Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 1959 1959 (2) This

Law	-- All -- GST Income Tax Benami Property Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy FEMA PMLA Service Tax Central Excise CST, VAT & Sales Tax Wealth tax Indian Laws
Court	-- Any -- Supreme Court SC Orders / Highlights High Court Appellate Tribunal Tribunal Appellate authority for Advance Ruling Advance Ruling Authority National Financial Reporting Authority Competition Commission of India ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY Commission Central Government Board DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court Commissioner / Appellate Authority Other
Citation	--Year-- 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982 1981 1980 1979 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1973 1972 1971 1970 1969 1968 1967 1966 1965 1964 1963 1962 1961 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 1953 1952 1951 1950 Upto 1949 - -Volume- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -
Landmark	Nil - N/A Referred in >= 3 Cases Referred in >= 4 Cases Referred in >= 5 Cases Referred in >= 10 Cases Referred in >= 15 Cases Referred in >= 25 Cases Referred in >= 50 Cases Referred in >= 100 Cases
Order by	TMI Citation Date of Decision

Advanced Search Options

Case Laws

Showing 21 to 25 of 25 Records

• 1959 (2) TMI 21
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... mounts collected were lawfully payable by way of tax to the State before they could be called upon to account for the collections. On the same reasoning, the sales tax collected by the respondent not being a lawful collection does not preclude the appellant from recovering the sales tax collected from him. In the result, the appeal is allowed in respect of the sales tax recovered on the turnover during the period 26th January, 1950, to 31st March, 1950, in regard to the transactions referred to supra. The amount will be determined by the Court below. The appeal is allowed as aforesaid and the suit is remanded to the Court below for fixing the amount of the sales tax which the appellant is entitled to refund. The appellant will also be entitled to interest at 6 per cent per annum from the date of the notice of demand, i.e., 28th September, 1952. As the appellant has, partly failed, the parties will receive and pay proportionate costs in both the Courts. Appeal partly allowed.

  ---

• 1959 (2) TMI 20
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... h a contrivance. It is obvious that in examining the question of liability of the petitioner to sales tax we must look at the substance of the transaction and not at the mere form in which the petitioner granted receipts or in which he kept his accounts. For the reasons already given, I hold that the amount of Rs. 41,736 which was paid as excise duty by the customers was part of the valuable consideration for the sale of the tobacco and so constituted part of the sale price within the meaning of section 2(h) of the Bihar Sales Tax Act. It follows, therefore, that the amount of Rs. 41,736 was rightly included in the taxable turnover of the petitioner and assessed to sales tax by the authorities constituted under the Bihar Sales Tax Act. In my opinion, the petitioner has not made out a case for grant of a writ under Article 226 of the Constitution. The application fails and is accordingly dismissed with costs. Hearing fee Rs. 200. CHOUDHARY, J.-I agree. Applications dismissed.

  ---

• 1959 (2) TMI 19
  

  Winding up – Liability as contributories of present and past members

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... spondence on the subject. It is necessary to emphasise that the transfer in this case was ante litam notam, long before liquidation and through accredited stock-brokers and must, therefore, be held as bona fide and genuine. Therefore, the laches were entirely on the part of the bank alone and not on the part of the transferor in this case. Applying the principles I have laid down these disputants must be relieved. For these reasons, I set aside the order settling the list of contributories made on the 7th September, 1955, and the order of the 5th June, 1956, making a call but only in respect of these disputants. I hold further that Mr. Chowdhury s clients are not liable as contributories and were not shareholders at the time when the bank went into liquidation, and due entirely to the banking company s default the share register was not rectified. Each party will bear his own costs and the liquidator will retain his costs out of the assets in his hands. Certified for counsel.

  ---

• 1959 (2) TMI 12
  

  Amalgamation

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... ricted interpretation of these words so as to exclude certain kinds of contractual rights and liabilities? In the general purpose of the section, nothing. On the contrary, if the power of the court did not extend to contractual rights and liabilities of all kinds, its order would be only partial in its operation and the necessary arrangements for transfer in such cases would have to be carried through by assignment, novation or other appropriate means. How in such a case the beneficent power of ordering dissolution of a transferor company without liquidation could conveniently be exercised it is difficult to see. It is unnecessary to consider the matter further, as, for the reasons, already mentioned, I do not think the decision of the House of Lords itself is an authority for the extreme proposition that unless the ordinary law makes a particular property transferable, the vesting order would not have the effect of transferring it. I agree with the order proposed by my Lord.

  ---

• 1959 (2) TMI 1
  

  Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the loss of ₹ 27,709 arising in Cochin State could be set off against the profit of ₹ 38,998 arising in Travancore State ?

  Held that:- The question referred to the High Court which is common to the two appeals was rightly answered in favour of the assessee. Appeal dismissed.

  ---

12