Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (1992)108CTR(All)46; [1993]201ITR307(All)
R. K. Gulati, J.1. This is a reference under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, at the instance of the Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Lucknow. The reference arises out of the proceedings relating to levy of penalty under Section 18(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act ( for short 'the Act ') in respect of the assessment years 1967-68 and 1968-69. The following common question of law has been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench, Delhi, for the opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in directing the Wealth-tax Officer to recompute the penalty as per the'law that prevailed when the returns were due ?'2. We may at once notice that the measure of penalty imposable under Section 18(l)(a) of the Act for non-submission or delayed submission of returns without reasonable cause between April 1, 1965, and March 31, 1969, was equivalent to two per cent. of the tax for every month during which the defau...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1998IVAD(SC)185; AIR1998SC1959; JT1998(3)SC297; 1998(3)SCALE209; (1998)5SCC126; [1998]2SCR1065
M. Jagannadha Rao, J.1. Leave granted in S.L.P (C) No. 7766 of 1994.2. These Civil Appeals and Transferred Cases raise common questions and can be disposed of together. The Civil Appeals arise out of judgments of the High Court of Allahabad and Rajasthan High Court. The transferred cases arise from the Delhi High Court and from Railway Claims Tribunal (Lucknow Bench). Counsel have referred to the documents contained in T.C. No. 47 of 1997 (Eastern coalfield Ltd. v. Ashoka Silicate & Glass Works, Delhi) for convenience, apart from the pleadings and documents in the other paper books. T.C. No 47 of 1997, referred to above, is a case filed as C.W.P. No. 864 of 1985 in the Delhi High Court and transferred to this Court by virtue of orders in T.P. (C) No. 713. of 1995. On transfer it was numbered in this Court as T.C. No. 47 of 1997.3. The broad facts in all the cases are similar. The appellants/petitioners are all consignees of coal from the collieries. The issue relates to the right of th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : [1975]98ITR540(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. The following question has been referred to this court under Section 26(1) of the Gift-tax Act, 1958 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that Section 17(1)(a) of the Gift-tax Act, 1958, as amended by the Gift-tax (Amendment) Act, 1962, would not apply to the levy of penalty in this case?'2. The assessee made a gift of certain properties to his sister on July 14, 1961. The gift attracted tax liability and the gift-tax return was due on June 30, 1962. But the return was actually filed only on October 22, 1963. The Gift-tax Officer completed the gift-tax assessment on March 31, 1964 and as he found that the assessee had no reasonable cause for not filing the return within the time allowed under the Act, he initiated penalty proceedings under Section 17(1)(a) of the Gift-tax Act and levied a penalty of Rs. 2,605.3. The assessee filed an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Gift-tax who reduced the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : [1977]110ITR655(Mad)
Ratnavel Pandyan, J.1. The first accused in C,C. No. 4445 of 1973 on the file of the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Egmore, has preferred this revision petition against the order of the said Magistrate in Crl. M.P. No. 481-A/73 dated November 28, 1973, praying that the said order may be set aside. The petitioner-accused has also filed another petition in Crl. M.P. No. 4813 of 1976 under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, praying to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 4445 of 1973.2. The petitioner-accused had filed a petition under Section 432 of the old Criminal Procedure Code, raising certain preliminary objections and praying for the dismissal of the complaint on legal grounds or, in the alternative, to refer the questions raised in the said petition for decision by the High Court. The learned Magistrate, after fully hearing the counsel for the respective parties, dismissed the petition by overruling all the objections raised and holding that the complaint should be proceeded i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1994SCC(3)569; JT1994(2)423
JUDGMENT:The Judgments of the Court were delivered by S. RATNAVEL PANDIAN, J. (on behalf of himself, Punchhi, J., K. Ramaswamy, J., Agrawal, J. and Sahai, J.).1.The above batch of matters consisting of a number of writ petitions, criminal appeals and SLPs are filed challenging the vires of the Terrorist Affected Areas (Special Courts) Act (No. 61 of 1984), the Terrorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (No. 31 of 1985) and the Terrorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (No. 28 of 1987) commonly known as TADA Acts (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1984, Act of 1985 and Act of 1987 respectively) and challenging the constitutional validity of Section 9 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (U.P. Amendment) Act, 1976 (U.P. Act No. 16 of 1976) by which the Legislative Assembly of Uttar Pradesh has deleted Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as applicable to the State of Uttar Pradesh. Though originally, a number of other matters falling under various A...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Lahiri, J. 1. ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in refusing to rectify its orders dated May 30, 1974, in I.T.A. No. 709 (Gau) of 1972-73, and dated May 31, 1974, in I.T.A. No. 710 (Gau) of 1972-73, having regard to the provisions of Section 13 of the Direct Taxes (Amendment) Act, 1974, on the ground that it was a debatable point and so no rectification order can be passed under Section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, relating to the assessment! years 1961-62 and 1962-63 '2. The above common question has been referred to the High Court under Section 254(4) of the I.T. Act, 1961, for short ' the Act ' by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Gauhati Bench at Gauhati.3. Relevant facts leading up to the reference may be summarised asfollows :4. For the assessment year 1961-62, the return of income of the assessee was due for submission on July 21, 1961. Similarly for the assessment year 1962-63, return of income was due for sub...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : [1972]42CompCas72(Bom)
Mody, J. 1. These are two appeals by the Union of India and the Regional Director, Company Law Board, Western Region, Bombay, against a common judgment but two separate orders passed in Company Petitions Nos. 159 of 1970 and 161 of 1970, the first filed by Tata Engineering and Locomotive Company Ltd., hereinafter referred to as 'Telco', and the second by the Central Bank of India Ltd., hereinafter referred to as 'the old Central Bank', whereby Mr. Justice Nain as the company judge sanctioned under sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, an arrangement in the nature of a scheme of amalgamation between the two companies, negativing the contentions of the appellants that the court should not sanction the scheme without prior approval of the Central Government as required under section 23(1) of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969, hereinafter referred to as 'the Monopolies Act'. We also propose to dispose of these two appeals by a common judgment as both the m...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1971Bom124; (1971)73BOMLR260; [1971(22)FLR268]; ILR1971Bom910; 1971LabIC429; 1971MhLJ69
Kotval, C.J.1. These two special civil applications raise common questions of law of some importance and may be conveniently disposed of together. We are concerned in both these applications with orders passed by the Payment of Wages authority regarding the remuneration payable under the recently enacted Payment of Bonus Act (21 of 1965) which came into force on the 25th of September 1965. The principal points raised are regarding jurisdiction viz. whether the remuneration payable under the Act can be claimed before the authority under the Payment of Wages Act, and whether the petitioner Companies are exempt under the Bonus Act. For the purpose of the points raised the facts are also somewhat similar. The orders impugned however have been passed by two different authorities under the Payment of Wages Act. 2. The main argument was advanced in Special Civil Application No. 2239 of 1968 and we would first set forth briefly the facts of that Special Civil Application. The petitioner before...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1988(3)BomCR581a; (1987)89BOMLR485
S.P. Bharucha, J.1. Bennett Coleman and Co. Ltd. (hereinafter called 'the company') publishes the newspapers 'The Times of India' and 'Nav Bharat Times'. In 1983, company called Jansevak Karyalaya Ltd. (Jansevak) entered into negotiations with the company for printing and publishing editions of The Times of India and Nav Bharat Times from a press to be established at Lucknow. Three agreements dated June 4, 1983, July 30, 1983 and October 1, 1983 were entered into. In pursuance of the agreement, necessary applications were made under the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867. On October 17, 1983, the first edition of the The Times of India and Nav Bharat Times were issued from Lucknow. The City Magistrate at Lucknow commenced proceedings under the Press and Registration of Books Act it regard to complaints received that the provisions of that Act had been contravened. These proceedings were stayed in a writ petition filed by Jansevak in the High Court at Calcutta. The stay order wit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1994KAR1370; 1994(5)KarLJ63
R. Ramakrishna, J.1. The appellant - Airbus Industrie is a groupment D'lnterest created under the Laws of France engaged in the business of manufacturing passenger and cargo aircraft since 1969. The first aircraft manufactured by them was called Airbus A-300, The second aircraft called A-320 was introduced later and was supplied to various renowned Airlines all over the world.2. Respondent No. 10, the Indian Airlines Corporation purchased about 20 aircrafts A-320. One such aircraft purchased by respondent No. 10 was an aircraft bearing registration VT-EPN. On 14.2.1990 this aircraft bearing registration VT-EPN was a schedule passenger flight from Bombay to Bangalore being flight No. IC 605. In the course of this flight while attempting to land at Bangalore Air Port at 13-03 hours contacted ground approximately 2,300 feet before the beginning of runway No. 09 within the boundary of Golf Association and immediately thereafter hit the embankment which was the boundary wall of the Golf Cou...
Tag this Judgment!