|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 1 to 16 of 16 Records
-
1952 (7) TMI 22
... ... ... ... ..... tiffs in that case were equitably entitled to the money as the profits of the lands, which one of the owners of the lands withdrew honestly believing that he was-entitled to it, and therefore according to the learned Judges the claim was an equitable claim against the defendants. In my opinion here too, although defendant No. 1 did not receive the money for the use of the plaintiff and defendant No. 2 and although the State of Sangli did not pay the money to defendant No. 1 for the use of the plaintiff and defendant No. 2,....... + More
-
1952 (7) TMI 21
... ... ... ... ..... sal. The interim award which is assailed in this case, as already stated, was passed on 27-12-1951. After this original petition was presented in this Court, an order of stay was obtained and papers were called for. The result was that case No. 13 of 1951 before the tribunal could not be proceeded with and is still pending. If the petitioner is to be directed to prefer an appeal to the appellate authority, then the result would be, that the proceedings might have to be stayed until the result of that appeal whose period of....... + More
-
1952 (7) TMI 20
... ... ... ... ..... laimed, in their amended plaint which they put on file on July 15, 1948, to recover the excess over this sum of ₹ 18,776-6-0, the plaintiffs' claim could not be sustained. The rest of the judgment is not material to the report. 2. The appeal filed by the defendants will, therefore, be allowed in part. The decree passed by the Court below will be confirmed with this variation, that there will be a decree in favour of the plaintiffs for the sum of ₹ 11,605-1-0 instead of the sum of ₹ 24,549-15-0, with i....... + More
-
1952 (7) TMI 19
... ... ... ... ..... ated under Order 22, Rule 4, Sub-rule (3) arises. It must follow that the second application made toy the petitioners was misconceived and relief can be given to them on the first application. I accordingly hold that an application for substitution, if made on 14-7-1952, would be within time and since such an application was annexed to the application for setting aside an abatement, which was the application in fact made, we can make suitable orders on the actual state of facts disclosed. 11. I accordingly allow the applic....... + More
-
1952 (7) TMI 18
... ... ... ... ..... urisdiction of the Court, because under Section 10 whatever order is passed affects the jurisdiction of the Court. It is a mandatory provision and the suit cannot go on if it is stayed and therefore the decision under Section 10 must affect the jurisdiction of the Court one way or the other, and every decision which deals with the jurisdiction of the Court is a decision which affects the rights of parties. This is the principle on which the Bombay' decision is based and we do not feel that there is anything so seriousl....... + More
-
1952 (7) TMI 17
... ... ... ... ..... e applied in its entirety to such proceedings, including power of appeal and of review. This contention however does not really arise in this case because Section 141, Civil P. C., is indicative of general enunciation of the principle by the Legislature that to all judicial proceedings the Code of Civil Procedure is applicable and I have pointed but how the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council has held that this arises only where the proceedings reach the court appealed to as one of the ordinary courts of the country wi....... + More
-
1952 (7) TMI 16
... ... ... ... ..... are satisfied that the question referred to us must therefore be answered as follows - On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal erred in confirming the additions of ₹ 10,291 and ₹ 10,000 in the assessments for the years 1944-45 and 1943-46 respectively. It has been faintly suggested before us that whether or not there was material to show any business income from the undisclosed past capital, during the accounting year, it could reasonably be assumed that the past capital earned at least i....... + More
-
1952 (7) TMI 15
... ... ... ... ..... f ascertaining the real profits earned during the year. 12. The answer to question (1)(b) follows and it is that the method of valuation of the stock adopted by the assessee company is correct on the facts and circumstances of this case. 13. The answer to question (2)(a) is obvious and it is that it is not open to the Tribunal to disregard the statement in the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's order. Reference may be made to T.V. Krishna Iyer v. C.S. Lakshmanan Pillai 1952 7 D.L.R. (Travancore-Cochin) 201. 14. The ans....... + More
-
1952 (7) TMI 14
... ... ... ... ..... placed and certainly there can be no restriction to the examination of a court witness as Is now sought to be made out. 6. In this connection, we can usefully remember an extract from Burke in the Trial of Warren Hastings, A Judge is not placed in the high situation merely as a passive instrument of the parties. He has a duty of his own, independent of them and that duty is to investigate the truth. Lumpkin J. in - 'Epps v. State (U.S.A.)', observed, Counsel seek only for their clients' success; but the Judge m....... + More
-
1952 (7) TMI 13
... ... ... ... ..... nt of taxes to the poorer class of people who might convert a piece of six yards of hand-woven mill yarn cloth to some personal use. The assessee in the present case is a big dealer in cloth and his dealings, particularly those that have been taxed relate evidently to big quantities of hand-woven mill yarn made cloth sold to retailers in thans (long pieces) which the legislature never meant to exempt from assessment of sales tax. The defects lay in the wordings of column 2 in Item No. 16, the word piece not being qualified....... + More
-
1952 (7) TMI 12
... ... ... ... ..... e cases there was reservation of the right of disposal and, therefore, it was held that the property in the goods had not passed to the consignees by the mere fact of delivery of the consignments to the carriers. In this case there is no finding from the Commissioner that the right over the disposal of the goods was reserved before despatch. In fact that contention could not have been raised in view of the position taken up by the assessees, their case being that the presses were benami transferees. In any case there being....... + More
-
1952 (7) TMI 11
... ... ... ... ..... t of a citizen preserved under Section 176 of the Government of India Act, 1935, cannot be abrogated by a Provincial enactment. Accused s right not to be taxed was guaranteed by the Division Bench ruling in Provincial Government v. Veerabhadrappa(1), and conviction based on Pasha Saheb v. King(3) must land the Government in a civil suit for refund of taxes thus collected and damages as well. I am unable to deduce from these observations any ground for holding that the assessment cannot be levied. In the result, it has been....... + More
-
1952 (7) TMI 10
... ... ... ... ..... to the Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act as being that law. But he was not able to show that either ready-made garments or cloth as such was included within the purview of that Act. On the other hand, counsel for the respondent has brought to our notice that there is a Bill before the Parliament to declare, in pur- suance of clause (3) of Article 286 of the Constitution, certain goods to be essential for the life of the community but that Bill, which has been pending since June, 1951, has yet to be enacted as a law....... + More
-
1952 (7) TMI 9
... ... ... ... ..... view, merit consideration on account of the wording of the entry itself. There is thus nothing from which we could infer any intention on the part of the Legislature to repeal the Act of 1938 but on the contrary, it is beyond doubt that the Legisla- ture intended to keep that Act alive. The Legislature has done all that is necessary to effectuate that intention. It is therefore unnecessary to con- sider the authorities cited by the learned counsel to show that a statute can be repealed by implication. We are satisfied that....... + More
-
1952 (7) TMI 8
... ... ... ... ..... 1952 3 S.T.C. 185 (191) (1952) A.L.J. 332 (335). (2) (1833) 5 B. and Ad. 313 at 340. within the State of Orissa. As such, the basis of assessment by him was the letter of the Collector on the theory that mere export is sufficient to make a transaction taxable. The finding of the Commis- sioner that the goods were collected in Orissa and were despatched from Orissa. Normally, therefore, it is reasonable to presume that the sales were completed in Orissa , is too long a presumption, there being no material that the sales wer....... + More
-
1952 (7) TMI 7
Winding up – Overriding preferential payments ... ... ... ... ..... at page 104 and on Pekham v. Taylor (31 Bea. 2S0 and on 4 Eq. 34) but I do not think any one of these cases or the principles laid down therein would apply to the facts of this case. Whether it was trust money or not the fact remains that on 7th April, 1949, the object for which this money had been deposited, i.e., as earnest money for a tender for supply of material, had been achieved and therefore the case would fall under section 77 (a) of the Trusts Act the relevant provis....... + More
|
