Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1955Ori135
Panigrahi, C.J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for a partition filed by Subhashini Devi, the widow of one Harimohan who died as an undivided member of a Hindu joint family consisting of himself and defendants 1 and 2 who are the appellants before us. Harimohan died in or about the year 1942. Items 13 to 18 of the properties mentioned in Schedule Ga attached to the plaint were purchased by defendants 1 and 2 under Exts. B to B-2 and Ex 2 between, the years 1943 to 1945.The appellants claimed that these items, which had been subsequently purchased, did not constitute the joint family property in which the plaintiff could claim a share as they were their self-acquisitions. The learned Subordinate Judge negatived this contention and gave a decree for partition in respect of all the properties, including the disputed items 13 to 18 of Schedule Ga.2. The only point that has been strenuously urged before us is whether these items are liable to be partitioned as joint family properties. Mr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1955Ori84
ORDERP.V.B. Rao, J. 1. This is an application by 14 petitioners under Sections 162 and 166, Companies Act, for compulsory winding up of the Joyoti Pictures Ltd., with its Head Office at Berhampur. 2. It is alleged in the petition that petitioners 1 to 14 are contributories, & petitioner 6 and some others are creditors of the Joyoti Pictures Ltd., that the Company is a private Limited Company registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1918 in 1942; that the Company has a Board of 3 Directors; that the registered office of the Company is at Berhampur in Ganjam District; that the authorised capital of the Company originally stood at Rs. 20,000/- but later on increased to Rs. 50,000/-divided into 250 shares of Rs. 200/- each; that the entire share capital is fully paid up and the petitioners 1 to 14 are consequently fully paid-up share-holders; that the objects of the Company are to exhibit cinema shows, carry on business in all kinds of language cinema films etc., that the number of share...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1955Ori73; 21(1955)CLT116
Panigrahi, C.J.1. This case comes before us on a reference by a Division Bench. The question referred to us for our opinion is formulated as follows :'Whether the provisions of Section 3(2), Hindu Women's Rights to Property Act, 18 of 1937 as amended by Act, 11 of 1938 are retrospective so as to apply to the case of a widow whose husband died prior to the date when the said Act came into force.'This reference was necessitated on account of the majority decision in -- 'Badhi Bewa v. Bhagawan Sahu', AIR 1951 Orissa 378 (SB) (A), according to which Section 3(2) of the Act is retrospective in operation and, consequently, the widow of a Hindu who died before the Act came into force, viz., before 14-4-1937, was entitled to her husband's share provided that the joint family continued till the date when partition was demanded. This view was subjected to much adverse criticism by another Bench of this Court in -- 'Nandakishore v. Sukti Dibya', AIR 1953 Orissa 240 (B). In a later case decided by...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1955Ori113
Panigrahi, C.J.1. The petitioner was an applicant for a post in the Orissa Administrative Service and was examined by the Orissa Public Service Commission in various subjects, but was disqualified on the ground that he failed to pass the language test in Oriya upto the Middle Standard. The question raised in this application is whether the action of the Public Service Commission in eliminating the petitioner from the list of eligible candidates is unconstitutional. The petitioner also challenges the validity of the composition of the Service Commission itself and prays for the issue of a writ directing the Commission to include his name in the list of candidates sent up to Government for selection to the Orissa Administrative Service, or, in the alternative, to declare the composition of the Commission as unconstitutional.2. It is said on behalf of the State that the applicant was not qualified under the rules prescribed for recruitment to the Orissa AdministrativeService as he did not...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1955Ori106; 21(1955)CLT555
Misra, J.1. This is a reference under Section 66(1), Income-tax Actby the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, MadrasBench 'B', at the instance of the assessee, the RajaBahadur of Khallikote. The question referred tous is as follows :'Whether the reassessment of the income for the assessment year 1939-40 by invoking the provisions of Section 34 was correct.' 2. The assessee is the zamindar of Khallikote and derive his income, among other sources, from forests. For the assessment year 1939-40, the income-tax officer made an assessment under Section 23(3); the accounting year for the relevant period endedon 31-3-39. In the original assessment under Section 23 (3) of the Act, the Income-tax Officer did not take the income from forests into account as till then the revenue authorities were under the impression that such income was agricultural income and as such was not assessable to income-tax. On 17-4-1941, the Patna High Court held in the case of-- 'the Province of Bihar v. Pratap Udai Nath S...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : [1955]28ITR136(Orissa)
MISHRA, J. - This is a reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras Bench B, at the instance of the assessee, the Raja Bahadur of Khallikote. The question referred to us is as follows :- 'Whether the reassessment of the income for the assessment year 1939-40 by invoking the provisions of section 34 was correct'.2. The assessee is the zamindar of Khallikote, and derives his income, among other sources, from forests. For the assessment year 1939-40, the Income-tax Officer made an assessment under section 23(3), the accounting year for the relevant period ended on 31st March, 1939. In the original assessment under section 23(3) of the Act, the Income-tax Officer did not take the income from forests into account as till then the revenue authorities were under the impression that such income was agricultural income and as such was not assessable to income-tax. On the 17th of April, 1941, the Patna High Court held in the case of Prov...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1955Ori122
Mohapatra, J.1. These three petitions are under Article 226 of the Constitution for issue of a writ of prohibition or mandamus directing the opposite party, the Assistant Collector of Commercial Taxes, Central Circle, Orissa, not to assess the petitioners to sales tax, The three cases involve the same points of law and the facts are almost identical. They were heard together and arc disposed of in this judgment of ours. The petitioners are private Limited Liability Companies having their registered office at Mount Road, Madras.The petitioner in O. J. C. No. 194 of 1954, carries on the business of selling automobile parts, accessories, tools and equipments; the petitioner in O. J. C. No. 196 of 1954, carries on the business of selling Perkins Automotive, Tractor, Marine and Industrial Dissel Engines and spare parts etc.; and the petitioner in O. J. C. No. 197 of 1954, carries on the business of selling motor cars and trucks, automobile parts and accessories. The petitioners-companies, w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1956Ori34; 21(1955)CLT283; [1955]28ITR486(Orissa)
Narasimham, J. 1. This is an application under Sub-section (4) of Section 28, Orissa Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1947 against an order of the Revenue Commissioner, Orissa, rejecting an application under Sub-section (2) of Section 19 of that Act on the ground that it was time-barred. 2. The material facts are as follows: The petitioner was assessed to agricultural income tax for the year 1947-48 on 28-2-1949. His appeal to the Collector of Agricultural Income-tax under Section 25 of that Act was disposed of on 7-9-1949 with some directions to the Agricultural Income-tax officer to modify the assessment order in the light of the instructions contained in the Judgment. The petitioner then filed a revision petition under Section 28 of the Act before the Revenue Commissioner which after a remand was finally disposed of on 9-2-1951 with an order to the effect that the appellate order of the Collector of Agricultural Income-tax was correct and that there was no ground for revision of his ord...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1956Ori37; 21(1955)CLT441; [1956]29ITR30(Orissa)
Misra, J. 1. This is a reference under Section 66 (1), Income-tax Act, by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras Bench, 'B' stating a question of law which arises out of the Tribunal's order in I. T. A. No. 5617 dated 16-10-1952. 2. The assessee Mannalal Modi was a member of the Joint Hindu family consisting of Rangalal Modi, Mannalal Modi and others. This Joint family was an assessee on the file of the Income-tax Officer, Special Circle, Cuttack. The assessment year with which we are concerned is 1944-45, and the accounting year is the Dewali year ending 29-10-1943. Mannalal filed a return of hisincome before the territorial Income-tax Officer, Cuttack, on 19-10-1944 as an individual showing an income of Rs. 14,273/- for the Deepavali year (accounting year) ending with 29-10-1943. It appears on receipt of this return the territorial Income-tax Officer sent it to the Income-tax Officer, Special Circle, as the larger joint family of which Mannalal was a member was being assessed by t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : [1956]30ITR222(Orissa)
MOHAPATRA, J. - This is a reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras Bench, in their order dated 16th July, 1954, referring the point of law which runs as follows :'Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to the determination of the loss incurred in 1948-49 assessment year and to its set-off against the profits of the assessment year 1949-50.'2. The assessee is Bonai Industrial Company Limited, a public limited company incorporated in 1939, with its registered officer at Bonaigarh in the former Indian State of Bonai. The assessee-company was constituted with the main object of exploring and prospecting the mineral and forest resources of Bonai State. It is to be noted here that the company had only one source of income, that is to say, by carrying on business in the mineral and the forest resources. There were no mining operations in the account years ending on 31st March, 1947...
Tag this Judgment!