Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1961SC853; [1961]31CompCas10(SC); [1961(2)FLR120]; (1961)ILLJ249SC; [1961]2SCR995
Gajendragadkar, J.1. The short question of law which falls to be decided in the present appeal is whether a dispute raised by the employees of a General Insurance Company against their employer for payment of bonus in any particular year can be referred for adjudication by an Industrial Tribunal under section 10(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (XIV of 1947). This question arises in this way. The workmen of the Hercules Insurance Co. Ltd. are the appellants and the Insurance Company is the respondent before us. On April 11, 1957, the Central Government referred the appellants' claim for bonus for the years 1954 and 1955 for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad, constituted under section 7A of the Industrial Disputes Act, and this reference has been made under section 10(1)(d) and proviso (vii) of the Insurance Act. It was also urged by the respondent that having regard to the limitations imposed on the General Insurance Companies by section 40C of the Insurance Act t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1961SC1154; [1961]41ITR667(SC); [1961]2SCR990
Hidayatullah, J.1. This appeal, on a certificate by the High Court, has been filed by Shree Changdeo Sugar Mills, Ltd., to which section 23A of the Income-tax Act (prior to its amendment by the Finance Act, 1955) was applied in respect of the assessment year, 1948-49. The question which was referred to the High Court was whether at the relevant time the assessee Company could be deemed to be a Company. in which the public were substantially interested. This question was answered in the negative by the High Court. 2. During the assessment year, the Company had not distributed dividends to the extent of 60 per cent. of its profits, and an order under section 23A(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act was passed by the Income-tax Officer. The Company appealed to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, who dismissed the appeal. It next appealed to the Tribunal, but was unsuccessful. The Tribunal, however, referred the above question which, as already stated, was answered in the negative by the High...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1961SC867; (1961)ILLJ521SC; [1961]3SCR1
Wanchoo, J.1. These eighteen appeals by special leave raise a common question and will be dealt with by this judgment. The appellants are certain cotton textile mills in Ahmedabad while the respondent in each appeal is the Textile Labour Association, Ahmedabad, which is a representative union of the cotton textile workers in Ahmedabad. The total number of cotton textile mills in Ahmedabad is 66; therefore, 66 references under s. 73-A of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, No. XI of 1947 (hereinafter called the Act), were made to the industrial court for arbitration of disputes arising out of notices of change given by the respondent making a demand for bonus for employees of textile mills in Ahmedabad. It appears that there was an agreement between the Textile Labour Association and the Ahmedabad Mill-owners' Association representing the member-mills on June 27, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Agreement), with respect to payment of bonus by the mills to their employees. The Agree...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1961SC583; 1961CriLJ730; [1961(3)FLR258]; (1961)IILLJ158SC; [1961]2SCR971
S.K. Das, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave from the judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dated 27 March 1958, whereby the said High Court maintained the conviction of the appellant under section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (2 of 1947) but reduced the sentence of four years' rigorous imprisonment passed on the appellant by the Special Judge, Kanpur, to two years' rigorous imprisonment. 2. The short facts are these. The appellant Surajpal Singh was employed in the police Department of the Uttar Pradesh Government. He started his service as a constable on a salary of Rs. 13 per month from 1 August 1930. In 1946 his pay was increased to Rs. 46 per month. He was appointed a Head constable on a salary of Rs. 50 per month in 1947. He officiated as a Sub-Inspector of Police sometime in 1948 and 1949 on a salary of Rs. 150 per month. On March 1, 1949, he was reverted to his post of Head constable. Between the dates February 27, 1951, and Sept...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1961SC743; [1961]41ITR613(SC); [1961]2SCR978
Hidayatullah, J.1. The Raghuvanshi Mills Ltd., Bombay (a public limited Company), has filed this appeal by special leave against the judgment and orders of the High Court of Bombay dated March 10, 1953, and September 1, 1955. By the first order, the Bombay High Court directed the Income Tax Tribunal to submit a supplementary statement of the case in the light of its judgment, giving the parties liberty to lead further evidence, if any. By the second order, the High Court re-framed the question, and answered it against the assessee. 2. The assessee Company's issued and subscribed capital was, at the material time. Rs. 10,00,000 divided into 10,000 shares of Rs. 100 each. Prior to November 14, 1941, one Maganlal Parbhudas, who was a Director of the Company, held 6,344 shares. On November 14, 1941, he made a gift of 1,000 shares to each of his five sons, Ravindra, Surendra, Bipinchandra, Hareshchandra and Krishnakumar. We are concerned with the account year of the Company, April 1, 1942, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1961SC564; [1961]2SCR931
S.K. Das, J.1. This is writ petition under Art. 32 of the Constitution. Gazula Dasaratha Rama Rao is the petitioner. The respondents are (1) the State of Andhra Pradesh, (2) the Board of Revenue, Andhra Pradesh, (3) the Collector of Guntur in Andhra Pradesh and (4) Vishnu Molakala Chandramowleshwara Rao. The petitioner prays that this Court must declare section 6 of the Madras Hereditary Village-Offices Act, 1895 (Madras Act III of 1895), hereinafter called the Act, as void in so far as it infringes the fundamental right of the petitioner under Arts. 14 and 16 of the Constitution, and further asks for an appropriate writ or direction quashing certain orders passed by respondents 1 to 3 in favour of respondent No. 4 in the matter of the latter's appointment as Village Munsif of a newly constituted village called Peravalipalem. When this petition first came up for hearing we directed a notice to go to other States of the Union inasmuch as the question raised as to the constitutional vali...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1961SC701a; [1961]41ITR545(SC); [1961]2SCR949
Kapur, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave brought by the Commissioner of Income-tax against the judgment and order of the High Court of Bombay answering the question in favour of the assessee. The question referred by the Tribunal was : 'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the amount of Rs. 3,20,162 is an allowable deduction under section 10(2)(xi) or 10(2)(xv) of the Income-tax Act ?' which was amended by the High Court as follows : 'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the amount of Rs. 3,20,162 is an allowable deduction ?' and was answered in the affirmative and against the appellant. 2. The facts of the case shortly stated are these : The respondent is a registered firm carrying on business as commission agents. It was treated as the agent of a non-resident principal, Haji Mohomed Syed Al Barbari of Port Sudan (hereinafter referred to as the 'non-resident principal'). It was carrying on the business of export of cloth and kariana (i.e...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1961]41ITR608(SC); [1961]2SCR956
Shah, J.1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench, stated under section 66(1) of the Indian Income Tax Act the following question for decision of the High Court of Judicature at Chandigarh. 'Whether the assessee's receipts from consumers for laying service lines, (that is, not distributing mains) were trading receipts and whether the profit element therein, viz., service connection receipts minus service connection cost was taxable income in the assessee's hands ?' 2. The High Court answered the question as follows : '...... the company's receipts from the consumers for laying the service lines are trading receipts and the profit element therein being the difference between the service connection receipts and the service connection costs in taxable income in the hands of the company.' 3. With certificate granted under section 66A(2) of the Income Tax Act, this appeal is preferred by the Hoshiarpur Electric Supply Company - hereinafter referred to an the assessee. 4. The assesse...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1961SC1149; [1961]41ITR539(SC); [1961]2SCR911
Shah, J.1. This appeal with certificate of fitness granted by the High Court of Judicature of Mysore is from an order rejecting the petition of the appellant for a writ to quash a notice of reassessment under section 34 of the Indian Income Tax Act. 2. The appellants are a Hindu Undivided Family carrying on business in groundnuts and other commodities at Goribidnur, Kolar District, in the territory which formed part of the former State of Mysore. The Mysore Income Tax Act was repealed and the Indian Income Tax Act was brought into force in the Part-B State of Mysore as from April 1, 1950. The appellants had adopted as their year of account July 1 to June 30 of the succeeding year and they were assessed under the Mysore Income Tax Act on that footing for the year of assessment 1949-50 corresponding to the year of account July 1, 1948, to June 30, 1949. After the Indian Income Tax Act was applied to the State of Mysore on December 26, 1950, notice under section 22(2) of the Indian Income...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1961SC532; [1961]2SCR828
Sinha, C.J.1. This appeal on a certificate of fitness granted by the High Court of Judicature, Jammu and Kashmir, is directed against the judgment and order dated December 7, 1954, in an application under Art. 32(2A) of the Constitution for issue of a writ, directions or order against the Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Defence, New Delhi, as the first respondent and the State of Jammu and Kashmir through the Chief Secretary, Jammu and Kashmir State, as the second respondent. 2. The petition is based on the following allegations. The petitioner will be referred to as the appellant in the course of this judgment. He was aged 45 years 262 days on August 12, 1954. He was holding a regular commission in the Jammu and Kashmir State Forces, which were amalgamated with the Defence Forces of the Union with effect from September 1, 1949. The appellant holding the substantive rank of Lieut. Col. in the amalgamated forces had the right to continue in service until he attained t...
Tag this Judgment!