Case Laws |
Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 1963 1963 (10) This
|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 43 of 43 Records
-
1963 (10) TMI 3 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Valuation (Customs) - Evidence - Natural Justice - Adjudication - Quasi-judicial ... ... ... ... ..... tion that the petitioner could have asked the Department to disclose the material and that its failure to have made such a demand should be taken to deny it the right to attack the order on that ground does not strike me as reasonable at all. The Customs Authorities have at least a quasi-judicial duty to perform and when they purport to rely upon certain material, it is their duty to have brought that material to the notice of the party against whom such material is intended to be used. It is no answer to say that the party could have asked for such procedure at least at the appellate stage it certainly could have been aware that in the order of the Asst. Collector of Customs, such reliance upon the material would be placed. 10.It follows, therefore, that the petition has to be allowed. The rule is made absolute. It will be open to the Customs Authorities to deal with the matter afresh in the light of the observations made in this judgment. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1963 (10) TMI 2 - SUPREME COURT
Whether on the issue of a licence in From L-6 under the Central Excise Rules, they acquired a right to obtain from any distillery power alcohol required by them for their business without complying with the Rules regulating the issue of excisable articles in operation in the State of Uttar Pradesh?
Held that:- The validity of Chapter IX of the U.P. Excise Manual which has been incorporated by Rule 10 in the Rules framed under the Indian Power Alcohol Act, has not been challenged before us. It is true that the petitioners had, under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution a fundamental right to carry on business of manufacture of Thinners. But that fundamental right is subject to restrictions prescribed under the Indian Power Alcohol Act and the Rules framed thereunder. The reasonableness of those restrictions has not been challenged before us. The only argument advanced by the petitioners in support of the petition is that the Central Government having granted a licence in Form L-6 no further conditions could be imposed restricting the right of the petitioners to obtain power alcohol required by them for the purpose of their business. That contention on the Rules framed under the Power Alcohol Act is wholly unwarranted, and must be rejected. Appeal dismissed.
-
1963 (10) TMI 1 - PATNA HIGH COURT
Dealing in shares - permissible deduction - revenue loss/capital loss ... ... ... ... ..... he attributes of an adventure in the nature of trade. In my opinion, the later decision of the Supreme Court governs the present case and the facts of Rajputana Textiles case are different in material particulars. Keeping in view the well established principles of law in relation to the question before us, I have unhesitatingly come to the conclusion that, on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the loss of Rs. 7,74,080 was not incurred by the assessee-company in any event it was not incurred in the course of its trade or in an adventure in the nature of trade. It was, therefore, not permissible to deduct such loss as a revenue loss. The question of law referred to by the Appellate Tribunal must be answered in favour of the Commissioner of Income-tax and against the assessee-company, which will be liable to pay the costs of this reference to the former (Commissioner of Income-tax) hearing fee Rs. 250. RAMASWAMI C.J.-I agree. Question answered against the assesssee
|
|