreement is not an admissible deduction under the provisions of s. 10(2)
-
1967 (12) TMI 2 - SUPREME COURT
Assessment of the firm originally made under 1922 Act as unregistered firm. Assessment rectified on the basis that firm was a registered firm - hence rectification of partners` assessment after repeal of 1922 Act. is saved by 1961 Act - assessee's appeal is dismissed
-
1967 (12) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT
Tribunal holding that the losses incurred prior to the reconstruction of the respondent-company are irrelevant for the purpose of application of s. 23A of the Act in subsequent years - Tribunal was not right in taking view that after adjustment of loss against capital the losses do not survive - Revenue's appeal is dismissed
-
1967 (11) TMI 118 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ... ... ... ..... ection can never be attracted in the present case. Section 5 (2) of Criminal Procedure Code which provides that offences under other laws shall be investigated under the Code, is subject to the qualification "subject to any enactment for the time being in force regulating the manner or place of investigating inquiring into, trying or otherwise dealing with such offence". In our view, the Act of 1962 is such an enactment which has provided its own procedure for investigating into offences committed under it and the provisions of Chapter 14, Cr. P.C., therefore, would not apply to such investigations. Apart from this, the offences under the Act of 1962 are non-cognizable. In any event, Section 162, Cr. P. C. would not apply to such cases as Customs officers are not Police officers. 26. In the result, the rule is discharged in all the applications and the interim stay granted by this Court is vacated. Writ to be sent to the trial Court immediately. 27. Rule discharged.
-
1967 (11) TMI 117 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ... ... ... ..... the finding of the lower appellate Courts was to the effect that the execution of the promissory note was not proved. That finding is a finding on a pure question of fact which is not open to discussion in second appeal. 4. Further, that finding of the lower appellate Court stands reinforced by a very important feature which it observed of the signature appearing on the receipt stamp in Ex. P-1. What was noticed by it was that one part of the Kannada letter 'Ya' was missing on Ex. P-1 and that part is the segment or the are which is at the end of the Kannada letter 'Ya'. The missing segment, according to the lower appellate Court established the removal of the receipt stamp which contained the defendant's signature from Ex. P-3 and its transplantation on Ex. P-1. 5. This finding of the lower appellate Court which is a finding on a pure question of fact cannot be called in question in Second Appeal. So, I dismiss this appeal with costs. 6. Appeal dismissed.
-
1967 (11) TMI 116 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ... ... ... ..... as to do under such circumstances is to move the court or the authority, as the case may be, for handing over possession of the said property to the officer. And if the court or authority does not require to have possession of the property for any lawful purpose it is its duty to hand over the property to the officer, for being dealt with according to law. In the instant case, the currency notes were seized by the police, as they appeared to be involved in the commission of offences under the Act; and the police handed over the matter to the Enforcement Directorate, as the case was not cognisable by the police; and as it had to be investigated by the respondent. These notes were not, therefore, required for any purpose in the court, but the respondent was entitled to have them for the investigation. In these circumstances, the order passed by the First Class Magistrate handing over the currency notes to the respondent is correct. We, therefore, dismiss this revision petition.
-
1967 (11) TMI 115 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ... ... ... ..... ual relationships between the parties. We would, therefore, prefer to follow the two above said decisions and with respect find ourselves unable to accept the proposition laid down in the Madras case. 35. We are clear in our view that Article 85 applies to the account in question as it is mutual, open and current. 36. Article 85 of the Limitation Act having been held applicable, the limitation would be three years to be reckoned from the close of the year in which the last item admitted or proved is entered in the account. Such year of course has to be computed as in the account. It is already held that the last entry under Exhibit P-2 appears on 9-9-1947. There is no dispute that the Bank Accounts run from 1st January to 31st December each year. Reckoned from that point of view, the suit would obviously be within time. 37. For the reasons we have attempted to give, we do not find any merit in the appeal. The appeal is consequently dismissed with costs. 38. Appeal dismissed.
-
1967 (11) TMI 114 - SUPREME COURT
... ... ... ... ..... I L R (1890) 15 Bom. 238 it was observed by Sargent C J., as follows The Indian Legislature has, however, provided for the summary removal of any one who dispossesses another, whether peaceably or otherwise than by due course of law; but subject to such provision there is no reason for holding that the rightful owner so dispossessing the other is a trespasser, and may not rely for the support of his possession on the title vested in him, as he clearly may do by English law. This would also appear to be the view taken by West J., in Lillu v. Annaji (supra). 15. In. our opinion, the law on this point has been correctly stated by the Privy Council, by Chagla C.J., and by the Full Bench of the Allahabad High Court, in the cases cited above. 16. For the aforesaid reasons we hold that the High Court erred in quashing the order of the Board of Revenue. The appeal is accordingly allowed with costs, judgment of the High Court set aside and the order of the Board of Revenue restored.
-
1967 (11) TMI 113 - SUPREME COURT
... ... ... ... ..... s of which we say nothing, does not concern us here, because the words used in s. 537 of the Calcutta Municipal Act are different." We may mention that Hidayatullah, J., observed at p. 764 in Ballavdas Agarwala's case 1960 2 S.C R. 739 "An officer of the municipality must himself perform hi-, duties created by statute or bye-law. He cannot delegate them to others, unless expressly authorised in this behalf. The Act does not so empower the officers to delegate their functions in their turn, and thus an officer to whom the power is delegated by the Chairman must perform them himself." We agree with the above observations of Hidayatullah, J. On this point there does not seem to have been any difference of opinion between him and the majority; he differed only on the question whether on the facts in that case there was in fact a delegation or not. For the aforesaid reasons we dismiss the appeal and maintain the order passed by the High Court. Appeal dismissed.
-
1967 (11) TMI 112 - SUPREME COURT
Where there is a bargain for a certain quantity extra greater quantity, and there is h power of selection in the vendor to deliver which he thinks fit, then the right to them does not pass to the vendee until the vendor has made his selection, and trover is not maintain able before that is done
-
1967 (11) TMI 111 - SUPREME COURT
... ... ... ... ..... to which they were transferred. The learned Attorney-General told 'us that the government has no objection to those officers continuing in those posts for the present. We are sure if any change is required the same will be effected by mutual understanding between the High Court and the government. In the result these appeals are partly allowed and the order of the High Court holding that Shri B.K. Patro, Shri K.K. Bose and Shri P.C. Dey had no authority to hold the posts they were holding on or after October 10, 1966 is set aside. Though we hold that the orders of the High Court posting Shri B.K. Panda as law secretary, Shri T. Misra as superintendent and legal remembrancer and Shri P.K. Mohanti as deputy law secretary were excess of its powers, we do not set aside the mandamus issued by it for the reasons mentioned earlier. In other respects the judgment appealed against is upheld. The parties will bear their own costs in these appeals. R.K.P.S. Appeals allowed in part.
-
1967 (11) TMI 110 - SUPREME COURT
... ... ... ... ..... ings Bench Division in The King v. Grubb( 1915 2 K. B. 683.) relied on by Mr. Dhebar learned counsel for the appellant does not bear on the question under consideration. Therein, the factum of entrustment was not in dispute. The only question of law that arose for decision in that case was whether when a property is entrusted to a company, and the person directing and controlling the company, by whose instructions the property had passed into the possession of the company, had converted the same fraudulently, that person can be said to have committed an offence under s. 1 of the Larceny Act 1901. The court answered that question in the affirmative. ln view of our conclusion that the prosecution has failed to prove the entrustment pleaded, it is unnecessary to consider whether on the material on record it can be concluded that the respondent had misappropriated 40 bags of cement referred to earlier. In the result, this appeal fails and the same is dismissed. Appeal dismissed.
-
1967 (11) TMI 109 - SUPREME COURT
... ... ... ... ..... iscarding cards. We cannot, therefore, say that the game of Rummy is a game of entire chance. It is mainly and preponderantly a game of skill. The chance in Rummy is of the same character as the chance in a deal at a game of bridge. In fact in all games in which cards are shuffled and dealt out, there is an element of chance, because the distribution of the I cards is not according to any set pattern but is dependent upon how the cards find their place in the shuffled pack. From this alone it cannot be said that Rummy is a game of chance and there is, no skill involved in it. Of course, if there is evidence of gambling in some other way or that the owner of the house or the club is making a profit or gain from the game of Rummy or any other game played for stakes, the offence may be brought home. In this case, these elements are missing and therefore we think that the High Court was right in accepting the reference it did. The appeal fails and is dismissed. Appeal dismissed.
........
|