Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC875; [1958]34ITR143(SC); (1958)IIMLJ182(SC); [1959]1SCR703
Gajendragadkar, J. 1. This is an appeal by the Income-tax Officer, Companies Circle 1(1), Bombay and the Union of India and it raises a short question about the construction of section 35 of the Income-tax Act read with section 1, sub-section (2) and section 13 of the Indian Income-tax (Amendment) Act, 1953 (XXV of 1953). It arises in this way. The Income-tax Officer, by his assessment order made on October 9, 1952, for the assessment year 1952-53, assessed the respondent, the Bombay Dyeing and ., under the Act. In the said assessment order the respondent was given credit for Rs. 50,603-15-0 as representing interest at 2% on tax paid in advance under section 18A of the Act. This credit was given to the respondent in pursuance of the provisions contained in section 18A, sub-section (5) of the Act as it then stood. On May 24, 1953, the Amendment Act came into force. Section 1, sub-section (2) of the Amendment Act provides that 'subject to any special provision made in this behalf in the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC789; [1959]1SCR799
Imam, J. 1. The appellants, as trustees, of the Mankeshwar Temple Trust had filed suit No. 2325 of 1948 in the High Court of Bombay in its Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction, for a declaration that they were entitled to the building in suit and were entitled to claim possession of the same and to recover the rents and profits thereof. The appellants further prayed that the defendants may be ordered and decreed to obtain a letter of attornment from the tenants of the said property attorning to the appellants, that the first defendant may be ordered to render accounts of the rents received by him from the tenants of the said property from May 23, 1948, and that pending the hearing of the suit a Receiver may be appointed of the property in suit. The appellants had obtained leave of the High Court under O. II, r. 2 of the Civil Procedure Code reserving to them liberty to file a separate suit with respect to the land on which the building was situated. The learned Judge who heard the suit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC881; (1958)IILLJ249SC
S. Jafer Imam, J.1. Special leave to appeal was granted in this case upon the appellant giving an undertaking not to claim any refund of the compensation moneys already paid in pursuance of the order dated 31-1-1953, passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation at Junagadh and to pay in any event the respondents their costs of the appeal.2. The appellant is the Saurashtra Salt Manufacturing Co. It employs workmen both temporary and permanent. The salt works of the appellant is situated near a creek opposite to the town of Porbandar. There are at least two ways to go to the salt works from the said town, one an over land route nearly 6 to 7 miles long and the other via the creek which has to be crossed by a boat. At the Porbandar end of the creek is the Asmavati Ghat and the creek can be crossed from there at point A to the other side at point B which is on a sandy piece of land. Those crossing the creek from point A alight from the boat at point B. From point B, after traversi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC816; [1958]34ITR514(SC); [1959]1SCR729
Venkatarama Aiyar, J. 1. Messrs. Dalmia Dadri Cement Co. Ltd. which is the appellant in Civil Appeal No. 230 of 1954 and the petitioner in Petition No. 276 of 1953, is a public company engaged in the manufacture and sale of cement at a place called Dadri situate in what was once the independent State of Jind. On April 1, 1938, one Shanti Prasad Jain, a promoter of the above company, obtained certain concessions from the Ruler of Jind under an agreement, Exhibit A, and as it is this document that forms the basis of the present claim of the appellant, it is necessary to refer to the material terms thereof. Clause (1) of the agreement grants to the licensee, Shanti Prasad Jain, 'the sole and exclusive monopoly right of manufacturing cement in the Jind State', and for that purpose he is authorised in Clause (2) to 'win and work all quarries, strata, seams and beds of kankar, rorey, limestone or other like materials'. Under Clause (7), the licence is to last for a period of 25 years with op...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC795; [1958]34ITR275(SC); [1959]1SCR751
S.K. Das, J. 1. This judgment relates to and governs eleven appeals which for convenience have been classified into two groups. The first group may be called the group of Travancore-Cochin appeals, and within this group fall Civil Appeals Nos. 143 to 145 of 1954. The second group may be called the group of Mysore appeals and within this group are eight appeals, namely, Civil Appeals Nos. 27 to 30 of 1956 and 161 to 164 of 1956. By reason of the circumstance that certain common questions of law and fact arise in all these eleven appeals, they have been heard one after the other; but it will be convenient and will avoid confusion if we state the facts relating to the Travancore-Cochin group first and then deal with the questions arising therefrom. We shall then state the additional facts of the Mysore group of appeals, and answer the questions arising therefrom, in so far only as they have not been answered already in relation to the Travancore-Cochin group. It may be here added that in ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC808; [1958]34ITR601(SC); [1959]1SCR785
S.K. Das, J. 1. These four appeals brought by the Income-tax Officer, Special Circle, Bangalore, on a certificate granted by the High Court of Mysore, are from the judgment and order of the said High Court dated March 22, 1955, by which it quashed certain proceedings initiated, and orders of assessment made, against the respondent assessee in the matter of re-assessment of income-tax for the years 1945-46, 1946-47, 1947-48, and 1948-1949. 2. The relevant facts are these. The respondent, K. N. Guruswamy, was carrying on business as an excise contractor in the Civil and Military Station of Bangalore, hereinafter called the retroceded area, in Mysore. He was assessed to income-tax for each of the four years mentioned above under the law then in force in the retroceded area by the Income-tax Officer having jurisdiction therein. For 1945-46 the original assessment was made of February 12, 1946, for 1946-47 on January 21, 1949, for 1947-48 on January 22, 1949 and for 1948-49 also sometime in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC868; [1958]34ITR130(SC); (1958)IIMLJ174(SC); [1959]1SCR713
Gajendragadkar, J. 1. This is an appeal by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay, by special leave and it raises a short question of law under section 33B of the Income-tax Act. The respondent assessee had been registered as a firm under section 26A of the Act for the year 1946-47. For the assessment years 1947-48, 1948-49, and 1949-50, the Income-tax Officer made the assessment on the respondent on June 7, 1949, and September 23, 1949, respectively under section 23(3) of the Act. The Income-tax Officer made an estimate about the profits of the respondent under the proviso to section 13 and computed the total income of the respondent at Rs. 95,053, Rs. 93,430 and Rs. 83,752 for the said years respectively. The respondent had applied for and obtained renewal of registration of the firm. The Income-tax Officer had also passed an order under section 23(6) of the Act and allocated the shares of the various parties. 2. Against the said assessment orders the respondent preferred an appeal t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC783; [1958]34ITR10(SC); (1958)IIMLJ168(SC); [1959]1SCR690
Venkatarama Aiyar, J. 1. This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court of Nagpur in a reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, hereinafter referred to as the Act. 2. The appellant is the sole proprietor of a firm called Bansilal Abrichand Kasturchand, which carries on business as money-lenders, dealers in shares and bullion and commission agents in Bombay, Calcutta and other places. He is a resident of Bikaner, and manages the business at the several places through agents. During the relevant period, the agent of the firm at Bombay was one Chandratan, who held a power-of-attorney dated May 13, 1944, conferring on him large powers of management including authority to operate on bank accounts. During the period November 15, 1944, to November 23, 1944, the agent withdrew from the firm's bank account sums aggregating to Rs. 2,30,636-4-0, and applied them in satisfaction of his personal debts incurred in speculative transactions. On November 25, 1944, the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1959SC59; [1958]34ITR650(SC)
Sarkar, J.1. This is an appeal from a judgment of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated August 7, 1953, filed with have granted under article 136 of the Constitution. The Tribunal held that of the high denomination notes of the value of Rs. 2,68,000 encashed by the appellate in the relevant accounting year, notes worth Rs. 1,28,000 represented his concealed profits and were liable to be taxed. In this appeal the appellant challenges the correctness of this finding. 2. The appellant was assessed to income-tax for the year 1946-47 as a non-resident British subject, and out of the proceedings of this assessment the present appeal arises. The relevant accounting year was the period from November 6, 1945, to April 9, 1946. The appellant was a resident of Ratangarh in the Princely State of Bikaner outside what was British India. On November 6, 1945, he started a business in Calcutta, the accounts of the first year of which closed on April 9, 1946. On January 19, 1946, the appellant came to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1959SC63; [1958]34ITR646(SC)
Sarkar, J.1. This is an appeal by the assessee against the order of the Appellate Tribunal dated May 8, 1953, whereby that Tribunal confirmed the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's order of July 23, 1951, and the only question is whether the appellant is liable under section 4(1)(b)(iii) of the Income-tax Act to pay tax on Rs. 1,20,000 remitted by him from Srinagar in Kashmir to British India in the relevant accounting year as his profits accumulated outside British India and brought by him into British India. 2. This appeal arises out of the proceedings for the assessments of the appellant's income for the year 1945-46. The judgment had been carrying on a business in cloth in Srinagar for a long time. In 1943- 44 he started a similar business in Amritsar. It appears that in the relevant previous year, that is, between March 25, 1944, and April 12, 1945, the appellant had remitted from Srinagar to British India and aggregate sum of Rs. 5,00,850 for the purchase of goods there of which ...
Tag this Judgment!