Mumbai Court March 1945 Judgments
Emperor Vs. Bhimappa Saibanna Talwar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-29-1945
Reported in: AIR1945Bom484; (1945)47BOMLR648
Leonard Stone, Kt., C.J.1. We have before us the appeals of ten persons alleged to be concerned in a dacoity which took place at a house near Dharwar on the night of May 6, 1943. All the ten accused were arrested on and between June 18 and 20, 1943. The investigating police-officer sent all the ten accused, together with some other persons who had been arrested, to the Magistrate where they were detained in Magisterial custody, in each case requesting the Magistrate to record a confession. In a letter written by the investigating officer to the Magistrate, Mr. Sankolli, which is dated June 21, 1943, it is stated as follows:They (i.e. the ten accused) have been sent herewith for your custody and seven days remand. As they are willing to make a confessional statement, hence their statement may kindly be recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code.2. In fact no statement was taken from any of the, accused before us until July 14, 1943, when accused No. 8 made his alleged con...
Tag this Judgment!Killick Nixon and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-28-1945
Reported in: AIR1946Bom60; (1945)47BOMLR797
Kania, J.1. This is a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, and the question referred for our opinion is in these terms:Whether, in the circumstances of the case, the profits of the assesses company liable to excess profits tax have been rightly computed by taking into account the average of the bank overdraft and debenture loans during the standard period, viz,. Rs. 12,31,008, under Rule 5, Schedule I, read with a. 6 of the Excess Profits Tax Act? 2. The question appears to have come for consideration by the Tribunal in respect of three charging periods, namely, from September 1, 1939, to December 31, 1939 and the calendar years 1940 and 1941. In the statement of case it is observed that the agreed facts are as follows:The average of the bank overdraft and debentures for thestandard period Rs. 12,31,008Total of the bank overdraft and the debentures loan on the lastdate of the standard period, i.e., December 31, 1938, is.....
Tag this Judgment!Land Acquisition Officer Vs. Jamnabai
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-28-1945
Reported in: AIR1946Bom142; (1945)47BOMLR893
Rajadhyaksha, J.1. The only question in this appeal is as regards the claimant's right to receive compensation for the loss of prospective earnings. The land involved in this case is the southern half of survey No. 176 of Juhu, which belonged to one Narsi Monjee. The land was notified for acquisition on June 15, 1937, and the notification under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, was published on December 2, 1937. The land was actually taken possession of by the authorities on October 5, 1938.2. The contention of the claimant was that he owned a cigarette factory at Santa Cruz, and in order to expand his business he had purchased the land in question in 1935 with the object of building thereon a factory for manufacturing cigarettes. This factory was intended to be capable of manufacturing three times the quantity of cigarettes manufactured in the Santa Cruz factory. For this purpose the claimant had obtained a license from the Collector of Bombay and had also got certain plans...
Tag this Judgment!Killick Nixon and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-28-1945
Reported in: [1945]13ITR445(Bom)
KANIA, J. - This is a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under Section 66 (1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, and the question referred for our opinion is in these terms :'Whether, in the circumstances of the case, the profits of the assessee company liable to excess profits tax have been rightly computed by taking into account the average of the bank overdraft and debenture loans during the standard period, viz., Rs. 12,31,008, under rule 5, Schedule I, read with Section 6, of the Excess Profits Tax Act ?'The question appears to have come for consideration by the Tribunal in respect of three charging periods, namely, from September 1, 1939, to December 31, 1939, and the calendar years 1940 and 1941. In the statement of case it is observed that the agreed facts are as follows :-Rs.The average of the bank overdraft and debentures for the standard period12,31,008Total of the bank overdraft and debenture loans on the last date of the standard period, i.e., December 31, 1938...
Tag this Judgment!Lady Dinbai Petit Vs. M.S. Noronha
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-27-1945
Reported in: AIR1945Bom419; (1945)47BOMLR500
Coyajee, J.1. The petitioners are the trustees of a deed, of trust dated January 17, 1931, and as such owners of immoveable property situate at Tarde junction in Bombay. A considerable part of this piece of property was desired by the Controller of Supplies for a storage area for motor vehicles, spare parts, etc., and in the month of March, 1942, got possession of the portion of land under an agreement to lease. Subsequent to that and before the lease could be executed, the Collector of Bombay served an order on the petitioners on April 1, 1942, under Rule 79 of the Defence of India Rules under a certain (Notification of the same date whereby the piece of land Was requisitioned from the date of the said order. The petitioners pointed out that the property had been taken possession of by the Department of Supply, Central Government, under the agreement to lease. On May 4, 1942, the Controller of Supplies was addressed a letter by the petitioners forwarding the agreement to lease for his...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Poona Electric Supply Co., Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-27-1945
Reported in: (1947)49BOMLR187; [1946]14ITR622(Bom)
Chagla, J.1. Two questions have been raised in this reference :(1) Whether on the facts found by the Tribunal the contributions amounting to Rs. 36,310 received by the assessee company from Government during the accounting period are trading receipts and are, as such, assessable to tax in the hands of the company ?The contention of the company is that these receipts are not trading receipts but capital receipts being contribution towards capital expenditure made by the consumers which in this ease happen to be Government. The position is this : On December 5, 1940, the Chief Engineer, Southern Command, wrote to the company requesting the company to let him know the estimate of the cost for giving service in the areas mentioned in that letter. On December 10 the company replied that the price of the materials would vary from time to time and therefore it was not possible for them to give a firm quotation but they ware prepared to charge Government the cost of materials and labour charge...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-27-1945
Reported in: AIR1947Bom263
Chagla, J.1. Two questions have been raised in this reference:Whether on the facts found by the Tribunal the contributions amounting to Rs. 36,310 received by the assessee company from Government during the accounting period are trading receipts and are, as such, assessable to tax in the hands of the company?The contention of the company is that these receipts are not trading receipts but capital receipts being contribution towards capital expenditure-made by the consumers which in this case happen to be Government. The position is this: On 5-12-1940, the Chief Engineer, Southern Command, wrote to the company requesting the company to let him know the estimate of the cost for giving service in the areas mentioned in that letter. On 10th December the company replied that the price of the materials would vary from time to time and therefore it was not possible for them to give a firm quotation but they were prepared to charge Government the cost of materials and labour charges plus fifte...
Tag this Judgment!Premier Construction Company Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-27-1945
Reported in: AIR1946Bom51; [1945]13ITR391(Bom)
KANIA, J. - This is a reference made under Section 66 (1) of the Indian Income-tax Act by the Tribunal of Appeal. The question submitted for the Courts opinion is in these terms :-'Whether in the circumstances of this case, that portion of the income received by the assessee from the principal company of Marsland Price & Co., Ltd., which is proportionate to the agricultural income earned by the principal company is agricultural income within the meaning of Section 2 (1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and exempt from assessment under the provisions of Section 4 (3) (viii) of the Act ?'The relevant material facts are these : The assessees, a limited company, are the managing agents of Messrs. Marsland Price & Co., Ltd. (referred as to the principal company in the reference). The assessees were appointed managing agents under a contract. Clause 2 of that contract is as follows :-'A commission at the rate of ten per cent. per annum on the annual net profits of the said company after m...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Western India Life Insurance Co. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-26-1945
Reported in: (1945)47BOMLR795
Kania, J.1. This reference is made under Section 66(1) by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in respect of the respondent assessee, at the instance of the Commissioner The admitted facts are that the Insurance Company, which is doing life insurance business and held to be resident in British India, has certain securities with the Midland Bank, London. The interest on these securities has been recovered but not brought into British India. The assessee claimed that under the third proviso to Section 4(1) it was entitled to an exemption of Rs. 4,500 in respect of this foreign income. The taxing authorities contended that the proviso did not apply. The Income-tax Tribunal rejected the contention of the taxing authorities. The following question is submitted for the Court's opinion:Whether in the circumstances of the case it has been rightly held that the Western India Life Insurance Company Limited, which is a company resident in British India, is. entitled to a deduction of Rs. 4,500 under...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay Vs. Western India Life Insurance Co ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-26-1945
Reported in: AIR1946Bom185; [1945]13ITR405(Bom)
KANIA, J. - This reference is made under Section 66 (1) by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in respect of the respondent assessee, at the instance of the Commissioner. The admitted facts are that the Insurance Company, which is doing life insurance business and held to be resident in British India, has certain securities with the Midland Bank, London. The interest on these securities has been recovered but nor brought into British India. The assessee claimed that under the third proviso to Section 4 (1) it was entitled to an exemption of Rs. 4,500 in respect of this foreign income. The taxing authorities contended that the proviso did not apply. The Income-tax Tribunal rejected the contention of the taxing authorities. The following question is submitted for the Courts opinion :-'Whether in the circumstances of the case it has been rightly held that the Western India Life Insurance Company Limited, which is a company resident in British India, is entitled to a deduction of Rs. 4,500 u...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »