Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1959SC781; [1959]Supp(2)SCR406
Subba Rao, J. 1. This appeal filed against the judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta raises the question of the legality of a partnership to carry on business in wagering contracts. 2. The facts lie in a small compass. They, omitting those not germane to the controversy before us, are as follows : The appellant, Gherulal Parakh, and the first respondent, Mahadeodas Maiya, managers of two joint families entered into a partnership to carry on wagering contracts with two firms of Hapur, namely, Messrs. Mulchand Gulzarimull and Baldeosahay Surajmull. It was agreed between the partners that the said contracts would be made in the name of the respondents on behalf of the firm and that the profit and loss resulting from the transactions would be borne by them in equal shares. In implementation of the said agreement, the first respondent entered into 32 contracts with Mulchand and 49 contracts with Baldeosahay and the net result of all these transactions was a loss, with the res...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1959SC775; [1959]29CompCas282(SC); [1959]36ITR215(SC); [1959]Supp(2)SCR448
Hidayatullah, J.1. Messers. Howrah Trading Company Ltd., Calcutta (here in after called the assessee) obtained on April 28, 1955, a certificate under section 66A(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act from the Calcutta High Court, to appeal to this court against the judgment dated August 31, 1954, in Income-tax Reference No. 57 of 1953. The Divisional Bench (Chakravarti, C.J., and Lahiri, J.) in the judgment under appeal merely followed their earlier judgment delivered the same day in Income-tax Reference No. 22 of 1953, since reported as Hindustan Investment Corporation v. Commissioner of Income-tax. It is the latter judgment which gives the reasons for the decision. 2. The facts of the case have been stated with sufficient fullness, yet briefly, in the statement of the case submitted by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (Calcutta Bench) and may be conveniently set out in its own words : 'The applicant had received sums of Rs. 3,831, Rs. 6,606, Rs. 7,954 and Rs. 8,304 in the four years respe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1959SC763; [1959]36ITR222(SC); [1959]Supp(2)SCR459
Sinha, J. 1. The question for determination in this appeal on a certificate of fitness granted by the High Court of Calcutta, is whether the respondent's admitted income under certain heads is chargeable to income-tax under the provisions of section 10(6) of the Indian Income-tax Act (XI of 1922), hereinafter referred to as the Act. The Calcutta High Court, by its judgment dated January 6, 1956, answered the question in the negative, disagreeing with the determination of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal by its order dated April 23, 1949. 2. The facts of this case, upon which the decision of the appeal depends, may shortly be stated as follows : The respondent is a limited liability company incorporated on June 7, 1933, with a view to taking over the assets and liabilities of an unincorporated association called 'The Calcutta Stock Exchange Association' and to carrying on the affairs of the stock exchange which had been founded by that association. The principal object on the responden...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1959]36ITR257(SC)
Hidayatullah, J. 1. Messrs. Emerald & Co. Ltd., Bombay (hereinafter referred to as the assessee company) have filed this appeal with special leave of this court against the judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay dated September 27, 1955, in Income-tax Reference No. 23 of 1955. In that reference, the following question was considered by the High Court : 'Whether the computation of the loss by the assessee company at Rs. 35,801 is in accordance with law or whether the loss computed by the Income-Tax Officer/Tribunal is in accordance with law ?' 2. The High Court (Chagla, C.J., and Tendolkar, J.) decided that the loss by the assessee company computed by the Income-tax Officer was according to law. 3. The facts leading to this appeal are as follows : The assessee company deals in shares, and values the closing stock of shares at cost price. It dealt in 1950-1951 in the shares of the Bombay Dyeing and . On November 11, 1950, it purchased 50 shares of the said company for Rs. 49,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1959SC798; (1960)IIMLJ87(SC); [1959]Supp(2)SCR476
Gajendragadkar, J.1. These four appeals represent the last stage of a long and tortuous litigation between the appellants Waghmares (also called Guravs) who claim the rights of hereditary worshippers in the Shree Dnyaneshwar Maharaj Sansthan, Alandi, and respondents 1 to 6 who are the trustees of the said Sansthan. Alandi, which is a small town situated on the banks of the river Indrayani at a distance of about 14 miles from Poona, is regarded as a holy place of pilgrimage by thousands of Hindu devotees. In the last quarter of the 13th century Shree Dnyaneshwar Maharaj, the great Maharashtra Saint and Philosopher, lived at Alandi. He was a spiritual teacher and reformer; by his saintly life and his inspiring and illuminating commentary on the Bhagvad Gita, known as Dnyaneshwari, he helped to create a popular urge and fervour for religious and social revolution which led to the foundation of a devotional cult; the followers of this cult are known as Warkaris in Maharashtra. They refuse ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1959SC814; [1959]36ITR175(SC); (1960)IIMLJ73(SC); [1959]Supp(2)SCR375
BHAGWATI, J.1. This appeal with a certificate from the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad raises the question whether the sum of Rs. 2,19,343 received by the assessee in the year of account relevant for the assessment year 1951-52 was a revenue receipt or a capital receipt.The facts leading up to this appeal may be shortly stated : The assessee is a registered firm consisting of five brothers and the wife of a deceased brother having equal shares in the profit and loss of the partnership. The firm was appointed the sole selling agents and sole distributors for the Hyderabad State for the cigarettes manufactured by M/s. Vazir Sultan Tobacco Co., Ltd., under the terms of a -resolution of the Board of Directors dated January 6, 1931. " Mr. Baker reported that an arrangement had been, come to for the time being whereby the firm of Vazir Sultan & Sons, were given the distributorship of " Charminar " Cigarettes within the H. E. H. the Nizam's Dominions and that they were allowed a dis...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1959SC773; [1959]36ITR65(SC); [1959]Supp(2)SCR355
Hidayatullah, J.1. Messrs. Mcgregor & Balfour Ltd., Calcutta (hereinafter called the Company) is a Company incorporated in the United Kingdom. Its head office is also there. It, however, does business in India also. In some of the previous years, the Company was required to pay excess profits tax both in England and in India. When it did so, it obtained deduction of the amounts from its profits and gains for purposes of the Indian Income-tax Act, under s. 12(2) of the Indian Excess Profits Tax Act. 2. In the assessment year 1947-1948 which corresponded to the accounting year of the Company ending on October 31, 1946, it obtained a repayment of Rs. 2,31,009 out of the excess profits tax paid in England. This was under s. 28(1) of 4 & 5, Geo. VI, Ch. 30. For purposes of the levy of the Indian Income-tax, this sum was included in the taxable profits of the Company by the Income-tax Officer. He purported to act under s. 11(14) of the Indian Finance Act, 1946 (hereinafter called the Act). T...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1959]Supp2SCR364
Sarkar, J. 1. This appeal arises out of a proceeding in execution of an adjudication made under the provisions of the United Provinces Encumbered Estates Act, 1934 (U.P. XXV of 1934), an Act passed by the legislature of the United Provinces, now called the Uttar Pradesh. The questions that arise in this appeal largely turn on the provisions of that Act and they have therefore to be referred to. 2. The Act was intended to give relief to the proprietors of certain landed properties in the United Provinces. Section 4 of the Act enabled a proprietor of such landed properties to make an application in writing to the Collector of the District in which any of his lands is situate, stating the amount of his debts and asking for the application of the Act to him. Upon such an application being made, the Collector is to make an order under s. 6 forwarding it to a Special Judge appointed under the Act who, under s. 3 is any civil judicial officer appointed for a local area, to exercise the powers...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1959SC735; [1959]Supp(2)SCR339
Hidayatullah, J.1. The judgment in Petition No. 12 of 1957 shall also dispose of petitions Nos. 26 and 27 of 1954, 24 and 437 of 1955, 256 of 1956 and 16, 17 and 73 of 1957. 2. These petitions under Art. 32 arise out of alleged agreements by which some of the proprietors in the former State of Madhya Pradesh granted to one or other of the petitioners the right to take forest produce, mainly tendu leaves, from the forests included in Zamindari and Malguzari villages of the grantors. Government has disclaimed these agreements and auctioned the rights afresh. The petitioners state that this is an invasion of their fundamental rights. The dates on which these alleged agreements were entered into, the terms thereof and the periods during which they were to subsist are different from case to case. It is not necessary in this judgment to recite the terms of these documents, and it is sufficient to group them for purpose of decision on the bases whether the said agreements still subsist, and w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1959SC1238; [1959]37ITR151(SC)
Bhagwati, J.1. This appeal with special leave is directed against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'A' Bench, dated August 8, 1952, made in I. T. A. No. 3254 of 1951-52 allowing the appeal and reversing the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in I. T. A. No. 130 of 1949-50 for the assessment year 1948-49 dated June 23, 1951, whereby the Appellate Assistant Commissioner had allowed the appellant's claim for a reduction of his total income by Rs. 1,59,240.2. The appellant is a cloth merchant dealing in cloth, piece-goods and yarn both on wholesale and retail basis at Madurai. The appellant and his brother Abdulla Salay Mohammed were originally carrying on the business in partnership. But the partnership was dissolved during the year 1947-48 and the Appellant took over the entire business and became the sole proprietor thereof. For the assessment year 1948-49 (the accounting year being the year ending March 31, 1948), he submitted a return on September 7, 1...
Tag this Judgment!