|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 60 of 101 Records
-
1971 (7) TMI 79 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Winding up - Power of court to appoint and remove liquidator ... ... ... ... ..... himself and he cannot be allowed to remain in office to perpetuate his existence at the cost and to the ruin of the creditors. The scheme for appointing the liquidator is to see that the proceedings for winding-up shall go on to the advantage of the company. The question, therefore, is whether the removal of the appellant as liquidator would help the proceedings for winding up to the advantage of the company, taking into consideration the overall state of affairs of the company and the manner in which the appellant as liquidator had conducted the affairs of the company. We are satisfied, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, that the learned single judge was right in removing the appellant from the office of the liquidator, as the appellant s continuance as liquidator would not be in the real, substantial and honest interest of the liquidation . For the reasons stated above, we find no force in this appeal and the same is dismissed but with no order as to costs.
-
1971 (7) TMI 76 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Oppression and Mismanagement ... ... ... ... ..... rojected sales. The special officer will also submit to the court along with his report the balance-sheet and profit and loss account of the company for the past three years. It will be necessary for the special officer to take assistance of a firm of chartered accountants for carrying out the aforesaid investigation. He shall engage the services of Messrs. K. S. Engineer and Co. as chartered accountants for the purpose. This order will be temporary. The two judge s summonses will stand adjourned to 9th August, 1971, for final hearing. A final interim order on the summonses will be made after taking into consideration the aforesaid report of the special officer and its annexures. This order shall be without prejudice to the rights of the Central Government to take over the management of the company under section 18A of the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951, or under any other law empowering the Central Government in that behalf. Costs of this hearing reserved.
-
1971 (7) TMI 60 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Seizure - Seized goods - Adjudication - Natural Justice ... ... ... ... ..... oner had an opportunity to show cause against the ground of confiscation under section 124 of the Customs Act. It is given to the authorities concerned to set out the ground why the proposed action is contemplated in the said show cause notice. The authority, Adjudicating Officer, must have an open mind so that the petitioner may produce such evidence to disprove the charges or the grounds and to prove that the grounds are non-existent but if the adjudicating officer has already made up his mind that the opportunity of being heard or making representation becomes idle formality. 10.In that view of the matter, in my opinion, the show cause notice cannot stand and must be quashed. The Rule is therefore, made absolute. The order of extension dated 24th May, 1967 passed by the Collector of Customs under section 110(2) proviso is quashed. The show cause notice dated 25th July, 1967 is also quashed. The respondent is directed to restore the golds seized to the petitioner forthwith.
-
1971 (7) TMI 59 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Statements - Gazetted Officer - Prosecution ... ... ... ... ..... hese statements are therefore not admitted in evidence. We are therefore eliminating them from our consideration. 8.The moment these statements go out of consideration, so far as these accused persons are concerned there is no evidence to show that they were aware of the contents of the various packages which were in the hold vessel. Unless a person has any conscious possession as required by the various sections with which he is charged, it is not possible to hold that the offence is brought home to him. On this ground alone, viz. requisite knowledge is not being brought home to the accused persons, the appeal against accused Nos. 4, 5, 8 and 9 must fail and must be dismissed. In this view we dismiss the State appeal against respondents Nos. 4, 5, 8 and 9, viz Abdul Wahab Abdul Karim, Ibrahim Haji Yusuf, Abdul Latif Mohamed and Haji Yusuf respectively. These respondents are directed to be set at liberty. The rest of the appeal is kept pending and will be heard in due course.
-
1971 (7) TMI 58 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Exemption - Demand - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... -5 and C-6 are quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to refund to the petitioner the sum of Rs. 1,28,017.22P. 24.In the result, both the Special Civil Applications are allowed and rule is made absolute in each matter the respondents must pay the costs of the petitioner in each of these two matters. 25.Mr. Shelat, appearing for the respondent, applies for a certificate for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court under Art. 133 (1) (b) of the constitution. It is clear from the facts which we have discussed above that in each of these Special Applications the amount directly or indirectly involved is far in excess of Rs. 20,000. Hence we direct that a certificate under Art. 133(1)(b) be issued in each of these matters. Mr. Shelat undertakes to apply for an urgent certified copy of this judgement in course of today. The direction regarding refund of Rs. 1,28,017.22P not be enforced for a period of four weeks from the date of the certified copy of the judgment is ready.
