Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: finance act 2007 section 8 amendment of section 12a Sorted by: old Court: rajasthan Page 1 of about 212 results (0.075 seconds)

Jan 09 1951 (HC)

Madangopal Kabra Vs. the Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR1951Raj94a; [1951]20ITR214(Raj)

..... property are liable & how the tax is to be recovered but assessment is settled under the finance act which is the annual act & only determines the rate. section 67-b, income-tax act, provides for the contingency if in any year the finance act is not passed by 1st of april or no provision is made therein for the charging of ..... , the petnr. must be held to be immune from liability to assessment on the income of that year.15. the relevant section which calls for a careful consideration is section 2 (14a), income-tax act, as amended by the finance act of 1950, which defines 'taxable territories', & is as under :' 'taxable territories' means -(a) as respects any period ..... chargeability is left to arise by some other law, & that law is the previous state law referred to in section 13, finance act, 1960. it arises in a twofold manner. in the first place, under section 6, general clauses act, the repeal of the state law as from 1-4-1950 did not affect any liability incurred under the repealed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 11 1951 (HC)

Kishan Lal and anr. Vs. Bhanwar Lal

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR1952Raj81

..... that, if permitted, it would defeat the provisions of the notification of the jodhpur government dated 3rd of june, 1943, and, therefore, in view of section 23 of the contract act and section 13 of the code of civil procedure the suit was liable to be dismissed as it involved a violation of the notification of the 3rd of june, ..... been prohibited by law, and having been declared an offence punishable under sub-rule (3) of the notification dated 3-6-43 was illegal and under section 23 of the contract act, it could not be enforced. the suit to recover monies due on an illegal contract must fail.17. we agree with the finding on the third ..... state must give effect to it.'24. the distinction is noted in a recent case 'boissevain v. well', reported in 1949-1 all er 146 where the defence (finance) regulations 1939 as they originally stood prohibited transactions in foreign currency by any person in united kingdom, except with the permission of the treasury were subsequently amended by deleting .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 27 1951 (HC)

Jankiballabh Vs. State

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR1952Raj103

..... prove that the building was used or intended by the applicant to be used for one of the purpose given in section 203(1) of the act. as no such purpose was proved, the applicant could not be convicted under section 203 (4).5. i have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and also the learned govt. advocate. the ..... building as a manufactory without a license is punishable under sub-section (4) of section 203.7. i have considered the arguments of both the learned counsel and have very carefully read the provisions of section 203(4) of the act. to my mind an offence under sub-section (4) of section 203 can be said to be committed only if the ..... first assistant. city magistrate, jaipur held that the accused was guilty of the contravention of section 2 of the dangerous and offensive trade bye laws and convicted him under section 203(4) of the jaipur city municipalities act 1943 (hereinafter to be referred as the act) and sentenced him to a fine of rs. 30/- only and in default to undergo .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 24 1952 (HC)

Maharaja Kishangarh Mills Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR1953Raj145

..... kishangarh is_ manufacturing cotton cloth at kishangarh in the state of rajasthan. the central excises and salt act, 1944, was extended to the state of rajasthan by section 11, finance act, 25 of 1950, from 1-4-1950, and the necessary rules under that act also came into force from the said date. the superintendent of central excise, jaipur circle, jaipur ..... agreement, the union of india must be deemed to have taken over all current outstandings of cotton excise duties on 1-4-1950, when the finance act brought the central excises and salt act of 1944 into operation into rajasthan. it must, however, be remembered that the report was .made in 1949 in the shape of recommendations, and ..... . the question then is whether the (outstandings on 1-4-1950, would be transferred to the union government after the finance act of 1950 came into force on the 1st april. there is nothing in the finance act of 1950, which specifically transfers the arrears due up to 1-4-1950, to the union government.9. reliance in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 08 1952 (HC)

Ranjeet Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR1953Raj170

..... these circumstances, we are of opinion that if the power is to arise, the statute must be strictly complied with. it follows, therefore, that the provisions of section 15(1), marwar police act, are mandatory and not merely directory. 13. reference in this connection may be made to --'bhagchand dagdusa v. secy, of state', air 1927 pc 176 (c ..... and efficacious, and therefore no writ should be issued in his favour. 4. the main question, that falls for consideration in this case, is the interpretation of section 15, marwar police act which reads as follows: '15. (1) it shall be lawful for the government by proclamation to be notified in the official gazette and in such other ..... the opposite parties from realizing the amount from the applicant. it is also urged that, in any case the money can only be realized as provided under section 16, marwar police act, and that it was not open to the government to attach half the applicant's jagir, and realize the amount by such attachment. 3. the application .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 26 1953 (HC)

Maharaja Kishangarh Mills Ltd. Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR1953Raj188; (1953)IILLJ214Raj

..... 19 of the constitution of india.23. lastly, it has been argued by the opposite side that the discretionary powers which are vested in the government under section 10(3), industrial. disputes act cannot be subject to the control of this court. in other words, it is stressed that a writ of 'mandamus' cannot issue in such a case. ..... cannot be termed to be a mere idea without any foundation. in such a case, therefore, the law did not contemplate that an order under section 10(3), industrial disputes act should be made.this is why the language requires that a strike or lock-out in order that it might be prohibited should be in connection with ..... he is entitled to an appropriate writ or direction to restrain the government from adopting coercive measures against him. it is further argued that the language of section 10(3), industrial disputes act does not justify issue of an order against the petitioner in the present case.on the other hand, the learned government advocate and mr. bhandari have .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 09 1954 (HC)

Maharaja Shri Umaid Mills Ltd. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR1954Raj178

..... such registration and licensing and for the renewal of licences. the state of rajasthan has made rules in exercise of the powers conferred under this section read with section 112 of the factories act. in these rules, called the rajasthan factories rules, 1951, necessary provisions have been made for the regulation of factories in rajasthan, and a ..... distinction between a tax and a fee, and that this levy amounts to a tax which the state of rajasthan is not entitled to impose. authorities on public finance certainly recognize the distinction between a tax and a fee. generally speaking, a tax is an impost levied by the state for purposes of raising revenue. the ..... also urged that the fees were never levied for the purposes of raising public revenue, but were merely meant to finance the inspectorate of factories which looks after the welfare of labour, etc., according to the factories act, and that the income from the fees is less than the amount spent on the inspectorate of the factories. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 22 1954 (HC)

Baldevi Vs. Ramnath

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR1955Raj61; 1955CriLJ621

..... it became due towards payment of the amount due to shrimati baladevi on 28-3-1952. this depends upon the interpretation of clause (a) of section 386(1).8. that clause authorises the magistrate to attach any movable property belonging to the offender. movable property has not been defined in the ..... property of every description except immovable property. it appears to us that for purposes of the penal code movable property meant tangible corporeal property which could be perceived and seized.further as section 386. cr.pc provides two separate ways of ..... of criminal procedure. under section 22, penal code, movable property includes corporeal property of every description except land and things attached to the earth or permanentlv fastened to anything which is attached to the earththis definition is more restrictive, and different from that given in the general clauses act where movable property means .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 18 1955 (HC)

Sat Behwaric and Co., Jaipur Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR1956Raj76; [1956]30ITR151(Raj)

..... not be effected by another. it was contended by the crown that, for the purpose of computing the company's liability for national defence contribution under the finance act, 1937, pt. iii, sections 19, 20, the profits of the company on transactions underwritten in the year ending 31-3-1939, arose in that year (1938-39), although they ..... the sassoons prior to the dates of therespective transfers were not brought to tax and therefore issued on 29-6-1946 notices under section 34, indian income-tax act and section 15, excess profits tax act upon the sassoons on the ground that their income from the managing agency had escaped assessment. the income-tax officer and the excess ..... with the tribunal and answered the question in the affirmative. an appeal was taken by the sassoons to the supreme court after obtaining leave under section 66(a)(1)(3) of the act and section 133(1) (c), constitution of india and two appeals were filed by the income-tax commissioner. all were heard together by the supreme .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 23 1955 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi, Ajmer, Rajasthan and Madhya Bharat ...

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR1956Raj30; [1956]29ITR165(Raj)

..... that the assessee was entitled to the higher exemption limit of rs. 7,200/- in terms of the proviso to para. a in part i of schedule i of section 2, finance act of 1951?'3. the facts of the case are these: the assessee messrs dhannalal devilal of jaipur filed a return for the assessment year 1951-52, and claimed the ..... which is admittedly an hindu undivided familyconsisting of two minor sons and their mother and grand-mother, is entitled to the higher exemption limit of rs. 7,200/- under the finance act of 1951. we have already set out the relevant provision in this behalf, and it is admitted between the parties that clause (a) does not apply, as that requires ..... said to be lineal descendant of his mother or grandmother respectively within the meaning of condition (b) of clause (1) of part 1(a) of schedule 1 of the indian finance act (no. 23) of. 1951 which prescribes rs. 7,200/- as an exemption limit in the case of hindu undivided family.'4. the relevant provision on the interpretation of .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //