Mumbai Court October 1958 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.
Ramniklal Sunderlal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Ahmedabad
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-28-1958
Reported in: [1959]36ITR464(Bom)
S.T. Desai, J.1. A joint Hindu family consisted of one Ramniklal Sunderlal, his wife and his two sons. It appears that in March 1948, they partitioned some of the joint family properties and on 25th January, 1949, entered into an agreement of partnership between them. The partnership was to derive income from certain of the partitioned properties and was given the firm name of Messrs. Ramniklal Sunderlal. It is mentioned in the agreement that income derived from certain properties shall be divided by all the partners in equal shares and that income from leases also will be divided between the partners in equal shares. The work pertaining to courts, offices, recovery of rents etc., was agreed to be done by the father Ramniklal with the consent of the other partners. Later on there is a clause which says : 'This firm shall be entitled to carry on this partnership business and over and above this business any other business with the consent of all the partners.'2. The assessment year is 1...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-i Vs. Evans Medical Supplies L ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-27-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Bom448; (1959)61BOMLR490; ILR1959Bom1458
S.T. Desai, J.1. This reference, raises the vexed question of 'business connection'. Income which accrues to an assessee directly or indirectly through any business connection in the taxable territories is under section 42 deemed to be his income arising in the taxable territories. Business connection is an expression which no court has attempted to define. Tests have some times been suggested and criteria have been discussed but none of them offer the desired solution and for the obvious reason that in the ultimate analysis the determination of what is business connection must rest upon the facts of each particular case. The question that we have to answer on this Reference is a mixed question of law and fact and we shall take the facts as found by the Tribunal. The assessee is Evans Medical Supplies Ltd. a company registered in the United Kingdom. The assessment years are 1948-49 to 1951-52. The assessee has been treated as 'non-resident' in the taxable territories in respect of each...
Ormerods (India) Private Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay C ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-27-1958
Reported in: [1959]36ITR329(Bom)
S.T. Desai, J.1. On this reference arise a very short question of the construction of the first part of section 12(2) and the case, as aptly observed by the Tribunal, is rather extraordinary. The assessee is a private limited company. Its accounting year ends on 30th November every year. The reference has been brought in respect of n order affecting the assessment of the company of the years 1949-50 and 1950-51. It may be pointed out that the order relates to assessment not only of the two years 1949-50 and 1950-51 but to five years commencing with the assessment year 1949-50. In respect of the other there years, the Department has not raised any question for determination by the court. The balance-sheet of the company of the year ending 30th November, 1948, showed that it held total investment in share to the tune of over Rs. 521/4 lakhs. The assessee purchased a block of shares in Gannon Dunkerly & Co. Ltd. for a sum of about Rs. 521/2 lakhs during the accounting year ending with 30t...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City I Vs. Evans Medical Supplies L ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-27-1958
Reported in: [1959]36ITR188(Bom)
S.T. Desai, J.1. This reference raises the vexed question of 'business connection'. Income which accrues to an assessee directly or indirectly through any business connection in the taxable territories is under section 42 deemed to be his income arising in the taxable territories. Business connection is an expression which no court has attempted to define. Tests have sometimes been suggested and criteria have been discussed but none of them offer the desired solution and for the obvious reason that in the ultimate analysis the determination of what is business connection must rest upon the facts of each particular case. The question that we have to answer on this reference is a mixed question of law and fact and we shall take the facts as found by the Tribunal. The assessee is Evans Medical Supplies Ltd., a company registered in the United Kingdom. The assessment years are 1948-49 to 1951-52. The assessee has been treated as 'non-resident' in the taxable territories in respect of each ...
Gulabchand Nanulal and ors. Vs. Fulchand Hirachand and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-25-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Bom232; (1959)61BOMLR484; ILR1959Bom1076
Y.S. Tambe, J.1. This application is made by Sampatlal under Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code for the rehearing of First Appeal No. 39 of 1946 decided by a Division Bench of the then High Court at Nagpur on 30-12-1954. Though it is not so stated in the application, Shri Halve who appears before us for Sampatlal contends that the decision of the Nagpur High Court and the decree made in that appeal were null and void on account of a procedural defect.2. It is necessary to set out certain facts in detail. The suit out of which this appeal arises is between the members of two branches of the family which at one time were joint. The following family tree would disclose their relationship: GUMANCHAND ---------------------------------------------------- | | | | Hirachand (d. 1927) Nanhoolal (d. 1948) ---------------- -------------------------------------------------------- | | | | | | | |Fulchand Suganchand Jadao Bal Dulichand Pudamchand Gulabchand Mangalchand Udakaran (Deft. 1) (d. ...
Nanubhai Maneklal and Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-25-1958
Reported in: [1959]36ITR301(Bom)
S.T. Desai, J.1. The question that arises for our determination in this references lies in an extremely narrow compass and relates to the meaning of the expression 'reserves,' an expression which has not been defined i the Income-tax Act. The expressions occurs in section 23A of the Act and the controversy before us has centered round the meaning of the expression 'reserves' in the proviso to sub-section (1) of that section. The facts of the case are brief. The income of the assessee, a private limited company, for the previous year 1951 (assessment year 1952-53) was determined at Rs. 5,85,085. The tax payable on it was Rs. 2,48,901 and the dividend declared by the company in a general meeting was Rs. 2,21,904. That was about 66% of the assessable income reduced by the tax payable there on and satisfied the requirements of sub-section 23A. But the Department took the view that the case of the fell within the first proviso to that sub-section and that this was case in which the company ...
Shri Jagdish Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay North
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-24-1958
Reported in: [1959]36ITR279(Bom)
S.T. Desai, J.1. The assessee, Shree Ambica Ltd., Ahmedabad is the successor in interest of Shree Jagdish Mills Ltd. which, at all material times, ran a textile mill at Baroda which was an Indian State. The assessment year is 1949-50 and the previous year ended on 31st December, 1948. Shree Jagdish Mills Ltd. carried on its manufacturing operations at Baroda and also carried on its business at Baroda, but it used to make its purchases of stores, fuel and raw materials such as cotton British India. We shall refer to this mills company hereafter as 'the assessee'. The assessee became liable to pay excess profits tax in accordance with the law promulgated in the Baroda State in 1943 by a Huzur Ordinance called the Excess Profits Ordinance, 1943. It will be convenient at this stage to set out certain provisions of that Ordinance : '2. Excess Profits Tax Act applied to Baroda State : The Excess Profits Tax Act (No. XV of 1940) in force British India as modified up to date shall apply to the...
Jadhavji Narsidas and Co. Vs. the Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay C ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-23-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Bom499; (1959)61BOMLR582; ILR1959Bom1444; [1959]36ITR266(Bom)
S.T. Desai, J.1. A question of some importance arises on this Reference and that question in whether an assessee can, as against the profits of his business, claim to set-off his share of the loss of a firm in which he is a partner although the partnership firm is unregistered and is not assessed as a firm. The assessee is a registered firm of four partners. The assessment year is 1946-47 and the accounting year is S.Y. 2001 (18-10-44- to 4-11-1945). The assessee firm carries on speculative business in various commodities. In the year of account it claimed a sum of Rs. 1,05,641/- as loss arising to it in a joint venture with Damji Laxmidas. In the Statement of the case it is mentioned that the assessee firm had done such transactions with Damji Laxmidas in earlier years and also in subsequent years. The profits and losses arising from such transactions of the nature of the joint venture with Damji Laxmidas in the earlier years and the subsequent years have been taken into account while...
Eastern Electric Light and Power Company (Private) Ltd. Vs. Its Workme ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-22-1958
Reported in: (1959)ILLJ301Bom
Acts/Rules/Orders: Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Sections 2, 3, 10(1) 12(5) and 20(3)AWARD1. This is a reference made by the Government of Bombay, under Sub-section (5) of S. 12 of the Industrial Disputes, Act, 1947, for adjudication of the dispute between the Eastern Electric Light and Power Company (Private), Ltd., and the workmen employed under it over the following demand :- 'Sri Maruti Sakharam should be employed on the same post and on the same salary and dearness allowance effective from 3 August 1957 and be paid all the wages that would have accrued to him from month to month.' * * *2. The parties were heard only on the questions regarding validity or otherwise of this reference. Only those questions are considered in this award. 5. Now, validity of the reference was firstly challenged on the ground that the dispute referred to this Court is only an individual dispute as distinguished from an industrial dispute, because it referred to granting of employment and payment of sal...
Sudhir Laxman Hendre Vs. Shripat Amrit Dange and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-11-1958
Reported in: (1959)61BOMLR500
Gokhale, J. (After stating the fact and some evidence His Lordship proceeded): In connection with the order of the Elcetion Commisioner ordering a repoll confined to one polling station, the argument of Mr. Dhabe is that such an action is not warranted by the provisions of the Representation of the People Act. According to Mr Dhabe, in view of the defect that was brought tot henotice of the polling officer as well as the Returning Officer and to The Election Commission the entire electin to the Parlimentary seats in the constitutency should have been set aside nd a fresh election held. Under S. 57 of the Act, provision is made for the adjournment of poll at an election in certain emergencies. It is not disputed that S. 57 would not apply to the fact of this case. Section 58 provides for a fresh poll being taken and it runs as follows:'(1) If at any election, any ballto box used at a polling statin or at a place fixed for ht epoll is unlawfully taken out of the custody of the presiding ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »