Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC805; 1978(2)ELT408(SC); [1962]2SCR942
Hidayatullah, J.1. The only question in this appeal, with certificate under Art. 133(1)(c) of the Constitution, against the judgment and decree of the High Court of Patiala and East Punjab States Union, is whether the levy of royalty at Rs. 50 per one lakh bricks under a Robkar issued by the Ijlas-i-Khas (Council of Regency), Patiala State, on February 6, 1919, is valid. 2. The Appeal arises out of a suit filed by the present appellants in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Faridkot, for declaration and injunction. The suit was dismissed by the trial Judge, but on appeal to the District Court, the decision was reversed. On further appeal to the High Court, the decision of the Additional District Judge was set aside, and that of the trial Judge restored. 3. In this appeal, the only point argued is whether the order of the Ijlas-i-Khas continues to be effective, after the enactment of the Finance Act, 1950. The suit was filed on May 13, 1952, for junction against notices of demand issue...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC1255; [1961(3)FLR228]; (1961)IILLJ377SC; [1962]2SCR934
Wanchoo, J. 1. This is an appeal by special leave in an industrial matter. The appellant is the Ahmedabad Miscellaneous Industrial Workers' Union, and the dispute which went for adjudication before the industrial Court, Bombay was with respect to bonus for the year ending September 1956. The appellant claimed that three months' wages should be awarded as bonus by the respondent, which is the Ahmedabad Electricity Company, Limited. The contention of the respondent was that if a calculation was made in accordance with the Full Bench formula evolved by the Labour Appellate Tribunal and approved by this Court in the Associated Cement Companies Ltd. v. Its Workmen : (1959)ILLJ644SC , there would be no available surplus from which any bonus could be awarded. The industrial Court accepted the contention of the responded and rejected the appellant's claim. The main dispute in the industrial Court centerd on three points, namely - (i) Whether depreciation should be calculated according to the p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC191; [1962]2SCR924; [1961]12STC622(SC)
Gajendragadkar, J.1. The appellant, the Indore Iron and Steel Registered Stock-holders' Association (Private) Ltd., is a registered Association whose constituent members carry on business generally in fabricated iron and steel material and more particularly in iron sheets, plain or corrugated, bars, rods, light and heavy structurals, nails, joints, wire nails and all kinds and varieties of wires and pipes. This business is carried on by the constituent members of the appellant at Indore and Ratlam at which places they have their registered office. The State of Madhya Bharat, by its Act No. 30 of 1950, imposed sales tax in the territory of Madhya Bharat on the sales of goods therein specified with effect from May 1, 1950, and under the provisions of the said Act the Commissioner of Sales Tax, Madhya Bharat, and the Sales Tax Officer, Indore, who are respondents 2 and 3, were appointed authorities for the assessment of tax leviable under the Act and for its recovery in their respective a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1961]43ITR387(SC)
Gajendragadkar, J.1. These two appeals arise out of two writ petitions filed by the two appellants who are brothers, Lalji Haridas and Chhotalal Haridas, against the respective Income-tax Officers in their areas. Lalji Haridas, who is a resident of Jamnagar, filed Special Civil Application No. 132 of 1957 in the High Court of Judicature, Bombay, at Rajkot, challenging the validity of the notices issued against him by the Income-tax Officer, Ward A, at Jamnagar under section 23(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, claiming appropriate writ or order restraining the said Income-tax Officer from taking any further proceedings under the said notices. This petition was summarily dismissed by the High Court and the application made by Lalji for a certificate to file an appeal in this court was also rejected. Thereupon he applied for and obtained special leave from this court. It is with special leave granted to him that Lalji has brought his appeal before this court. 2. Chhotalal, who is a reside...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC113; [1962]2SCR880
Shah, J.1. Bikhraj Jaipuria - hereinafter called the appellant - is the sole proprietor of a grocery business conducted in the name and style of 'Rajaram Vijai Kumar' in the town of Arrah in the State of Bihar. In the months of July and August, 1943, the Divisional Superintendent, East Indian Railway under three 'purchase orders' agreed to buy and the appellant agreed to sell certain quantities of food grains for the employees of the East Indian Railway. 2. The following table sets out the purchase prices, the commodities, the dates of purchase orders, the quantities and the rates and the method of supply. Purchase Date of Kinds Quantity Rates.Order purchase of ofNo. orders. commodity. commodities.(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)69. 20-7-1943. Gram 1st 1000 mds. @ Rs. 15/-quality. per md.(pluscost of newbags notexceedingRs. 75/- per100 bags)for anyE.I.Rly.station inBihar.76. 4-7-1943. Rice 1000 mds. @ Rs. 22-8-0Dhenki (plus costMedium of bags notquality. exceedingRs.75per cent) permd. forany statio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC240; (1963)IMLJ77(SC); [1962]2SCR904
Gajendragadkar, J. 1. The short and interesting question which arises for our decision in the present appeal is in respect of the powers of the High Court in disposing of appeals under s. 423(1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In dealing with an appeal preferred by a convicted person against the order of conviction and sentence imposed on him by the trial court can the High Court in exercise of its appellate powers under s. 423(1)(b) reverse the finding of acquittal recorded by the trial court in favour of the appellant in respect of an offence which is directly not the subject-matter of the appeal On this question there has been a difference of opinion amongst our High Courts, and it appears from reported decisions that in the same High Court sometimes conflicting views have been expressed on the point. 2. This question arises in this way. In the Court of Sessions, Visakhapatnam Division, the respondent Thadi Narayana was charged at the instance of the appellant the State of And...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1970CriLJ588; (1969)2SCC412; [1970]1SCR639
V. Bhargava, J.1. These appeals, by certificate, challenge a common Order of the High Court of Madras dismissing applications under Section 561A of the Cr. PC presented by the appellants in the two appeals for quashing proceedings being taken against them in the Court of the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Madras, on the basis of a complaint filed on 17th March, 1968 by the respondent, the Director of Enforcement, New Delhi. The Rayala Corporation Private Ltd., appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 18 of 1969, was accused No. 1 in the complaint, while one M.R. Pratap, Managing Director of accused No. 1, appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 19/1969 was accused No. 2. The circumstances under which the complaint was filed may be briefly stated.2. The premises of accused No. 1 were raided by the Enforcement Directorate on the 20th and 21st December, 1966 and certain records were seized from the control of the Manager. Some enquiries were made subsequently and, thereafter, on the 25th August, 1967, a n...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC719; [1961]43ITR352(SC); [1962]2SCR871
S.K. Das, J.1. These three appeals, with special leave of this Court, have been heard together. They arise out of three Income-tax References made to the High Court of Bombay, namely, Income-tax Reference No. 29 of 1957, Income-tax Reference No. 30 of 1957 and Income-tax Reference No. 37 of 1957. The facts are similar in the three cases and the question of law which the High Court had to answer was the same in each of the cases. the High Court gave its answer in its leading judgment in Income-tax Reference No. 29 of 1957, and the other two References were disposed of in accordance with that answer. For the purposes of these appeals, it would be enough if we state the facts of Reference No. 29 and then indicate the question which arose for decision and the answer which the High Court gave to it. 2. One Nanalal Haridas was the karta of a Hindu undivided family which admittedly was the beneficiary of 1842 shares in a company called the Cotton Export and Import Limited (hereinafter referre...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC141; [1962]44ITR538(SC); [1962]2SCR848
Hidayatullah, J.1. The appellant, Rajah S. V. Jagannath Rao, was the Jagirdar of Jatprole Samasthan in the former Hyderabad State. In the year 1357 Fasli, the Income-tax Act (1357 Fasli) was passed by the Legislature, to come into force on Azur 1, 1357 Fasli. The present appeals, with special leave, concern the assessment of the appellant's income to income-tax and super-tax under the Act of 1357 Fasli for the assessment years, 1357 Fasli and 1358 Fasli, corresponding to the years, 1948-49 and 1949-50. They are directed against a common judgment of the High Court of Hyderabad, by which certain questions of law referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay, in the assessment of the present appellant and some others were answered by the High Court of Hyderabad against the present appellant. 2. The appellant had submitted returns of his income for the two accounting years under protest. According to him, the Income-tax Act, 1357 Fasli was ultra vires the by legislature. For the ac...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1962]44ITR545(SC)
Hidayatullah, J.1. This appeal with special leave has been filed by the Salar Jung Estate Committed through its Executive Secretary against the judgment and order of the High Court of Hyderabad dated April 15, 1955, in respect of the assessment of the appellant for the year 1557 Fasli. The respondent is the Commissioner of Income-tax, Hyderabad Division. 2. The following questions were referred by the Income-tax Tribunal, Bombay, for the decision of the High Court : '1. Whether the sum of Rs. 1,32,613 allowed by the Appellate Tribunal as a revenue deduction under section 14 (5) is in accordance with law 2. Whether the Hyderabad Income-tax Act is ultra vires 3. Assuming that the Hyderabad Income-tax Act is intra vires, whether the income of the previous year, that is to say, the income of 1356F, could be validly taxed in 1357 F ?' 3. These questions were all answered against the appellant by the High Court. In so far as questions Nos. 2 and 3 are concerned, we have already decided the...
Tag this Judgment!