|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 101 to 120 of 3057 Records
-
1949 (5) TMI 7 - HOUSE OF LORDS
Reduction of share capital – Application to Tribunal for confirming order, objections by creditors, and settlement of list of objecting creditors
-
1949 (4) TMI 26 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
... ...
... ... ..... Tribunal. If the question referred to us could be held in the negative. In so far as the last contention of Mr. Sikri is concerned we are of the opinion that it is not covered by the question referred to us. The only question which we are asked to consider is whether the sum of ₹ 45,351 determined as profit of the assessee for the relevant accounting period in their Sambar Lake firm had been remitted to the assessee in the relevant accounting year and is consequent taxable. We think that on the case as stated and in view of the question as formulated we are not called upon to decide and indeed have no power to decide, if the sum of ₹ 7,162 being the excess of the remittances received by the assessee over the remittances made by him can be regarded as profits received during the account period and liable to tax. The respondents shall have his costs of this reference. We assessee counsels fee at ₹ 250. Harnam Singh, J. I agree. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1949 (4) TMI 25 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... rest from the date of the filing of the suit to 4 per cent. which is at present the recognized rate of interest which the Court allows from the date of the filing of the suit. It is perfectly true that awarding interest from the date of the filing of the suit is discretionary with the Court under Section 34, Civil P. C. but the Advocate General has drawn our attention to the fact that this is a case where a partner had the use of partnership moneys and assets in the same way after the filing of the suit as he had before the filing of the suit and after the dissolution of the partnership, and there is no reason in principle as to why he should pay 6 per cent. interest, for the assets and moneys up to a particular point and pay four per cent. after a certain point of time. It is difficult to answer that argument, and we regret we cannot respond to the appeal made by Mr. Datar. 19. The result is that the decree of the lower Court is confirmed and the appeal dismissed with costs.
-
1949 (4) TMI 24 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... of justice Jagannath Prasad v. Ram Chandra, Cri. Misc. No. 15 of 1948, decided on 9-2-1949 by Harish Chandra and Desai JJ. (5) If the threat is that unless a certain pending proceeding or plea taken therein is withdrawn, a counter-action will be taken to protect one's own interest in the exercise of one's own right in the property or to take recourse to law upon a cause of action which has already accrued, or in the vindication of one's own honour, there is no interference with the administration of justice--Webster v. Bakewell Rural District Council (1916) 1 Ch. 300. 15. In our opinion, the present case falls under the last category (5) mentioned above. 16. "We, therefore, hold that the opposite parties are not guilty of contempt of Court. We see no force in this application and dismiss it. The applicants shall pay ₹ 200, as costs of the opposite parties and ₹ 160 as costs of the Government Advocate. (A month is allowed for the payment of costs.)
-
1949 (4) TMI 23 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ember 18, 1946, did not appear to have been received in that office. But there is nothing to show that Bombay ever forwarded all the papers to Patna. On the other hand, the correspondence that had passed between the Calcutta advocate and the Bombay office, specially the letter which is referred to in para. 14 of the petition, shows that Bombay accepted the position that the applications for certified copies had in fact been made by the learned advocate. 15. We are satisfied that the Appellate Tribunal's decision was not correct in this case and in our opinion the Appellate Tribunal was wrong in holding that the applications in question were time barred. 16. We direct that the applications be received as made within time and proceeded with in accordance with law. The Assessee is entitled to the costs of these applications. There will be one set of costs for these two applications, the hearing fee being assessed at three gold mohurs. Arthur Trevor Harries, C.J. 17. I agree.
-
1949 (4) TMI 22 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... itioner, under the powers conferred on me in that behalf under the provisions of Section 13 of the Bombay City Land Revenue Act, under which imprisonment is not to exceed one day for each rupee of the arrears." It is clear from these statements made by the Collector that he passed his order for the detention of the applicant under the bonafide belief that he had authority to make such an order under Section 13 of the Bombay City Land Revenue Act. Mr. Seervai also stated that in view of the Collector's affidavit he did not wish to press the allegations that the Collector had acted mala fide. In fact from the number of points raised and debated before us, it will be difficult to hold that he has acted mala fide or absurdly. The present application is consequently barred by Section 226 of the Government of India Act, 1935. We have, therefore, no jurisdiction to interfere in this case. Accordingly, we dismiss the application and discharge the rule. No order as to costs.
-
1949 (4) TMI 21 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e was nothing in it to show that it was a summons addressed by a Judge of the ct. commanding him to appear in Ct. & answer to a cause against him. 5. Under the circumstances, we are of opinion that in this case, it cannot be held that the summons has been served upon him in accordance with law. It should be proper to state here that service by post may be adopted as a supplementary mode of service, but it shall not , by itself, take the place of service of .summons, particularly, in a case where there was no attempt to serve the defls. with summon a personally as in this case in which the peon's report was not believed by the Ct. 6. In consideration of what I have said above, I should set aside the ex parte decree in the suit, as a whole, & restore the suit to its file as against defts 1, 2 & 3. The appeal is allowed. The applt. however, in the special circumstances of the case, shall pay costs of the Ct.. to the pltf. resp. Lingaraj Panigrahi, J. 7. I agree.
-
1949 (4) TMI 20 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... t, the mortgagee cannot exercise his power of sale if such a power of sale is given to him under the mortgage deed so long as the suit remains pending and so long as the decree is not passed. But once the decree is passed declaring an amount and the mortgagor has not exercised his option of redemption and the mortgagee has not exercised his option to ask for a decree for sale, then the mortgagee cannot be prevented from exercising his power of sale. 6. The appeal must, therefore, succeed and the decree passed by the trial Court will be modified by deleting from it the provision with regard to the injunction restraining the defendant from selling the property without the intervention of the Court. The mortgagee will be entitled to his mortgage debt. 7. With regard to costs, defendant 1 will be entitled to his costs in the suit, his costs to be tacked on to the mortgage claim. He will also be entitled to the costs of the appeal, this also to be tacked on to the mortgage claim.
-
1949 (4) TMI 19 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... -owning companies. That being so, the decision in the earlier Bench case to which I have referred in no way compels this Bench to hold that the decision of the Tribunal is right. As held in the earlier decision, the section applies to property-owning companies and therefore to this case. But when the section is applied it is clear from the plain facts of the case that there was no evidence at all upon which it could be held by the Income-tax Officer that a declaration of a higher dividend was reasonable or even possible. That being so, the view of the Tribunal was in my judgment clearly erroneous and the question propounded must be answered in the negative. The section applies to property-owning companies but it was improperly applied on the facts of this case. The assessee will be entitled to the costs of this reference. The assessee is also entitled to the return of the deposit made by him. Certified for two counsel. CHATTERJEE, J.--I agree. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1949 (4) TMI 18 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... therefore it would not be liable to assessment to excess profits tax. In my judgment no assistance can be obtained from the English cases and it is clear that the view of this Court is that merely holding property and deriving income therefrom by letting it cannot amount to a business. That being so, even apart from the proviso to Section 2(5) of the Excess Profits Tax Act, 1940, we would be bound to hold that the activities of the syndicate do not amount to a business and that their receipts cannot be regarded as the profits of business. That being so, the dead rents and royalties could not be assessed under the Excess Profits Tax Act. That being so, the answer to the question which I have already set out must be in the negative. The assessees will have their costs of this reference--the hearing-fee being assessed at five gold mohurs. The assessees will be entitled to refund of the ₹ 100 deposited. CHATTERJEE, J.--I entirely agree. Reference answered in the negative.
-
1949 (4) TMI 17 - PUNJAB HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e profits of the company for income-tax purposes. We fail to see what bearing this judgment can possibly have on the facts of the present case. As observed by the Tribunal, the question whether the amount claimed by the assessee in the present case had been laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business against the profits whereof it was sought to be set off was essentially one of fact, and, in the circumstances of the present case, we can find no reasonable ground for holding that the Tribunal could not find as a fact that this expenditure had not been so laid out or expended. We are of the opinion that the question of law formulated by the assessee or, for the matter of that, any other question of law does not arise out of the judgment of the Tribunal and we accordingly dismiss this petition. In the circumstances of the case, however, we leave the parties to bear their own costs. Counsel's fee is assessed at ₹ 150. Petition dismissed.
-
1949 (4) TMI 16 - HIGHT COURT OF NAGPUR
Shares – Power to issue of at Discount ... ... ... ... ..... has, however, not made such a claim in the plaint and so the respondent company urges that his suit ought to be dismissed as untenable. As no reliance was placed on Article 35 in the Courts below, the appellant did not think it necessary to amend his plaint and claim damages, at least in the alternative. It would be a bit hard on him if the suit is dismissed for want of a proper prayer. No question of limitation is involved as the prayer arises out of the same cause of action as the one on which the relief for declaration is founded. In the interests of Justice, I therefore think that the appellant should be allowed to amend his plaint and so also should the respondent be allowed to amend his written statement, if he wants to do so. This can only be done in the Court of first instance. So I set aside the decree of the lower appellate Court and send bad the case to the Court of first instance for a fresh decision in advertence to the above remarks. Costs shall abide the event.
-
1949 (4) TMI 15 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Winding up - Power to apply to court to have questions determined or powers exercised and Power of court to assess damages against delinquent directors, etc.
-
1949 (4) TMI 14 - IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
Shares of shareholders dissenting from scheme or contract approved by majority – Power and duty to acquire
-
1949 (3) TMI 39 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
... ...
... ... ..... has not been complied with and, therefore, I cannot accept the contention put forward by Sir Jamshedji that we must treat the agreement between the Phaltan State and the assessee as a notification under Section 60 of the Act. The result, therefore, is that we must take the view that both the orders complained of are valid and proper orders. I will now proceed to answer the questions raised. References Nos. 24, 25 and 26 raise the same questions with regard to three consecutive accounting years. Question No. 1 - in the affirmative Question No. 2 - In the affirmative. As regard Reference No. 27 in which one question is raised, the answer is that it is not competent to the Court to consider the agreement. But if it is competent, then the question must be answered in the negative. In Reference No. 28 which raises the same question as in Reference No. 27, the answer will be the same as in Reference No. 27. Assessee must pay the costs of all the references. TENDOLKAR, J. - I agree.
-
1949 (3) TMI 38 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
... ...
... ... ..... . But Reddy is certainly liable to the plaintiff in damages. What the nature and quantum of those damages are is a matter which will have to be determined, as the learned Judge himself has reserved this issue in the event of the receiver in the receiver's suit not being able to obtain share certificates in respect of the 381 shares of the new issue in question, and directed that it should be tried later. 11. We would, therefore, set aside the decree as passed by the learned Judge in favour of the plaintiff and we will pass a decree in favour of the plaintiff to the effect that he is entitled to damages by reason of Reddy not having applied for shares when directed by the plaintiff and that an enquiry as to what the damages are should be held by the Commissioner for taking accounts, and the Commissioner should report to us what those damages are. Costs of this appeal, and further costs and further directions reserved. Costs of the suit before the trial Court also reserved.
-
1949 (3) TMI 36 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
... ...
... ... ..... an avoidance of payment of tax within the meaning of Section 10A of the Act. The motive of the assessee for opening the business is entirely immaterial and irrelevant. It is no concern of the Department how an assessee should conduct and carry on his business, and even if an assessee deliberately chose to start a business in a part of India where no excess profits tax is payable, he was perfectly entitled to do so and he was within the law in doing so. In my opinion, therefore, the order made by the Excess Profits Tax Officer was clearly wrong and in excess of the jurisdiction conferred by him by the statute. The question is not properly framed. We will reformulate the question and the question will read thus "Whether in view of the provisions of the third proviso to Section 5 of the Act, the Tribunal was justified in holding that Section 10A applies to the case ?" To that the answer is in the negative. The Commissioner to pay the costs. S.R. Tendolkar, J. I agree.
-
1949 (3) TMI 35 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... Section 9(1)(iv) the Legislature intended to make any exception in respect of an assessee who happens to be a Hindu undivided family. The deduction which is permitted under Section 9 is permitted to all assessees and the only condition that has to be satisfied is that there is an annual charge which is valid and legal and which can be enforced against the owner of the property. It is not disputed in this case that the assessee is the owner of the property on which the charge has been fixed. It is not disputed that it is an annual charge, nor is it disputed that it is a valid and legal charge, and I see no reason why any exception should be grafted on this section to the effect for which Mr. Joshi is contending. I am therefore of the opinion that the deduction has been properly claimed by the assessee under Section 9(1)(iv) of the Act. 5. We must, therefore, answer the question submitted to us in the affirmative. 6. Commissioner to pay the costs. S.R. Tendolkar, J. 7. I agree.
-
1949 (3) TMI 34 - PRIVY COUNCIL
... ...
... ... ..... a balance, unascertained and un-ascertainable till a large number of sales have been completed, and possibly then found to be non-existent, would be, to say the least of it, an unusual form of decree, and one which could hardly fail to cause serious embarrassment to a Court asked to execute such a decree against future property of the judgment-debtor not included in the compromise decree. Their Lordships are not prepared to hold that the Court which passed the compromise decree intended to make, or did make, any such order. They think that the words on which Mr. Pringle relies amount to no more than a submission by the mortgagors to consent to a personal decree for payment of the ultimate balance if and when any such balance should be found to be due, and legally recoverable. In their Lordships' view all the points urged by the appellant against the judgment of the High Court fail. 16. Their Lordships will therefore humbly advise His Majesty that this appeal be dismissed.
-
1949 (3) TMI 33 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
... ...
... ... ..... the amendment passed on the December 3, 1940. Mr. Joshi says that within the meaning of Section 28, even a registered firm could commit default by not complying with the requisition under Section 22, sub-section (4); but the default has no significance because no consequence was attracted to the commission of that default by a registered firm. It is only when a default carries a certain consequence with it, namely, the possibility of a penalty being imposed for the commission of that default, that the default can be considered to be an offence. Obviously there was a lacuna in the law which has been made good by the amendment of the December 3, 1940; but he assessee is entitled to the benefit of that lacuna, and in our opinion the Tribunal was right in coming to the conclusion that the penalty imposed was not valid under the law. We must, therefore, answer the question in the negative. Commissioner to pay the costs. TENDOLKAR, J. - I agree. Reference answered in the negative.
............
|
