-
1962 (1) TMI 94
... ... ... ... ..... at even in a cash balance of a small amount almost the entire cash balance may be made up only of high denomination notes. When both the possibilities are there, it cannot be said that in taking the existence or non-existence of high denomination notes in a certain cash balance in a certain proportion the Tribunal could hold that the burden which rested upon the income-tax department stood discharged. It follows that it cannot be said in the circumstance of this case that the Tribunal had before it material for holding tha....... + More
-
1962 (1) TMI 93
... ... ... ... ..... elong to the company if the policy was vitiated by reason of a fraudulent suppression of material facts by the insured. We agree with the High Court that where the contract is bad on the ground of fraud, the party who has been guilty of fraud or a person who claims under him can not asked for a refund of the money paid. It is a well-established principal that courts will not entertain an action for money had and received, where, in order to succeed, the plaintiff has to prove his own fraud. We are further in agreement with....... + More
-
1962 (1) TMI 92
... ... ... ... ..... to non-holding or late holding the elections at the gram panchayat as also municipal level only for the purpose of showing that even in such a case, the operation of the existing statutes or implementation thereof has not been held to have ceased. Thus, unless an appropriate case is made out for issuing a direction upon the State to make a legislation in terms of Article 243W read with Twelfth Schedule of the Constitution of India, prima facie the provisions of the Act as also the rules and regulations framed under the MRT....... + More
-
1962 (1) TMI 91
... ... ... ... ..... rs cannot be exercised to do what the Code specifically prohibits the Court from doing. Sri Tripathi was competent to consider when the other party raised the objection whether the appeal was validly up for re-hearing before him. He considered the question and decided it rightly. It is also urged for the appellants that Sri Tej Pal Singh, had the jurisdiction to pas orders on the application presented by the appellants on December 17,1956, praying for the re-hearing of the appeal and that therefore his order could not be s....... + More
-
1962 (1) TMI 90
... ... ... ... ..... r expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the land. But the borrowed capital cannot be claimed as deduction as the spending of the amount is in the nature of a capital expense. Interest paid on such borrowing would however stand on a different footing as the expense incurred by paying interest is not a capital expense; but yet it is laid out and expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the land. 10. The Division Bench referred to above has, in our opinion, quite rightly, if we may say so with respect, ....... + More
-
1962 (1) TMI 89
... ... ... ... ..... ing that year. The same view is taken by a Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Seth Kalekhan Mohammed Hanif v. Commissioner of Income Tax. At page 677 the learned judges observed as follows We think that once the case is reopened under section 34 of the Income Tax Act, the Income Tax Officer is not limited to the information which he had received and on the strength of which he had asked for a reopening and reassessment of the assessee. If he were to discover other cash credits, he is entitled to take them i....... + More
-
1962 (1) TMI 88
... ... ... ... ..... iately preceding the year of assessment. Mr. Chaudhary contends that the entire file of assessment of the assessee for the previous year is placed before the Income Tax Officer at the time of making assessment and when the Appellate Assistant Commissioner refers to the order of his predecessor, he must have looked into the assessment file for the preceding year. As I have already said the orders passed by the Income Tax Officer, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Tribunal are all based on different reasonings and....... + More
-
1962 (1) TMI 87
... ... ... ... ..... urt. Thus, the provisions of the Indian Limitation Act do not apply to arbitrations other than those conducted under the Indian Arbitration Act. A Division Bench authority of the Bombay High Court (Shah and Gokhale JJ.) in Savitra Khanda Boradi v. Nagar Agricultural Sale and Purchase Co-operative Society Ltd., Ahmednagar . A.I.R 1957 Bom. 178., has been cited in support of this proposition. It was observed by the Bombay High Court in this case that it cannot, therefore, be said that in terms the provisions of the Limitatio....... + More
-
1962 (1) TMI 86
... ... ... ... ..... ive Government for which there is no prima facie justification and of which the petitioner was not even given a notice of. The action of the executive cannot be defended on the vague formula of administrative grounds as observed by Basi Reddy, J. in K. Venkataramaiah v. State of Andhra Pradesh. (7) Mr. Jindra Lal has very strongly contended that the pension given to the petitioner was a matter of grace and bounty not founded on any legal right. No reference has been made in support of this proposition to any law or statuto....... + More
-
1962 (1) TMI 85
... ... ... ... ..... idhar Tejpal v. Commissioner of Income Tax, where it was held, upon the facts of the case, that there was sufficient material to hold that there was willful suppression by the assessee of the particulars of his income within the meaning of section 28(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. Having perused the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in this can, we are of opinion that the present case falls within the principle laid down in the earlier case, Khemraj Chagganlal v. Commissioner of Income Tax and not than laid down in ....... + More
-
1962 (1) TMI 84
... ... ... ... ..... e was not made solely with t(sic) object of supplying evidence of the debt. 6. No other point has been argued before us. The amount of the debt is admitted. T(sic) assignment of the debt in favour of the plaintiff (sic) sufficiently proved. It must follow, therefore, th(sic) the plaintiff is entitled to a decree as claimed (sic) the plaint We pass the following order. 7. The appeal is allowed. The judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Judge i(sic) set aside. There will be a decree in favour of the plaintiff Proka....... + More
-
1962 (1) TMI 83
... ... ... ... ..... aid in section 10(5) was ex abundanti cautela and the result would have been the same even if the word paid was not interpreted as provided for. I find myself unable to accept this contention. There was no need to give such an interpretation at all in that event. As the taxation of what is not trading receipt is the result of a fiction the scope of the same ought to be strictly limited. It is legitimate to infer that the legislature thought that it would not be right to take ways a portion of the insurance moneys even befo....... + More
-
1962 (1) TMI 82
... ... ... ... ..... ined at this stage in view of the finding recorded. I find no difficulty in holding that the capital paid in surplus , which remained constant from 1934 to 1945, can also be treated as a reserve in the light of the above. The accounts of the company clearly show that it was a surplus which came in as a result of the issue of shares in 1934. It remained undisturbed for eleven years and has figured in the accounts in the same way as its paid up capital. It really partakes of the nature of a reserve. Moreover, it has never be....... + More
-
1962 (1) TMI 81
... ... ... ... ..... ate of Bihar 1961 12 STC 449; 1962 2 SCR 81; AIR 1961 SC 1615 and Venkateswaran v. Ramchand Sobhraj Wadhwani 1962 1 SCR 753; AIR 1961 SC 1506, and to the cases of Calcutta Discount Co. v. Income-tax Officer, Calcutta 1961 41 ITR 191 , 207-208; 1961 2 SCR 241, and Bidi Supply Co. v. Union of India 1956 29 ITR 717 ; 1956 SCR 267; AIR 1956 SC 479. But I do not think it is necessary to deal with these cases at length or to express any opinion on this point. Our attention was also drawn to the cases of B.M. Desai v. Ramamurthy,....... + More
-
1962 (1) TMI 80
... ... ... ... ..... rm. The business remains the same for the purpose of section 24(2)(ii) and the identity of the business does not change by reason of the change in persons who carry on that business. The business also continues to be carried on by that individual; for, a business carried on by a firm is a business carried on by the partners of the firm and one partner is the agent of the others in carrying on that business, and when a partnership carries on a business each partner thereof carries on that business (Head-note). In the light ....... + More
-
1962 (1) TMI 79
... ... ... ... ..... ppearance before the court, it has no option but to refuse to answer the question referred to it. The jurisdiction to refuse to answer is there. But its exercise in any given case is a question of discretion. 8. The decision of the Calcutta High Court was followed by the Travancore-Cochin High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Pothan Joseph Sons. 9. Having given our best consideration to the terms of section 66(5) and the decision referred to supra we are inclined to take the view that this court is not bound to answe....... + More
-
1962 (1) TMI 78
... ... ... ... ..... be. The matter will however be different if the District Judge had no concurrent jurisdiction with the Subordinate Judge. In such a case he would certainly be justified in refusing to entertain the application for probate. The District Judge therefore having jurisdiction concurrent with that of the subordinate judge should have at the stage at which the application came to him, entertained it and disposed it of himself or transferred the same to the file of the Sub Court for disposal. 19. In the result, the appeal is allow....... + More
-
1962 (1) TMI 77
... ... ... ... ..... ris was not disposed of by the Subordinate Judge for two years and it took the High Court three years to dispose of the revision petitions against the orders of the Subordinate Judge. The proceedings were further held up even after special leave was granted by this Court in March, 1957 for nearly five years before the appeal could be heard. This Court had ordered that the hearing of the appeals be expedited and heard on cyclostyled record but the record was not made ready for a long time. We also find that a large number o....... + More
-
1962 (1) TMI 76
... ... ... ... ..... decision in the matter on facts unknown to him. If, in the instant case, the decision or the opinion of the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, ultimately turns out to be correct and the petitioner's own impression about his own age turns out to be incorrect, then by asking the Chief Justice to treat the petitioner as a sitting Judge and not as a retired Judge and by asking him further to allocate judicial work to him, the Chief Justice may be asked to face the peril of having judicial work done by a retired....... + More
-
1962 (1) TMI 75
... ... ... ... ..... ssee is liable to pay tax on half the income, or the entire income. As we are clear that the order of the Tribunal is contrary to the decision of the Madras High Court in Mohamad Abdul Kareem Co. v. Commissioner of Income-tax 1948 16 I.T.R. 412, we answer the question in the negative, viz., that the assessee is not liable to be taxed on half the income only. It follows from our conclusion that both G. Krishna Reddy and D.D. Italia are jointly and severally liable for the tax as an association of persons within the meaning ....... + More