Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Feb-13-1973
Reported in : AIR1973SC1062; 1973CriLJ862; (1973)4SCC4
..... 1972 the state government confirmed the detention order as required by section 12(1) of the act and duly communicated its decision to the petitioner.2. shri v. c. parashar, learned counsel appearing as amicus curiae to assist this court, submitted in ..... considered and rejected on july 3, 1972. on july 5, 1972 the state government placed the petitioner's case before the advisory board as required by section 10 of the act. the board submitted its report on august 17, 1972 expressing its opinion that there was sufficient cause for the petitioner's detention. on august 26, ..... government considered this report and approved the detention order on august 26, 1971 when it also submitted to the central government the necessary report as required by section 3(4) of the act. the petitioner could, however, be arrested only on june 16, 1972 as, according to the return 'soon after the said order the detenu-petitioner .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Sep-18-1973
Reported in : AIR1973SC2667; 1973CriLJ1801; (1973)2SCC688; [1974]1SCR662; 1973(5)LC814(SC)
..... them to organise the movement in a systematic manner, raising volunteers and setting offices at suitable places in punjab. you further directed them to collect arms, explosives etc. for use for the achievement of the object at the proper time. you further instigated them to create hatred amongst hindus and sikhs and cause communal ..... makers in their wisdom have provided for it. it is not necessary to give further examples to show that prejudicial activities contemplated under section 3(1) of the maintenance of internal security act are not necessarily activities prohibited or made punishable by a specific provision of law. the cases relied upon to support the contrary proposition ..... detention is not a punishment for an offence. to accept the argument on behalf of the appellant would make the grounds given in section 3(1) of the maintenance of internal security act meaningless. take for instance action prejudicial to the relations of india with foreign powers. as far as we are aware, there is .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Apr-12-1973
Reported in : AIR1973SC2297; [1973(26)FLR294]; (1973)0GLR948; 1973LabIC1040; (1973)IILLJ130SC; (1974)3SCC66; [1973]3SCR967; 1973(5)LC672(SC)
..... it is contended that the appellant was under a statutory obligation because of section 46 of the factories act and the relevant rules made thereunder to maintain the,canteen for the workers, but the canteen was being actually run by the co-operative society ..... point which has been strenuously urged on behalf of the appellant is that on a proper construction of the amended clauses (13) and (14) of section 3 of the act, the workers employed in the canteen which was being run by the co-operative society, could not have been held to be employees of the appellant. ..... canteen co-operative society limited, ahmedabad (hereinafter called the co-operative society). the appellant company is responsible for maintaining the canteen under the provisions of section 46 of the factories'act and the rules made thereunder. the appellant handed over to the co-operative society the task of running the canteen. the workers mentioned above filed .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-09-1973
Reported in : AIR1973SC1030; [1973]89ITR53(SC); (1973)3SCC571; [1973]3SCR206; 1973(5)LC580(SC)
..... the assessee's contention that it was a public limited company in which the public was substantially interested and its share were freely transferable. the provisions of section 23a of the act were held to have been wrongly invoked. the order of the income tax officer in this respect was consequently set aside. the question reproduced above was ..... co. was produced before the tribunal. the appellate assistant commissioner had by that order set aside the order of income tax officer and had held that section 23a of the act did not apply to ppi co. the tribunal observed that both jc mills and ppi co. were public companies in which the public were substantially interested ..... the income tax officer, came to less than 25 per cent of the total shareholding, the assessee company was held to fall within the purview of section 23a of the act. the income tax officer also referred to article 33 of the memorandum and articles of association of that assessee company, according to which the directors could .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Sep-25-1973
Reported in : AIR1974SC37; (1973)IILLJ495SC; (1974)3SCC498; [1974]1SCR747
..... doubtful whether regular part time service can be considered even prima facie to suggest anything other than a contract of service. according to the definition in section 2(14) of the act, even if a person is not wholly employed, if he is principally employed in connection with the business of the shop, he will be a ..... on the basis of his finding that the workers represented by the second respondent union were employed in the establishment within the meaning of section 2(14) of the act, and, therefore, the act was applicable.4. the appellants filed an appeal against the decision to the division bench of the same court. the division bench dismissed ..... the factory after making arrangements for the manufacture of salt.10. the question for decision was whether the agarias were workmen as defined by section 2(s) of the industrial disputes act of 1947 or whether they were independent contractors. the court said that the prima facie test to determine whether there was relationship between employer .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Apr-23-1973
Reported in : AIR1973SC2226; (1974)3SCC137; [1974]1SCR25; [1973]32STC496(SC)
..... one the following question referred to it by a division bench in the negative against the assessee-appellant :whether, in order to recover interest under section section (1-a) of the u.p., sales tax act, it is necessary for the sales tax officer to make an assessment order in respect of the interest and to issue a notice of demand in ..... was paid by it. the appellant, however, contested its liability to pay interest amounting to rs. 1,36,000 on the amount of sales tax under section 8(1-a) of the act. a petition under article 226 of the constitution was consequently filed by the appellant in the high court challenging the recovery of the interest amounting to rs. ..... period during which the recovery of sales tax was stayed. we find it difficult to accede to this contention because there is nothing in the language of section 8(1-a) of the act which prevents the running of interest because of the operation of any stay order. indeed, the liability to pay interest is created by the statute and the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Mar-08-1973
Reported in : AIR1973SC2366; (1974)3SCC1; [1973]3SCR649; [1973]31STC588(SC)
..... officer, ghaziabad, issued to the assessee a notice on january 8, 1960 calling upon him to show cause why he should not impose penalty on him under section 10a of the act. the assessee did not give any explanation. some time thereafter, the assessee made an application praying for condonation of his default, alleging that the defaults were ..... sales tax officer, ghaziabad again issued a notice to the assessee on october 31, 1960 requiring it to show cause why it should not be prosecuted under section 10(b) of the act. thereupon, the assessee submitted an application offering to compound the offence for a sum of rs. 7.000/-. that offer was not accepted. subsequently, on ..... 1960 stood terminated as a result of the subsequent notices issued by the sales tax officer. the notices issued by him are not statutory notices. under section 10a of the act the sales tax officer was only required to give reasonable opportunity to the assessee to show cause why penalty should not be imposed on him.6. in .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-29-1973
Reported in : AIR1973SC927; [1973]88ITR192(SC); (1973)1SCC442; [1973]3SCR448; 1973(5)LC583(SC)
..... the amount demanded under section 156 of the act but the amount assessed under section 143 of the act.in appeal, the appellate assistant commissioner confirmed the order of the income-tax officer. on a further appeal, the tribunal came to the ..... ,734/10 p. at this stage it may be mentioned that on february 2,1961, a provisional assessment was made by the income-tax officer under section 23b of the 1922 act. immediately thereafter the assessee deposited rs. 92,294/55 p. in determining the penalty due from the assessee, the income-tax officer took into consideration not ..... the informed the assessee that no further time would be allowed. the assessee failed to furnish its return within the extended time. thereafter a notice under section 28(3) of the 1922 act was served on the assessee on january 16, 1961. on the very next day viz. january 17, 1961, the assessee filed its return for the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Mar-09-1973
Reported in : AIR1973SC2346; [1973]89ITR41(SC); (1973)2SCC403
..... on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the expenditure of rs. 94,500/- incurred by the assessee in london is exempt under section 5(o) of the expenditure tax act.3. similar questions have been referred to the high court in other appeals.4. the high court answered the above-mentioned question in the negative and ..... these facts are all admitted. the question for decision is whether the expenditure incurred by the two grandsons, who are beneficiaries under the trust is exempt under section 5(o)(ii) of the act. the contention of the assessee is that the amount in question was realized by them in london and hence they are entitled to the benefit of ..... , a common question of law arises for decision and that question relates to the meaning of the word 'realization' in section. 5(o)(ii) of the expenditure tax act, 1957 which will be hereinafter referred to as the 'act'. the facts relevant for the purpose of deciding the question of law arising for decision in all the appeals are identical .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Dec-20-1973
Reported in : AIR1974SC613; 1974CriLJ486; (1974)4SCC152; [1974]2SCR832
..... the proclamation of emergency and for a period of six months thereafter. section 2(g) of that act defines "proclamation of emergency" as the proclamation issued under clause (1) of article 352 of the constitution on the 3rd day of december, 1971. the president ..... shall be twelve months from the date of detention or until the expiry of the defence of india act, 1971 whichever is latter". sec 1(3) of the defence of india act, 1971 laid down the duration of that act and said that act shall remain in force for the duration of the proclamation of emergency and a period of six months ..... be twelve months from the date of detention or until the expiry of the defence of india act, 1971, whichever is later." the defence of india act, 1971, came into force on december 4, 1971. section 1(3) of that act provides that the act shall come into force at once and shall remain in force during the period of operation of .....
Tag this Judgment!