| Case Laws |
|
Home  Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 1950 1950 (7) This
|
|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 1 to 4 of 4 Records
-
1950 (7) TMI 4
... ...
... ... ..... there are circumstances which account for the delay. Though there is no specific period of limitation, it has generally been the accepted practice of this Court not to exercise the extraordinary power by way of the issue of prerogative writs when there has been a long delay since the passing of the order sought to be quashed. We, therefore, dismiss the application on this ground, but in the circumstances we make no order as to costs.
-
1950 (7) TMI 3
... ...
... ... ..... s excess profits tax is concerned and that Section 42(3) of the Income-tax Act applies to the levy of excess profits tax by virtue of Section 21 of the Excess Profits Tax Act. Questions (3). - The Tribunal was right in rejecting the contention that the income, profits and gains are chargeable to tax under Section 42 only. 37. They are also chargeable to income-tax as falling within the purview of Section 4(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act as income received in India on behalf of the assessee company. In such a case Section 42 of the Income-tax Act would have no application. As both parties have partially succeeded they shall bear their own costs of this reference. 38. Mr. Mitra brought to our notice a recent decision of the Supreme Court passed after hearing had concluded and shortly before judgment was delivered. We have looked into the decision and find nothing in it that would lead us to come to any other conclusion than the one at which we have arrived. Chunder, J. - I agree.
-
1950 (7) TMI 2
... ...
... ... ..... ey order for a higher sum without there having been any corresponding remittance from Raipur. In any case the fact that the applt. permitted Dhanpalsingh to use the applt's address in no way influenced the resp. in making the payment to the applt. On the contrary, because the resp. paid the money to the applt- as though it had been sent from Raipur, the applt. was induced to pay the money to Dhanpalsingh. When the money was received, the applt. believed that the money was meant for Dhanpalsingh as told by him earlier. The conduct of the applt. is above board. The applt. was misled by the resp's conduct & on the faith of that conduct altered his own position before the discovery of the mistake. In my view, these circumstances are sufficient to disentitle the resp. from recovering the money. The loss must, therefore lie where it fell. 12. The appeal is allowed with costs in all the Cts. The decree of the lower appellate Ct. is set aside & the suit is dismissed.
-
1950 (7) TMI 1
... ...
... ... ..... n agent of the customers for purchasing the gunny bags and had only recovered their actual price from the customers, and that, as sales tax had been paid on the original sale by the dealers in gunny bags to him, a second sales tax should not be levied, in justice and equity, now. There is no evidence to show that he was acting as an agent of the customers in purchasing these gunny bags. No customer wrote to him any letter asking him to buy the gunny bags on his behalf, or sent him an advance for purchase of gunny bags nor were accounts for the gunny bags alone rendered by the appellant to his customers. The question of the second payment of sales tax is not material as in some cases sales tax has to be paid, under our rules, twice over not only on these articles but in the case of many others. In the end, therefore, we see no reason to interfere with the judg- ment and decree of the lower Court. This appeal deserves to be and is hereby dismissed with costs. Appeal dismissed.
|
| |
