Mumbai Court March 1953 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Provident Investment Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay C ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-12-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Bom95; (1953)55BOMLR804; [1953]23CompCas260(Bom); ILR1953Bom1281
Chagla, C.J. 1. A very interesting and by no means easy question arises in this reference with regard to the interpretation of Section 12B, Income-tax Act. The assessee company is a private limited company and at the material time, which is the assessment year 1947-48, the company was the managing agents of Malhowji Dharamsi ., and also of Sir Shapurji Broacha Mills, Ltd. The assessee company held the bulk of the 'conversion' shares of the Sir Shapurji Broacha Mills and practically all the 'conversion' shares of the Madhowji Dharamsi Mills. It is mentioned in the statement of the case that these shares were held by the assessee company, but we have been told--and that appears to be the fact-- that really these shares were held by the Gwalior Darbar, but were controlled by the assessee company. On 14-9-1946, Dalmia Investment Co., Ltd., wrote a letter to the assessee company making a certain offer and the offer was that they agreed to purchase all the conversion shares of Sir Shapurji B...
Bandu Hari Vs. Bhagya Laxman and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-12-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Bom114; (1953)55BOMLR753; ILR1954Bom224
Chainani, J.1. The material facts, so far as this appeal is concerned, are these. In 1939 respondent 3 filed a suit against respondents 1 and 2 for possession of the suit property which he had previously purchased. A consent decree was passed in that suit on 24-1-1941. By the compromise, respondent 3 gave up his claim to the suit land, while respondent 1, who it appears was the contesting defendant, agreed to pay him a sum of Rs. 125 ana interest thereupon in four equal instalments, the first instalment being payable in December 1941. The decree placed a charge on the suit property and provided that in case of default in the payment of any instalment, respondent 3 could recover the amount by sale of the suit property. As the first two instalments, which fell due in December 1941 and December 1942, were not paid, respondent 3 filed a darkhast for recovering the amount of these instalments by sale of the suit property.This darkhast was filed on 12-4-1943, that is, more than two years aft...
Buddhisagar Bhaijibhai Vs. Lakha Govind and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-12-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Bom162; (1953)55BOMLR866; ILR1954Bom277
Gajendragadkar, J.1. This is a reference made to this Court by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Baroda, under the proviso to Section 113, Civil P. C. which has been added by Act 24 of 1951. The learned Judge was satisfied that fhe case in which he has made the present reference involves the decision of the question as to the validity of the Baroda Ordinance No. 11 of 1949, and he has added that he was himself disposed to take the view that the Ordinance was invalid. That is why he has made the present reference.2. The Ordinance in question is Ordinance No. 11 of 1949 and it was promulgated by the Maharaja of Baroda on 30-4-1949. The object of promulgating this Ordinance, as mentioned in the Ordinance itself, was to give protection to agriculturists who needed immediate relief on account of the emergency which had arisen owing to scarcity of rain. The duration of the Ordinance was limited for one year from the date of its promulgation. The Ordinance contained two operative sect...
The State Vs. Mansi Karamsi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-10-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Bom55; (1953)55BOMLR717; ILR1953Bom1278
Chainani, J.1. This is an appeal by the State of Bombay. The opponent owns a grocery shop within Thana municipal limits. In this shop he used to store and keep for sale ghee made from milk. Clause (f) of Sub-section (1) of Section 61, Bombay Municipal Boroughs Act, which applies to the Thana Municipality, empowers the Municipality to make bye-laws prescribing 'the conditions on which sweetmeats, milk, butter or other milk products may be sold and on which licences may be granted, refused, suspended, or withdrawn for carrying on the trade or business of a dealer in sweet-meats, milk, butter or other milk products, or for the use, for purposes of trade, of any place for stabling milch cattle, for storing or selling milk, or for making, storing or selling butter or other milk products.The marginal note to Clause (f) is 'milk shops'. Under this clause of Section 61, the Thana Municipality has made by-laws, the heading of which is 'Licensing of Milk Shops and Milk Products Shops'. The first...
Mehta Parikh and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay, Kutch and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-10-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Bom82; (1953)55BOMLR814; ILR1953Bom898; [1953]24ITR207(Bom)
Chagla, C.J. 1. Though Mr. Kolah has argued this reference with considerable heat and warmth, it raises a very short and Simple question. The assessment year is 1947-48 and the accounting year is the calendar year 1946. It apears that on 18-1-1946, the assessee encashed high denomination notes of the face value of Rs. 61,000. The books of account of the assessee showed that there was an opening cash balance on that day of Rs. 72,863-13-3. On 20-12-1945, the opening cash balance was Rs. 14,318. On 2-1-1946, the opening cash balance was Rs. 18,396. On 12-1-1946, the cash balance was Rs. 69.891. 12-1-1946, is an important date because that was the date on which the High Denomination notes Ordinance came into force.What has been held by the taxing authorities is that the sum of Rs. 61,000 was the income of the assessee from undisclosed sources and the high denomination notes did not represent the business receipts of the assessee. The Tribunal has concurred in this decision to the extent o...
Raghuvanshi Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-10-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Bom85; (1953)55BOMLR799; ILR1953Bom1271
Chagla, C.J. 1. The question that arises on this reference is whether the assessee company is entitled to the benefit of the third proviso to Section 23A, Income-tax Act, which provides that Sub-section (1) of Section 23A shall not apply to any company in which the public are substantially interested.2. The assessee company has a subscribed capital of Rs. 10,00,000 divided into 10,000 shares of Rs. 100 each, and during the relevant accounting period, which is the assessment year 1943-44, the company had eight directors who held between them 4695 shares. One of the directors was one Maganlal Prabhudas who held 1344 shares and his two sons Ravindra Maganlal and Surendra Maganlal were also directors who held each 1168 and 1100 shares. 4754 shares were held by various relations of the directors and 1,000 shares each were held by three other sons of Maganlal, viz. Bipinchandra, Harishchandra and Krishnakumar, and the balance of 551 shares were held by members of the public unconnected with ...
Narottam and Parekh Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-06-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Bom67; (1953)55BOMLR790
Chagla, C.J.1. The question that arises in this reference is whether the assessee company is a resident company. The assessment years are 1944-45 and 1945-46. The company is a subsidiary company of the Scindia Steam Navigation Co. Ltd., and its business is stevedoring in Ceylon, it is registered in Bombay and its registered office is also in Bombay. The meetings of the Board of Directors are held in Bombay and also the meetings of the shareholders. 2. In order that a company should be resident it is necessary that the control and management of its affairs should be situated wholly in the taxable territories or its income earned in the taxable territories should exceed its income without the taxable territories in that year. In this case we are not concerned with the second part of the definition, because the income of this company in India was Rs. 3,791 whereas its total world income was Rs. 3,28,108, the bulk of which was earned in Ceylon by the business which it did. In order to cons...
Ramgopal Ganpatrai and Sons Vs. Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax, Bo ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-06-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Bom87; (1953)55BOMLR794; ILR1953Bom1263
FACTS The Dhanraj Mills were incorporated in 1935 and Raja Dhanrajgirji was appointed in its managing agent on 13-7-1935. One 3-9-1937, be a tripartite agreement between the Dhanraj Mills. Raja Dhanrajgirji and the Hindu Undivided family of Ramgopal Ganpatrai, the managing agency agreement between Raja Dhanrajgirji and the Dhanraj Mills was cancelled and the Hindu undivided family was appointed the managing agents. There was a fresh managing agency agreement between the Dhanraj Mills and the Hindu undivided family on 3-9-1937. On 23-6-1943, a private limited company of the name of Ramgopal Ganpatrai & Sons Ltd., (assessee), was incorporated and the Hindu undivided family assigned the managing agency agreement subsisting between it and the Dhanraj Mills to the assessee company with effect from 1-7-1943. A fresh managing agency agreement between the Dhanraj Mills and the assessee company was executed on 13-12-1943.The assessee company submitted its excess profits tax returns for three ch...
Ramgopal Ganpatrai and Sons Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Excess Profits Ta ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-06-1953
Reported in: [1953]24ITR362(Bom)
Chagla, C.J. 1. Two sets of questions have been submitted to us on this reference; one set raised by the assessee and the other set by the Commissioner; and a few facts may be stated in order to understand how these questions arise. Raja Dhanrajgirji was appointed the managing agent of the Dhanraj Mills Ltd., on the 13th July, 1935. On the 3rd September, 1937, a tripartite agreement was arrived at between the Mills, Raja Dhanrajgirji and the Hindu undivided family of Ramgopal. By this tripartite agreement Raja Dhanrajgirji gave up his managing agency of the Mills and Raja Dhanrajgirji requested the Hindu undivided family to accept the managing agency on certain terms and conditions. The Mills thereupon cancelled the managing agency of Raja Dhanrajgir and by a fresh managing agency agreement appointed the Hindu undivided family as the managing agents. On the 23rd June, 1943, the assessee company was incorporated and the managing agency of the Hindu undivided family was assigned to it by...
Narottam and Pereira Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-06-1953
Reported in: [1953]23CompCas185(Bom)
Chagla, C.J.1. The question that arises in this reference is whether the assessee company is a resident company. The assessment years are 1944-45 and 1945-46. The company is a subsidiary company of the Scindia Steam Navigation Co. Ltd. and its business is stevedoring in Ceylon. It is registered in Bombay and its registered office is also in Bombay. The meetings of the board of directors are held in Bombay and also the meetings of the shareholders. 2. In order that a company should be resident it is necessary that the control and management of its affairs should situated wholly in the taxable territories or its income earned in the taxable territories should exceed its income without the taxable territories in that year. In this case we are not concerned with the second part of the definition because the income of this company in India was Rs. 3,791 whereas its total world income was Rs. 3,28,108, the bulk of which was earned in Ceylon by the business which it did. In order to construe ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »