Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 1962 1962 (7) This

Law	-- All -- GST Income Tax Benami Property Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy FEMA PMLA Service Tax Central Excise CST, VAT & Sales Tax Wealth tax Indian Laws
Court	-- Any -- Supreme Court SC Orders / Highlights High Court Appellate Tribunal Tribunal Appellate authority for Advance Ruling Advance Ruling Authority National Financial Reporting Authority Competition Commission of India ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY Commission Central Government Board DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court Commissioner / Appellate Authority Other
Citation	--Year-- 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982 1981 1980 1979 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1973 1972 1971 1970 1969 1968 1967 1966 1965 1964 1963 1962 1961 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 1953 1952 1951 1950 Upto 1949 - -Volume- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -
Landmark	Nil - N/A Referred in >= 3 Cases Referred in >= 4 Cases Referred in >= 5 Cases Referred in >= 10 Cases Referred in >= 15 Cases Referred in >= 25 Cases Referred in >= 50 Cases Referred in >= 100 Cases
Order by	TMI Citation Date of Decision

Advanced Search Options

Case Laws

Showing 41 to 45 of 45 Records

• 1962 (7) TMI 27 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
  

  Memorandum of association – Alteration to be registered within three months

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... and 19(2) with the proviso, I uphold the objection of the Registrar of Companies and rule that there is not power to condone the delay and extend the time since the application has been made beyond the time provided by the proviso to sub-section (2) of section 19. Sri Raghavan contends that this court in Application No. 2514 of 1958 made an order condoning the delay and extending the time, although an application was made beyond the time contemplated by the proviso to sub-section (2) of section 19. It is further pointed out by the learned counsel that the Registrar himself, on that occasion, had no objection. But the order of this court does not show that the precise scope of section 18(4) read in the light of sub-section (2) of section 19 with its proviso had been considered. It was not considered obviously for the reason, as Sri Raghavan himself says, the Registrar did not raise the objection. The petition is dismissed, but, in the circumstances, with no order as to costs.

  ---

• 1962 (7) TMI 19 - HIGH COURT OF MYSORE
  

  Winding up - Liability as contributories of present and post members, Power of Tribunal to make calls and Winding up - Powers and duties of liquidator

  ---

• 1962 (7) TMI 17 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
  

  Oppression and mismanagement, Winding up - Appeals from orders

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... e respondents to clearly understand upon what allegations the petitioner relied for the relief under section 397 and on what allegations he relied for the relief under section 398. A perusal of this application shows that the applicant made allegations against the management which furnish a cause of action under section 397 as well as under section 398. Really speaking, the application sets out the facts and merely wants the court to draw an inference of oppression as well as mismanagement from the same facts. By asking the applicant to file another application what we will be requiring him to do would be to file another copy of the same application and then in one pray for relief under section 397 and, in the other, under section 398. We do not think any useful purpose can be served by such a procedure. The order, therefore, under appeal has to be set aside. We give two months time to the respondents to file their answers to the application. Costs will be costs in the cause.

  ---

• 1962 (7) TMI 2 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
  

  Adjudication - Natural justice - Bias

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... on the principle of law laid down in Lalchand Bhagat v. Commissioner of Income-tax (A.I.R. 1959 S. C. 1295). In the result I quash the adjudication order and make the Rule absolute. 51.Let a Writ of Certiorari issue accordingly. 52.I desire, however, to make one position clear. I quash the adjudication order because it violated the principle of natural justice and was procedurally defective. I do not express any opinion on the charges levelled against the petitioners. While it is important that even the guilty must not be denied a reasonable judicial procedure, it is of equal importance that persons who may be guilty must not be allowed to escape taking shelter under all sorts of procedural defects. I, therefore, make it clear that the authorities will be at liberty to proceed with the charges against the petitioners afresh according to law, if they so like. But this the authorities must do, if they do at all, with utmost expedition. 53. This Rule is made absolute with costs.

  ---

• 1962 (7) TMI 1 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
  

  Prosecution - Seizure (Customs)

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... at the petitioners were unable to pay the penalties, as they amounted to considerable amounts, at any rate in the case of Almeida. Ordinarily the existence of an alternative remedy will justify this Court declining to exercise its discretion, in the first instance, under Article 226 of the Constitution. But where the conditions imposed for appeal are onerous or the remedy is not a speedy one or where other justifiable circumstances exist, it is in the discretion of the Court to permit petitions like this under Article 226 of the Constitution. I also take into account the fact that these Writ Petitions have been pending in this Court Since 1960. In the Circumstances, I do not think that I can dismiss these petitions merely on the ground urged by the learned Additional Government Pleader. 10.The Order of the respondent in so far as it levied personal penalties on the petitioners is hereby quashed and the petitions are allowed and the Rules Nisi are made absolute to that extent.

  ---

123