|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 21 to 40 of 54 Records
-
1973 (1) TMI 74 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the respondent cannot invoke the benefit of clause (c) of sub-section (3) of section 8 of the Act?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. As the tin sheets and tin plates purchased by the respondent were intended to be used for packing of vegetable products sold by the respondent, the respondent, in our opinion, was entitled to invoke the benefit of clause (c) of sub-section (3) of section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 reproduced above.
-
1973 (1) TMI 62 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Company - Incorporation of ... ... ... ... ..... filed on the same allegations on the basis of which the earlier complaint was filed and withdrawn, it was clear that the complainant s motive in filing this complaint was not to vindicate the law but to coerce the accused by criminal process to enter into a settlement with regard to his false claim. He, therefore, submitted that this was a case in which compensation should be ordered under section 516-A A of the Criminal Procedure Code. There is undoubtedly some force in what Mr. Jethmalani has stated, but it is clear that there is a dispute as found by us above. In view of that dispute it is possible that the complainant was advised to file a complaint and it cannot be said that it is without any reasonable or proper cause. For the above reasons, we allow the application and quash all the proceedings against the applicant and all the other accused pending in the court of the learned Presidency Magistrate, 28th Court, in Case No. 18/S of 1972. All the accused are discharged.
-
1973 (1) TMI 53 - SUPREME COURT
Winding up – Power of court to assess damages against delinquent, directors, etc. and Power of court to assess damages against delinquent directors, etc.
-
1973 (1) TMI 51 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Winding up - Company when deemed unable to pay its debts, Application for ... ... ... ... ..... e learned counsel for the petitioner at the hearing is that the company suffered losses and its assets are less than its liabilities and, therefore, it could be legitimately inferred that the company was unable to pay its debts. The two facts emphasised by the petitioner and his counsel are not sufficient to come to the conclusion that the company is unable to pay its debts. Something more is to be proved, that is, the business of the company is such that the income to be derived by the company in future coupled with the present assets would not be sufficient to meet all the liabilities of the company when they accrue due. No such attempt has been made in the present case. This issue is accordingly decided in favour of the respondents and against the petitioner. Issue No 3 In view of my decision on issue No. 2, this issue is decided in favour of the company, that is, that the company is not liable to be wound up. In the result, this petition fails and is dismissed with costs.
-
1973 (1) TMI 50 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Winding up – Commencement of, Suits stayed on winding-up order ... ... ... ... ..... am, therefore, of the opinion that no leave of this court was required by the plaintiffs to file the present suit in the civil court on October 5, 1970, as the winding-up order had not been passed by that date nor was an order appointing the provisional liquidator in force. The suit was rightly filed in the trial court and was, thereafter, transferred to this court for disposal under section 446(3) of the Act by Narula J. There is no requirement that after the suit is transferred, the leave of the company court is to be obtained for continuing it. The suit is transferred to the company court for disposal which means that its trial is to be continued in that court from the stage it was at in the lower court before transfer. There is thus no merit in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the defendants which are repelled and the points raised are decided against them. The case is adjourned to March 1, 1973, for the evidence of the parties and arguments on issue No. 1.
-
1973 (1) TMI 48 - HIGH COURT OF PATNA
Winding up - Company when deemed unable to pay its debts ... ... ... ... ..... company does not deserve to be wound up at present. It appears that the huge loss, as suffered by the company as disclosed in its balance-sheet of the year 1963, has gradually been liquidated subsequently and according to the balance-sheet of 1970 it has a profit of the aforesaid amount of Rs. 2,479.79. This is a sound indication of improvement in the company s position by and by. It cannot, therefore, be said that the company s position is not likely to improve to the extent that even after allowing depreciation on its fixed assets, as above, it registers a profit and be in a position to pay its debts, if any. The company s position, as it stands at present, as disclosed in its balance-sheet of 1970, is not such that it is to be treated as being wholly unable to pay its debts requiring its winding-up as prayed for. For the above reasons, the prayer for winding up the company, as made in the present petition, is at present rejected and the petition is dismissed without costs.
-
1973 (1) TMI 28 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Classification of goods - Common parlance ... ... ... ... ..... ent manner. We find no reason to take a different view from the one taken by the Collector of Central Excise in the matter. From the point of view of composition and the ingredients of the product of the Petitioners, therefore, it will not be possible to accept Mr. Joshi s contention, that the Petitioners product should not be regarded as hair lotion. In our view, the use of the product as hair darkner though a relevant factor, would not be determinative of the matter. 12.In the circumstances we feel that the order passed by the Excise authorities and which have been confirmed by Central Government by its order dated 10th January, 1966 seems to be justified and there is no reason for us to interfere with the order passed by Justice K.K. Desai who dismissed the Petitioners Petition for writ. In the result, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed with costs. Liberty to the respondents Attorneys to withdraw Rs. 500 deposited by the appellants towards the cost of the petition.
-
1973 (1) TMI 27 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Interpretation of statutes - Penal statue ... ... ... ... ..... enalty has been imposed against petitioner under Section 112(a). I shall assume that the goods are liable for confiscation under Section 111 of the Act. Admittedly clause (i) of Section 112 has no application. It is clause (ii) that is sought to be applied. It appears to be very clear from clause (ii) that a penalty is attracted under that clause only in a case where the duty sought to be evaded on the imported good. That can happen only when goods liable to a higher rate of duty is imported under a licence which permits import of goods liable to a less rate of duty. What happened to the instant case was just the opposite. Goods which were liable under a much less rate of duty were imported under a licence which relates to goods liable to a higher rate of duty and the higher rate was actually paid Section 112 of the Customs Act has clearly no application to such a case. For the reasons stated above, the impugned order Ext. P-11 is quashed. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1973 (1) TMI 26 - HIGH COURT OF MYSORE
Appeal - Writ jurisdiction ... ... ... ... ..... had the benefit of the lesser penalty by the original authority and also the benefit of the order under Section 129 of the 1962 Act before the appellate authority, we decline to interfere with the impugned order in the exercise of our writ jurisdiction. The petitioner in our opinion was in no way prejudiced by the proceedings taken and continued by the Sea Customs Act, 1878. 9. There is also one other reason why we should not exercise our jurisdiction, i.e., laches on the part of the petitioner. The Central Board of Excise and Customs dismissed the appeals by its order dated 21-8-1964. The revision petitions preferred by the petitioner were dismissed by the Government of India by their order dated 23-5-1966. This writ petition was preferred in January, 1968. There is thus an inordinate and unexplained delay on the part of the petitioner in approaching this Court. 10. In the result, the petition fails and is dismissed. In the circumstances, there will be no order as to costs.
-
1973 (1) TMI 25 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Assessment On Executors ... ... ... ... ..... tor the estate had vested with the legatees. So, we think that if for any reason it can be said that the sum of Rs. 3,40,000 payable to Achikannu and Devaunie are amounts that should be discharged by Mundan in his capacity as executor and acting as such-we have already held, it is not so-even then, it cannot be said that by reason of what is stated in paragraph 9 of the compromise, annexure B , the assent of the executor had not been given and that that assent is insufficient to vest the properties with the legatees. In the light of the above, we answer the question referred to us in the affirmative, that is, in favour of the assessee and against the department. The assessment will have to be made under section 41 of the Act. We direct the parties to bear their respective costs. A copy of this judgment under the seal of the High Court and the signature of the Registrar will be forwarded to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench. Question answered in the affirmative.
-
1973 (1) TMI 24 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Accepting Partition ... ... ... ... ..... the assessment years 1948-49 and 1949-50 on May 31, 1962, were, therefore, clearly incompetent. I would, therefore, answer the question referred to us for opinion in the negative and in favour of the assessee. The assessee is entitled to costs which I assess at Rs. 200. BY THE COURT.--Under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has submitted this statement of the case seeking the opinion of this court on the following question of law Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, valid assessments could be made on 31st May, 1962, for the assessment years 1948-49 and 1949-50 on the basis of voluntary returns of income filed under section 22(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, on November 18, 1950 ? According to the opinion of the majority, we answer the question in the affirmative, in favour of the department and against the assessee. The department is entitled to the costs, which we assess at Rs. 200.
-
1973 (1) TMI 23 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Impartible Estate, Property Of HUF, Sale Proceeds ... ... ... ... ..... ife and his sons will inherit the property equally as it is joint family property. None of the sons is entitled to inherit the whole of the property as it will lose its impartible character on the death of the present holder. In the instant case, therefore, there is no question of the son entitled to succeed to the impartible estate giving his consent to the partition. Thakur Gopal Singh having relinquished his right of keeping the sale price obtained by the sale of the garh as impartible property it became open to the partitioned amongst the members of the joint family. We accordingly agree with the view taken by the Appellate Tribunal that the partition of Rs. 2,00,000 did not involve any transfer and the provisions of the Gift-tax Act were not attracted. Our answer to the question posed in the gift-tax case is, therefore, in the affirmative. The references are accordingly disposed of as indicated above. In the circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs.
-
1973 (1) TMI 22 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Advance Tax, Bona Fide, Income Tax Act, Liability To Penalty, Tax Liability ... ... ... ... ..... Income-tax, however, the Tribunal has referred the following question of law for the opinion of this court Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the cancellation of penalty levied under section 273(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on the assessee is justified ? The Tribunal has accepted the assessee s plea that the advance tax bad not been paid because it was under a bona fide belief that its income was exempt from tax. This was a sufficient cause for not depositing the advance tax. A penalty under section 273(b) is leviable only if an assessee fails to pay advance tax without reasonable cause. The Tribunal has found that there was sufficient cause for the default attributed to the assessee. This is a finding of fact and has not been questioned. We, accordingly, answer the question in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the department. The assessee is entitled to costs, which we assess at Rs. 200. Question answered in the affirmative.
-
1973 (1) TMI 21 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Flat Rate, Income Tax, Question Of Law, Reference To High Court ... ... ... ... ..... erefore, at least up to 19 there is clear evidence about the flat rate being just. If the Tribunal made it 20 we are unable to call it capricious, conjectural or based on irrelevant or no evidence. A question relating to the flat rate as held by the Privy Council in Feroz Shah s case is a pure question of fact. Although from the language of the questions which are asked to be referred to this court the grievance of enhancement is there yet it was not pressed before us. Therefore, it is not necessary to enter into the question whether the tax was enhanced because it is factually incorrect to say that the total liability of the assessee was increased. The case in point is Commissioner of Income-tax v. McMillan and Co. In our opinion, it is not necessary to enter into the argument whether the question arises from the order of the Tribunal or not because we are clearly of the opinion that no question of law arises in this case. The applications fail and are dismissed with costs.
-
1973 (1) TMI 20 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
High Court, Land Acquisition Compensation ... ... ... ... ..... are, therefore, of the opinion that the Tribunal in the instant case was right in coming to the conclusion that the said extra amount of compensation amounting to Rs. 7,24,914 was not income which accrued or arose during the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1956-57. We shall make it clear that in view of our answer to the question referred, we have not considered it necessary to go into the break-up of the said amount of Rs. 7,24,914 mentioned by the Tribunal and to the question whether the amount of interest, and compensation for occupation, if any, included in the said amount of Rs. 7,24,914 can be said to have accrued in the relevant year or in a particular year or in a number of years. We may observe that, in view of the decision of the Tribunal, the Tribunal has also not considered this aspect. We, therefore, answer the question in the negative and in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. There will be no order as to costs. T. K. BASU J.--I agree.
-
1973 (1) TMI 19 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Provision For Payment, Wealth Tax Act ... ... ... ... ..... along with the fittings, furniture, goodwill, equipments, etc., which were leased out should be used for the purpose of a hotel business, Coupled with these facts we have the further evidence in this case that the lease has expired and on the expiry thereof the lessor has resumed possession and is carrying on the hotel business as before. And the resumption of possession took place before the Income-tax Officer could make his orders. Taking all these facts into consideration, we are of the opinion that in the present case, the rental income derived from the lease should be taxed under section 10 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. In the result, this appeal is allowed. The orders of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Commissioner of Income-tax referred to above are set aside and the Income-tax Officer concerned is directed to make the assessments in accordance with law. Let appropriate writs issue. There will be no order as to costs. SABYASACHI MUKHARJI J.-I agree.
-
1973 (1) TMI 18 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Assessment Of Income Of Trust In Hands Of Settlor, Trust Whether Revocable, Trusts ... ... ... ... ..... ained in any other law. The trust deed under the Act, therefore, shall have an overriding effect on the I.T. Act. The contention, therefore, that under s. 60(1) of the I.T. Act, the Central Government can give an exemption in respect of income-tax only in favour of any class of income or in regard to the whole or any part of the income of any class of persons is not substantial in view of s. 3 of the Nizam s Trust. Deed (Validation) Act. Since one of the provisions of the trust deed is that the income from the said deposit shall be tax-free and shall not be assessed to any tax, the amount of Rs. 1 lakh representing interest on deposit in the bands of the assessee, therefore, cannot be assessed to tax. We are, therefore, unable to agree with the Tribunal that the said amount is assessable to tax in the hands of the assessee. We, accordingly, answer the second question in favour of the assessee and against the Department. The assessee will get his costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 250.
-
1973 (1) TMI 17 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... (vide page 347 of the report) When it was held that there was no appeal when the appeal filed was rejected on the ground it was barred by limitation, it would obviously be unsound to hold that where an appeal had been rejected as out of time, the order had been the subject of an appeal. Indeed, the words I subject of an appeal imply that the order appealed against has been decided on merits. Relying on these observations, this court, in Jagmohandas Gokaldas v. CWT 1963 50 ITR 578, held that when the appeal before the Tribunal had been withdrawn, the order could not be said to be the subject of an appeal, meaning effective appeal, and as such there was no bar to the exercise of the revisional powers. Having regard to the above discussion, we are of the view that the construction sought to be placed on proviso (b) to section 25(1) by Mr. Joshi cannot be accepted and the view taken by the learned judge below is right. In the result, the appeal fails and is dismissed with costs.
-
1973 (1) TMI 16 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Petitioner is a Hindu undivided family and Sri Jugal Kishore is the karta thereof. He was a director on behalf of the Hindu undivided family in Messrs. Ram Chand Sugar (Private) Ltd. - director pays some amount to other directors for the loss during his management of the Company - " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to the deduction of Rs. 26,000 under section 10(1) or section 10(2)(xv) or section 12 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 ? "
-
1973 (1) TMI 15 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Change in Constitution of Firm - Of the three partners, one died, remaining two and the son of deceased entered into partnership, whether it amounts to succession by new firm and whether it is merely a change in Constitution - No doubt it is true that on the facts of that case there was a provision in the partnership deed that on the death of a partner the firm shall not dissolve, but I fail to understand as to how this will affect the merits of their case, keeping in mind the view we have taken regarding the, interpretation of section 187 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Therefore, this authority is also of no assistance to the learned counsel for the assessee
|