-
1971 (7) TMI 57 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Prosecution ... ... ... ... ..... evidence and if it was proved that the thing photographed was the original. In this case, there was such evidence. P.W. 20 was definite that the photographs had been taken from the original documents and as such I find that they could be admitted in evidence. 12. Another contention raised was that Ext. P7 sanction was not competent. I do not think that the contention is sustainable. The evidence of P.W. 3 was conclusive that Ext. P7 was given by the Collector of Customs. His evidence could not be challenged. There was no question put to him as to its genuineness. Neither could it be said that the sanction was not complete I find that the sanction was proper. There is no other point argued in the case. 13. The courts below gave a concurrent finding that the case against the accused 1 and 2 had been proved beyond a reasonable doubt. I find no ground to interfere with the conviction or sentence. 14. In the result, the criminal revision petition fails and the same is dismissed.
-
1971 (7) TMI 56 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Baggage - Import ... ... ... ... ..... did not make a specific order rejecting the request of the petitioner for returning the goods on leaving India does not affect his conclusion in any way. 7. Mr. Rajan next contended that having regard to the circumstances under which the articles were seized from the petitioner, it cannot be said that the petitioner imported any article so as to attract the penal provisions of the Act. His argument was that after all the articles seized are articles of personal use and constant wearing. This argument is not tenable. Import is defined in Section 2 (23) of the Customs Act as meaning bringing into India from a place outside India. What the petitioner did was import he having brought the articles in question into India from a place outside India. The fact that the articles are such that one may ordinarily put to daily use is totally irrelevant when considering the question whether the petitioner imported the articles in contravention of the Act. 8. I see no ground to interfere.
-
1971 (7) TMI 55 - SUPREME COURT
Whether A-1 could be convicted of any overt act which was pursuant to a conspiracy for which he had not been charged and which was the result of quite a different conspiracy?
Held that:- There can be no manner of doubt that A-1 played a leading role in extensive smuggling operations on his own admission, he had been illegally smuggling Indian currency in specie (for which, however, no charges were preferred against him). The entirety of facts and circumstances do create a serious suspicion of the commission of offences with which A-1 was charged and of which he is being acquitted. But according to the system of jurisprudence which we follow, conviction cannot be based on suspicion nor on the conscience of the Court being morally satisfied about the complicity of an accused person. He can be convicted and sentenced only if the prosecution proves its case beyond all reasonable doubt. This is what it has failed to do with regard to A-1. His appeal is allowed and his conviction and sentences on the various charges are hereby set aside.
As regards appellants Budhoo and others we are unable to accede to the suggestion that they were as innocent as has been sought to be made out. We have no doubt that the High Court rightly upheld their conviction. Appeal dismissed.
-
1971 (7) TMI 54 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the levy of royalty at ₹ 50 per one lakh bricks under a Robkar issued by the Ijlas-i-Khas (Council of Regency), Patiala State on February 6, 1919 is valid.?
Held that:- Robkar under which the royalty was imposed, cannot be said to be a law corresponding to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, and is, therefore, not within the repeal created by Section 13(2) of the Indian Finance Act, 1950. Appeal dismissed.
-
1971 (7) TMI 53 - SUPREME COURT
Whether no notice of demand can be issued until the Tax Officer makes such an order quantifying the amount of tax?
Held that:- As in the two appeals, i.e., C.As. Nos. 1449 and 1453 of 1967 in which returns had been filed the Tax Officer was not bound to make any order quantifying the amount of tax before issuing the notice of demand. The amount sought to be realised was quantified in the returns themselves, vide Form IV read with rule 4(2)(c) of the M. P. Motor Vehicles (Taxation of Passengers) Rules.
It has not been shown that any penalty was sought to be imposed in those two cases. The order of the High Court, therefore, in these appeals cannot be sustained and is hereby set aside and the writ petitions are ordered to be dismissed. Appeals allowed.
-
1971 (7) TMI 52 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the proceedings initiated by the Tax Officer by means of a notice under section 7 of the Act were beyond the time prescribed and therefore the proceedings taken were not maintainable against the assessee?
Held that:- Reading sections 6 to 8 together, we come to the conclusion that the proceedings under section 7 or section 8 will have to be taken within the period of one year mentioned in section 8. Appeal dismissed.
-
1971 (7) TMI 51 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Article 14 Of The Constitution, Failure To File Return, Income Tax Act, Mens Rea ... ... ... ... ..... necessity for determination whether he had taken reasonable care to avoid non-compliance. In other words, whether on the facts found conclusion can be reached that the assessee was culpably negligent in filing the return. On the material before the Income-tax Officer, he came to the conclusion that the mere fact that the petitioner was under the impression that as in earlier years he would be served with a notice to file the return was not sufficient to hold that he had taken reasonable care to comply with the provisions of the section. This finding of fact has been upheld not only by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner but also by the income-tax Appellate Tribunal. There is no reason why we should disturb that finding. On this finding, assuming that the element of mens rea is go essential, it has been sufficiently established. This contention also, therefore, fails. In the result, the writ petition is dismissed with costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 100 (rupees one hundred only).
-
1971 (7) TMI 50 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Article 14 Of The Constitution, Failure To File Return, Income Tax Act, Mens Rea ... ... ... ... ..... lied on the principle of harmonious construction which is a salient principle of interpretation of a statute. Once the guardian or receiver or trustee voluntarily chooses to file a composition application, then the privilege he secures is relatable to the concession in the quantum of tax and he is not disentitled to the other statutory benefits available to him under the other provisions of the statute or under the common law. In this view of the matter as section 9(2) is conceded to be inapplicable to the facts of this case, I am of the view that the clubbing adopted by the authorities below and which was finally accepted by the Commissioner appears to be against law and is not justified. The order of the Commissioner of Income-tax which is solely based upon the consent given by the father and which decides that such a clubbing is plausible in the eye of law is unsustainable and is, therefore, set aside. The writ petitions are allowed and there will be no order as to costs.
-
1971 (7) TMI 49 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
In these two writ petitions, the constitutional validity of section 40A(3) and (4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 has been questioned on two grounds : (1) that it is ultra vires the powers of Parliament under entry 82, List I of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution ; and (2) that it violates the fundamental right guaranteed under article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. Rule 6DD is also challenged on the ground that it is beyond the competence of the rule-making authority and repugnant to article 14 of the Constitution - we are unable to find any merit in both the writ petitions and they are accordingly dismissed
-
1971 (7) TMI 48 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Petitioners cannot succeed on the ground that the provisions of section 139(1), proviso (iii) (a) and (b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, are ultra vires ; but they would be entitled, on a reasonable interpretation of the text of the clause, to the credit for advance tax which is available to other assessees and in this view the petitioners are entitled partially to a relief. These writ petitions are, therefore, allowed in part. The assessments, if any, made have to be revised in the light of the observations contained in this judgment and no further direction is necessary
-
1971 (7) TMI 47 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Whether Tribunal was right in holding that, for the purpose of computing the assessee's net wealth under section 7(2) the written down value of the assets as per income-tax records should not be adopted - whether Tribunal, in computing the net wealth of the company should have adopted the value of the fixed assets appearing in the balance-sheet after excluding therefrom a sum of Rs. 1,88,31,309 being the amount added by way of revaluation of the assets - Whether Tribunal, in computing the net wealth of the company was justified in law in valuing the block assets at Rs. 2,63,15,524 as determined by the U.P. Government
-
1971 (7) TMI 46 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
This petition under article 226 of the Constitution challenges the validity of a notice under section 148, Income-tax Act, 1961 - It was the assessee's duty to inform the Income-tax Officer of the primary facts relating to the transactions. His failure to do so amounted to a non-disclosure of primary facts.
-
1971 (7) TMI 45 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the penalty of Rs. 6,600 levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act of 1961 was rightly cancelled - Whether penalty could be levied in the reassessment proceedings for default in the original assessment – held that penalty can be imposed during the course of proceedings under section 34 in respect of a default committed during the original assessment proceedings - we answer the question as reframed by us in the negative, in favour of the department and against the assessee
-
1971 (7) TMI 44 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Assessee purchased share in properties. There were litigations for partition - compromise had been entered into - transaction was not a trade - not established that the receipts in question were as a result of an adventure in the nature of trade - no part of the amount could be brought to tax under the head "profits and gains of business"
-
1971 (7) TMI 43 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Petitioner contention that the ITO acted without jurisdiction in reopening the assessment in purported exercise of his powers under section 147(b) - It is argued that no new materials which will constitute " information " has come to the possession of the Income-tax Officer - knowledge that the amount was actually payments towards arrears of provident fund contributions relating to earlier years constituted information on the basis of which the reassessment proceedings could be validly initiated
|
