Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: companies second amendment act 2002 section 62 insertion of new section 446a Page 3 of about 1,768 results (0.382 seconds)

R.L. Arora Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1964SC1230; [1964]34CompCas487(SC); [1964]6SCR784

..... such acquisitions in which property has vested absolutely in government either under s. 16 or s. 17 (1). secondly s. 7 of the amendment act provides that where acquisition has been made for a company before july 20, 1962 or purported to have been made under cl. (a) or cl. (b) of s. 40(1) and those clauses do not apply in view of ..... acquisition for a company before july 20, 1962 and after that date. we do not think that there is any force in this contention either. in the view we have taken of the meaning of cl. (aa) land the meaning of the first fiction introduced in s. 7 of the amendment act, all that the second fiction in s. 7 of the amendment act says is .....

Salem Textiles Limited Vs. Authorized Officer of Phoenix Arc Private L ...

Court : Chennai

..... . (vi) the historical developments that had taken place ever since the enactment of state financial corporations act, 1951, through the companies act, 1956, sica 1985 rddb act, 1993, companies (second amendment) act, 2002, securitisation act, 2002, sica (repeal) act, 2003 and the enforcement of security interest and recovery of debts laws (amendment) act, 2004 clearly indicate that there could be only one intention behind the insertion of the third proviso under section ..... and the third in the year 2004 in the form of enforcement of security interest and recovery of debts laws (amendment) act, 2004. companies (second amendment) act 25. first let us take note of what led to the companies (second amendment) act, 2002. in the year 1999, the government constituted a committee under the chairmanship of justice v.balakrishna eradi, a retired judge of the supreme court, to review the .....

R.M. Veerabhadra thevar Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Chennai

Reported in : [1973]92ITR357(Mad)

..... was not taken over by the company. we do not propose to express any opinion on the correctness of that view, for, in our judgment, by virtue of the amendment made in section 10(2)(vii), proviso (ii), of the indian income-tax act, 1922, by section 11 of the taxation laws (extension to merged states and amendment) act, 1949 (67 of 1949), even ..... under a 'realisation sale' excess over the written down value not exceeding the difference between the original cost and the written down value is liable to be brought to tax.'12. whether the assessee was carrying on any business on the 1st and 2nd april, 1959--the finding of ..... found as a fact that the assessee carried on business for a part of the previous year ending march 31, 1960, that the assessee had plied buses on 1st and 2nd april, 1959, and, therefore, the income of rs. 223 was assessable as income from business in the assessment year 1960-61, we are of the view that this .....

Purbanchal Bricks Industries Vs. State of Tripura and ors.

Court : Guwahati

..... recover the same as an arrear of land revenue.the aforesaid scheme of the act regarding payment and collection of arrears from defaulting dealers continued till the amendment of the act by the tripura sales tax (second amendment) act, 1981, which inserted a new section in the act, namely, section 26a to provide for special mode of recovery. the said section ..... notice is issued under this section shall be bound to comply with such notice and in particular, where any such notice is issued to a post office, banking company, or insurer, it shall not be necessary to produce any passbook, deposit receipt, policy or any other document for the purpose of any entry, endorsement or ..... the parties. we have perused the scheme of the act more particularly the provisions relating to payment and recovery of the amounts due under the act which have been set out above, as well as the provisions of section 26a of the act as inserted by the second amendment act of 1981. the said section was enacted with a .....

Baidya Nath Plastic Industries (P) Ltd. and ors. Vs. K.L. Anand, Incom ...

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 71(1998)DLT312; 1998(44)DRJ40; [1998]230ITR522(Delhi); 1998RLR75

..... this sub-section shall apply to or in relation to the repayment of any deposit before the date on which the it (second amendment) act, 1981, receives the assent of the president. explanationn - for the purposes of this section, - (i) 'banking company' shall have the meaning assigned to it in cl. (i) of the explanationn to s. 269ss; (ia) 'co- ..... (2) no branch of a banking company or a co-operative bank and no other company or co-operative society and no firm or other person shall repay any deposit made with it otherwise ..... deposit to the account (if any) with such company or bank of the person to whom such deposit has to be repaid : provided further that nothing in this sub-section shall apply to or in relation to the repayment of any deposit on or after the date on which the it (second amendment) act, 1981, receives the assent of the president. .....

Union of India and anr. Vs. Tulsiram Patel and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1985SC1416; (1985)87BOMLR563; (1985)3CompLJ45(SC); [1985(51)FLR362]; (1985)IILLJ206SC; 1985(2)SCALE133; (1985)3SCC398; [1985]Supp2SCR131; 1985(2)SLJ145(SC)

..... make a representation on the proposed penalty was to be found in clause (2) of article 311 prior to its amendment by the constitution (forty-second amendment) act. this right having been taken away by the constitution (forty-second amendment) act, there is no provision of law under which a government servant can claim this right.69. as for the argument ..... circumstances, as has been said throughout the argument, is, of course, the provisions of the statute in question : in this case sections 164 and 165 of the companies act 1948.99. in india, in suresh koshy george v. the university of kerala and ors. this court observed (at page 322):the question whether the requirements of ..... koshy george v. the university of kerala and ors., such an opportunity is not the requirement of the principles of natural justice and as held in associated cement companies ltd. v. t.c. shrivastava and ors. neither the ordinary law of the land nor industrial law requires such an opportunity to be given. the opportunity .....

Anju Timblo, Managing Director of Fomento Resorts and Hotels Ltd. and ...

Court : Mumbai Goa

..... submissions, it would be necessary to reproduce section 10f of the act which reads as under: 10f. appeals against the orders of the company law board- any person aggrieved by any decision or order of the company law board [made before the commencement of the companies (second amendment) act, 2002] may file an appeal to the high court within sixty ..... days from the date of communication of the decision or order of the company law board to him on any question of law arising out ..... are, therefore, of the view that both the authorities original and appellate, under the rent control act, have the power to permit amendments of the pleadings. ? 15. it is next submitted that the transfer of shares of the company to frhl cannot be said to be transfer of business as such. the learned senior counsel submitted .....

Bastyan Jao Patil Vs. the Special Land Acquisition Officer

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1971)73BOMLR643

..... present proceedings. in the second arora case the provisions of this section were invoked on behalf of the state to save the acquisition in that case but the supreme court after considering the effect of the word 'acquisition' used in section 7, held that before section 7 of the land acquisition (amendment) act 31 of 1962 can validate ..... case at this stage. now, there is no doubt or dispute here that respondent no. 2 for whom the acquisition is being undertaken is a company within the meaning of the act, nor is there anything to show that the requirements of section 4 by itself are not fulfilled. 'what is urged is that the requirements ..... that 'the special land acquisition officer, thana is being directed to start fresh proceedings in the matter from section 4 notification onwards in view of the land acquisition (companies) rules, 1963. you may, therefore, approach that officer in the matter.' notwithstanding this reply from the government on december 5, 1963 the petitioner wrote to the .....

S.C. Prashar, Income-tax Officer, Market Ward, Bombay and anr. Vs. Vas ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1963SC1356; [1963]49ITR1(SC); [1964]1SCR29

..... s. 34 applicable without the limit of time. there was also s. 31 of the amending act of 1953, which made s. 34 of the principal act (which meant the income-tax act as amended till that date including the amendments made by the amending act of 1953 in the second proviso to s. 34(3)), applicable to any assessment or re-assessment for any year ..... relied on by mr. rajagopal sastri did not decide the question that subsequent change in the law can revive barred rights. it proceeded on the construction of the amended s. 235 of the indian companies act. he also relied on two judgments of the patna high court : baleswar prasad v. latafat i.l.r. (1944) pat. 249, and jagdish v. ..... of his income under s. 22 for any year or to disclose fully and truly all materials facts necessary for his assessment for that year. when the calcutta discount company's case : [1961]41itr191(sc) came to us, we had explained what was meant by non-disclosure of material facts and pointed out the distinction between the primary .....

Thayillath Vamanan Nambudiri Vs. Ammarmankandiyil Narayana Kurup and o ...

Court : Kerala

Reported in : AIR1965Ker1

..... 6) of section 20 of the malabar tenancy act, 1929 (madras act xiv of 1930), and such decree would not have been passed if the principal act as amended by the malabar tenancy (second amendment) act, 1945 (madras act xxiv of 1945) the malabar tenancy (amendment) act, 1951 (madras act xxxiii of 1951), and this act had been in force at that time the ..... no appeal was available from a decision in an application under section 5(2) of themalabar tenancy (amendment) act, 1556. thissecond appeal challenges the correctness of thatdecision.4. the sole question for determination in the second appeal is whether an appeal is available from a decision directing a restoration of possession in an ..... decision of raman nayar j. in 1962 ker lj 517. in this second appeal the appellant canvasses the correctness of that decision.11. though 1962 ker lj 517 concerned an order under section 52 (1) of the malabar tenancy(amendment) act xxxiii of 1951, the subordinate judge applied the dicta therein to the instant .....