Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC658; (1958)IILLJ9SC; [1959]1SCR463
S.K. Das, J. 1. This is an appeal by special leave. The appellants before us are the Nagpur Electric Light and Power Company, Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the company), a public limited company having its registered office at Nagpur in Madhya Pradesh, its Manager, and Assistant Manager. The respondent, Shreepathi Rao, joined the service of the Company as a typist on a salary of Rs. 30 per month in July 1936. He rose in rank from time to time and was appointed Deputy Head Clerk in 1947 in the grade of Rs. 120-10-225. Since 1952, he has been receiving a basic salary of Rs. 245 per month. On November 28, 1955, an explanation was called for from him with regard to the issue of certain bills to consumers of electricity called 'high tension consumers', without having certain 'notes for the information of consumers' printed at the back of the bills. The respondent submitted his explanation on the next day, marking a copy thereof to one of the directors of the company. On December 2, 1955,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC899; (1958)IILLJ265SC
K. Subba Rao, J.1. This appeal by Special Leave is directed against the decision and Order of the Labour Appellate Tribunal of India, Bombay, dated 18-5-1955, modifying the Order of the Industrial Tribunal dated 31-8-1953. The appellants were Government contractors for clearing and transporting of imported foodgrains. They entered into three agreements with the Government - the first and the second appellants on 5-2-1952 and the third appellant on 1-11-1951 - for clearing the cargo at prescribed rates. The three agreements contained similar terms. The said agreements provided that if the rate of discharge on a ship exceeded 1,500 tons per 24 hours and no shed demurrage was incurred, the Government was liable to pay to the appellants remuneration at the prescribed rates plus a bonus of Rs. 4/- per ton, and if the rate of discharge fell below 900 tons per 24 hours or shed demurrage was incurred Government was liable to pay to the appellants remuneration at the prescribed rates less Rs. 8...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC664; [1959]1SCR438; [1958]9STC412(SC)
Venkatarama Aiyar, J.1. This is a petition under Art. 32 of the Constitution, and the question that is raised therein for our decision is as to the validity of certain provisions of the East Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (East Pb. XLVI of 1948), hereinafter referred to as the Act, imposing a tax on the supply of materials in construction works treating it as a sale. 2. It will be convenient at this stage to refer to the relevant provisions of the Act. Section 2(c) defines 'contract' as meaning, 'Any agreement for carrying out for case or deferred payment or other valuable consideration - (i) the construction, fitting out, improvement, or repair of any building, road, bridge or other immovable property; or (ii) the installation or repair of any machinery affixed to a building or other immovable property.....' 3. 'Dealer' is defined in section 2(d) as any person engaged in the business of selling or supplying goods. Section 2(h) defines 'sale' as meaning 'any transfer of property in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC682; [1959]1SCR445; [1958]9STC417(SC)
Venkatarama Aiyar, J.1. The petitioners are building contractors carrying on business in Delhi, and they have filed the present applications under Art. 32 of the Constitution challenging the validity of certain provisions of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 (Ben. VI of 1941), which had been extended to the State of Delhi by a notification dated April 28, 1951. 2. The impugned provisions of the Act may now be referred to. Section 2(d) of the Act defines 'goods' as including 'all materials, articles and commodities, whether or not to be used in the construction, fitting out improvement or repair of immovable property'. 'Sale' is defined in section 2(g) as including 'any transfer of property in goods for cash or deferred payment or other valuable consideration, including a transfer of property in goods involved in the execution of a contract........'. Section 2(b) defines 'contract' as meaning, omitting what is not relevant, 'any agreement for carrying out for cash or deferred pay...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC1006; [1958]9STC581(SC)
P.B. Gajendragadkar, J.1. Civil Appeal No. 300 of 1956. The appellant Gordhandas Lalji had filed a petition in the High Court at Calcutta under Article 226 of the Constitution for quashing an Orderof assessment made by the respondents against him for Rs. 23,905-11-0 for the year 1949-50 under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 (Act VI of 1941), hereinafter called the Act. Mr. Justice D. N. Sinha who heard the petition rejected all the contentions raised by the appellant and dismissed the petition. An appeal preferred against the Order passed by Sinha, J., was dismissed by Chakravartti, C. J., and Lahiri, J. It is against this judgment that the appellant has come to this Court by special leave.2. The appellant is a registered dealer under the Act. As required by the Act, the appellant submitted his return for the year 1949-50 which showed that his turnover was Rs. 24,21,023-3-3. The appellant's case, however, was that the taxable turnover for the relevant period was 'nil'. He clai...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC722; [1959]1SCR455
Kapur, J. 1. This is an appeal by special leave brought by J. K. Chaudhuri for and on behalf of the Governing Body of Guru Charan College, Silchar (which will be referred to in this judgment as the college) against a judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature in Assam dated June 13, 1956, dismissing the appellant's petition under Art. 226. It raised the question as to the nature and extent of the jurisdiction of the Executive Council of the University of Gauhati in regard to disciplinary action taken by the Governing Body of the College against its principal, R. K. Datta Gupta, respondent No. 1. 2. In 1937, respondent No. 1 was appointed Professor of Mathematics in the college. He was appointed Vice-Principal in 1947 and Principal in 1950. Due to certain representations made to the Governing Body against respondent No. 1, a committee was appointed by the Governing Body to enquire into the allegations. This committee held several sittings and made a report after considering whic...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC883; [1958]9STC407(SC)
A.K. Sarkar, J. 1. The Hyderabad General Sales-tax Act, 1950, came into force on 1-5-1950. As it originally stood, sales of coarse and medium cloth were not liable to be taxed under it. The Act was amended by Hyderabad Act XXVII of 1952 which came into force on 1-8-1952 and as a result of the amendment, sales of coarse and medium cloth were made taxable under the principal Act. Thereafter, the Sales-tax Officer, Secunderabad, on different dates in the months of October, November and December, 1952, made five provisional orders of assessment, one in respect of each of the five appellants before us, whereby he levied a tax on the sales of the appellants including the sales of coarse and medium cloth made by them on and after 1-8-1952, being the date from which sales of coarse and medium cloth became taxable under the amendment earlier mentioned. The appellants appealed from these orders of assessment to the higher Sales-tax authorities under the provisions of the Act. Pending the decisio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC909; [1959]1SCR427; [1958]9STC388(SC)
Venkatarama Aiyar, J.1. These are appeals against the judgment of the High Court of Nagpur in writ application filed by the appellants impugning the validity of certain provisions of the Central Provinces and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947 (C.P. & Berar 21 of 1947), hereinafter referred to as the Act, imposing sales-tax on materials used in construction works. 2. It will be convenient to refer to these provisions at this stage. Section 2(b) of the Act defines 'contract' as including 'any agreement for carrying out for cash or deferred payment or other valuable consideration the construction, fitting out, improvement or repair of any building, road, bridge or other immovable property or the installation or repair of any machinery affixed to a building or other immovable property'. Section 2(c) of the Act defines 'dealer' as including a person who caries on the business of supplying goods. In section 2(d), 'goods' are defined as including 'all materials, articles and commodities whether or no...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC756; [1958]9STC397(SC)
A.K. Sarkar, J.1. This appeal raises a question under the Hyderabad General Sales Tax Act, 1959. It is from a judgment of a Full Bench of the High Court at Hyderabad, dated 11th September 1953, which, by a majority, dismissed a petition by the appellant asking for the issue of certain writs.2. In Warangal in Hyderabad State there was an Association of oil mill owners called the Warangal Subha Oil Mill Owners' Association. The appellant was a member and the Vice-President of that Association. The members of the Association in the course of their business purchased ground-nuts for the purpose of converting them into oil and trading in the same.3. The Hyderabad General Sales Tax Act came into force on 1st May 1950. The members of the Association who were 'dealers' as defined in the Act, got themselves registered under its provisions. Soon after the Act came into force the Sales Tax Officer, Warangal verbally informed the members of the Association that they would have to pay tax on the pu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC560; (1958)IIMLJ66(SC); [1959]1SCR379; [1958]9STC353(SC)
Venkatarama Aiyar, J.1. This appeal arises out of proceedings for assessment of sales-tax payable by the respondents for the year 1949-1950, and it raises a question of considerable importance on the construction of Entry 48 in List II of Sch. VII to the Government of India Act, 1935, 'Taxes on the sale of goods.' 2. The respondents are a private limited company registered under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act, doing business in the construction of buildings, roads and other works and in the sale of sanitary wares and other sundry goods. Before the sales-tax authorities, the disputes ranged over a number of items, but we are concerned in this appeal with only two of them. One is with reference to a sum of Rs. 29,51,528-7-4 representing the value of the materials used by the respondents in the execution of their works contracts, calculated in accordance with the statutory provisions applicable thereto, and the other relates to a sum of Rs. 1,98,929-0-3 being the price of food...
Tag this Judgment!