Mumbai Court March 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.
Chaturbhujdas Karnani (Deceased by His Legal Representatives) Vs. Comm ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-18-1958
Reported in: [1958]34ITR553(Bom)
Chagla, C.J. 1. Up to 24th October, 1946, the assessee, Chaturbhujdas, carried on a business in adat and cloth as the sole propertietor. On the 25th of October, 1956, he transferred his business to his four sons, two of whom were minors, and he executed a formal deed of gift in respect of this transfer on the 31st October, 1947. The Department sough in include the share of the profits coming to the monor sons in the total income of the assessee and the assessee contended that this income which went to the share of the profits of the minors could not be included in the total income. The question that arises is as to the applicability of section 16(3)(a)(iv) of the Income-tax Act. 2. Now, when we turn to the deed of gift which record the transaction, it is clear that what the assessee as the father has transferred to his four sons as tenants-in-common is the business together within name, goodwill, title and all other rights whatsoever. The deed of gift then makes, up certain accounts th...
Kathiawar Coal Distributing Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-18-1958
Reported in: [1958]34ITR182(Bom)
Chagla, C.J.1. A very simple question arises on this reference as to where the commission earned by the assessee was received in Part A States or Part B States - and where the commission accrued. The facts are not in dispute. The assessee firm has its place of business in Saurashtra. This firm procures orders from various mills in Part A States for supply of coal. Having procured the orders, the assessee forwards those orders to the Deputy Coal Controller in Calcutta. The Deputy Coal Controller then issues quotas of coal to these various mills and orders are issued to the collieries in Bengal to supply the coal ordered by the Controller to the mills. The coal is supplied directly to the mills in Bombay. the railway receipt is sent by the colliery to the assessee and the railway receipt is endorsed by the assessee in favour of the mills. The assessee then submits his bill to the mills, which includes the price of the coal and the assessee's commission. The mills then send cheques to the...
Purshotamdas Thakurdas Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City I
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-17-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Bom303; (1958)60BOMLR980; ILR1958Bom1172; [1958]34ITR204(Bom)
Chagla, C.J. 1. M/s. Narandas Rajaram and Co. Ltd., carried on business both in taxable territories and also in Pakistan. During the S.Y. 2007 (10th of November. 1950 to 30th of October, 1951), profits accrued to this Company both in India and Pakistan. On 14-10-1952, the company declared dividend for S.Y. 2007. The total dividend in respect of the shares held by the assessee came to Rs. 1,71,992, and the dividends were declared out of profits which partly accrued in India and partly in Pakistan. The resolution declaring the dividends states : 'A moiety of the amount of the dividend be paid to the share-holders on and after 16-10-1952, whose names appear on the Register of the Company as on 6-10-1952, and the other moiety be postponed for payment within two months from the date on which remittances from Pakistan become free and the monies are actually received.' Now, the dispute arises with regard to the moiety of dividends which were to be paid two months after remittances from Pakist...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay North, Kutch and Saurashtra Vs. Nat ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-17-1958
Reported in: [1958]34ITR155(Bom)
CHAGLA, C.J. - The decision of this reference may turn on what, in our opinion, is essentially a question of fact. The assessee company carried on business of manufacturing textiles and it ceased manufacturing textiles in April, 1949. It got into financial difficulties and an order of winding up was made by the court on the 16th of February, 1950. In March, 1950, the liquidator took charge of the assets of the assessee company. On the 23rd of October, the liquidator executed a lease in favour of the Sardar Spinning and Weaving Mills, and by this lease, and the lessors received as consideration Rs. 36,900 per month. There are three or four provisions of the lease to which attention might be drawn. One is that the duration was for a period of three years, but the lessees had as option to renew it for a further period of two years, and there was also an option given to the lessees to purchase the plants and machinery for a price of Rs. 20 lakhs, and this option was to be exercised at the ...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Ahmedabad Vs. Gokuldas Harivallabhdas
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-14-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Bom96; (1958)60BOMLR960; ILR1958Bom1162
M.C. Chagla, C.J.1. It is difficult to understand why the Tribunal has made this reference. It appears that the assessee was assessed to tax on an income of Rs. 15,203/- which the Department held to be income from undisclosed sources. A partnership was being carried on between two brothers Chimanlal and Manilal. Manilal died in the S.Y. 2000. In the relevant account year S.Y. 2003 which corresponds to the assessment year 1948-49, the assessee firm was constituted by two partners, Chimanlal and Rasiklal, the son of Manilal. Upto S.Y. 2002, the firm carried on business at Nadiad only. On the 25th of October, 1946 which was the first day of the account year S.Y. 2003, the assessee opened a branch in Bombay, and the following credits appeared in the books of account of the Bombay Branch:Rasiklal Manilal Rs. 7,601/-Jaswantlal Chimanlal Rs. 2,534/-Jayantilal Chimanlal Rs. 2,534/-Sunderlal Chimanlal Rs. 2,534/-the last three being the sons of Chimanlal. This entry was found by the Income-tax ...
Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City, ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-14-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Bom304; (1958)60BOMLR847; ILR1958Bom1167
M.C. Chagla, C.J. 1. It may be unfortunate that in this case the assessee may escape payment of tax, but we must give effect to the view we have taken with regard to the powers of the A. A. C. and that view cannot be altered to suit the exigencies of a particular situation. As we have pointed out in the case of Narrondas Manordass Bombay v. Commr. of Income-tax. : AIR1958Bom35 , the powers of the A. A. C. are very wide, and we have indicated in that judgment what the limitations upon that power are. But it would be wrong, in our opinion, to extend those powers to the prejudice of the assessee because in a particular case revenue may suffer by reason of the fact that the A. A. C. does not possess the necessary powers. 2. The facts giving rise to this reference are very few. The assessee was assessed to tax for the assessment year 1947-48 by the Income-tax Officer. The assessee appealed to the A. A. C., and while the appeal was pending, the I. T. O. wrote to the A. A. C. drawing his atte...
Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-14-1958
Reported in: [1958]34ITR342(Bom)
CHAGLA, C.J. - It may be unfortunate that in this case the assessee may escape payment of tax, but we must give effect to the view we have taken with regard to the powers of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and that view cannot be altered to suit the exigencies of a particular situation. As we have pointed out in the case of Narrondas Manordass v. Commissioner of Income-tax, the powers of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner are very wide, and we have indicated in that judgment what the limitations upon that power are. But it would be wrong, in our opinion, to extend those powers to the prejudice of the assessee because in a particular case revenue may suffer by reason of the fact that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner does not possess the necessary powers.The facts giving rise to this reference are very few. The assessee was assessed to tax for the assessment year 1947-48 by the Income-tax Officer. The assessee appealed to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, and while the app...
Dinanath Shaligram Marvadi Vs. Maroti Totaram Shimpi and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-13-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Bom10; (1958)60BOMLR1017; ILR1959Bom249
1. This is the first defendants' appeal from a decree passed in a suit instituted by the respondents 1 and 2 for a declaration that the property purchased by them in execution of a decree against the respondent No. 3 was not liable to attachment and sale in insolvency proceedings pending against him. 2. The relevant facts are as follows: One Goverdhandas, the brother of the appellant obtained a decree against the respondent No. 3 for a sum of Rs. 1174-4-0 on 2-4-1949. In execution of that decree, he attached that field in suit on 10-4-49. This field was sold at an auction held in execution and was purchased by the appellant on 25-11-49. He entered into possession of this field on 2-4-1951 or so. 3. The respondents 1 and 2 who are creditors of the respondent No. 3, filed an application for adjudication of the respondent NO. 3 as insolvent. This was sometime in September 1949. The application was admitted on 3-10-1949 and necessary notices and proclamation were directed to issue. Eventua...
Jubilee Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-13-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Bom51; (1958)60BOMLR920; ILR1958Bom1153; [1958]34ITR30(Bom)
Chagla, C.J. 1. The main question that arises for our decision on this reference is whether the assessee company is a company to which Section 23A applies. The facts briefly are that the share-capital of the company consisted of 1 lakh Ordinary Shares of Rs. 10/- each aggregating to Rs. 10,00,000/-, 5,000 Cumulative Preference Shares of Rs. 25/- each aggregating to Rs. 1,25,000/-, and 4,000 Second Preference Shares of Rs. 100/- each aggregating to rs. 4,00,000/-. All the shares were fully paid up. 2. Now, under Section 23A what has got to be considered is the voting power and it is clear from the provisions of Section 23A, as it stood at the relevant date, that the only shares that we have to consider are the Ordinary Shares. The position with regard to the Ordinary Shares was this. Seven Directors between themselves held 35,469 Ordinary Shares. These Directors were also partners in the managing agency firm of Mangaldas mehta and Co. which managed the assessee company. the managing age...
Maharaj Shri Govindlalji Ranchhodlalji Vs. Commr. of Income-tax, Ahmed ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-13-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Bom100; (1958)60BOMLR926; ILR1958Bom1149
M.C. Chagla, C.J. 1. The assessee is a direct descendant of Shri Vallabhacharya who founded a Faith known as Vallabhacharya who founded a Faith known as Vallabh Sampradaya. It has been found as a fact by the Tribunal that he is not a sanyasi, that he has married and has children and that he will be succeeded by his sons who would inherit and divide his properties. He resides at Porbandar and keeps an idol of Lord Krishna in his house. Offerings are made to him from time to time by his devotees and these offerings are not made to the idol but to the assessee himself. The offerings are made ususally at the time of the prayers. It has also been found as a fact that the assessee by virtue of the office he holds has to perform some obligations as the head of this faith and that he is looked upon by his devotees as 'Guru' and he gives 'mantras' to his disciples. As a matter of fact a person can only be initiated into this faith by the assessee chanting certain 'mantras'. Now, it was found by...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »