Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1967SC401; [1967]63ITR292(SC); [1967]1SCR784
Bhargava, J.1. This appeal arises out of proceedings for registration of the firm, Juggilal Kamalapat, Calcutta, under section 26A of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for the assessment year 1943-44. Prior to this assessment year, the three Singhania brothers, Sir Padampat Singhania, Kamlapat Singhania and Lakshmipat Singhania, were carrying on a hosiery business in the name of Messrs. Juggilal Kamalapat with Head Office at Kanpur and a branch at Calcutta. On November 29, 1939, these three brothers executed a deed of partnership, by which one Jhabbarmal Saraf was taken in as a partner, and under this deed, all the four partners had equal shares. On October 27, 1941, the three brothers executed a trust deed known as the Kamla Town Trust, the principal object of which was the welfare of the employees of Juggilal Kamalapat Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. Under this deed, the three brothers became the first trustees. On December 2, 1942, a Deed of Relinquish...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1967]64ITR67(SC)
Shah, J.1. The Income-tax Officer, Companies Circle 1 (4), Bombay, computed the respondent-company's total income for the assessment year 1952-53 at Rs. 23,596 and brought that amount to tax. The respondent- company had, however, distributed Rs. 2,66,788 as dividend in the previous year. The Income-tax Officer, by his order dated the 27th July, 1955, levied an additional tax on the excess dividend declared by the respondent-company and ordered the company to pay as additional tax on the excess dividend Rs. 33,348-8-0. The order was complied with. Thereafter, it appears that the Bombay High Court in Khatau Makanji Spinning and Weaving Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax held that the levy of tax on excess dividend was illegal. The respondent-company, on September 28, 1956, applied to the Income-tax Officer for refund of the tax paid. It was not expressly stated in the application that the order be rectified under section 35 of the Indian Income-tax Act, and an order for refund be mad...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1967SC595; [1967]63ITR470(SC); [1967]1SCR768
Shah, J.1. For the assessment year 1957-58 the appellant Company claimed in proceedings for assessment of wealth-tax that the following four amounts be deducted in the computation of its net wealth : (1) Rs. 29,44,421 in respect of income-tax liability relating to the assessment year 1957-58. This amount included Rs. 2,95,869 representing the last instalment of advance tax under s. 18A in respect of which a notice of demand had been issued. (2) Rs. 3,70,083 in respect of business profits tax liability. (3) Rs. 20,23,500 in respect of proposed dividend. (4) Rs. 25,02,675 'on account of accrued liability for gratuity to workmen and staff as per the award of Industrial Court and Labour Appellate Tribunal.' 2. The claim was rejected by the Wealth-tax Officer. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner accepted the claim of the appellant Company in respect of the last instalment of the advance tax for which a notice of demand had been issued, and rejected the claim in respect of the rest. The ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1967SC509; [1967]63ITR478(SC); [1967]1SCR761
Bhargava, J.1. The respondent is a public limited company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1913 and was carrying on the business of manufacturing of absorbent cotton wool. In March, 1955, the board of director resolved to establish a new spinning unit under the name of Sudarsanan Spinning Mills for each licence was obtained from the Government of India under the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951, in August, 1955. The respondent placed orders for purposes chase of necessary spinning machinery and plant in the months of January and February, 1956. The construction of factory building was taken in hand in March, 1956, and these constructions were completed by December, 1957. The erection of the spinning machinery and the plant in the building was completed in several stages commencing from June 1957. A licence from the Inspector of Factories for working the factory was obtained in June, 1958. The statement of the case further maintained that the time given to c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1967SC361; [1967]1SCR739
Shelat, J.1. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order of the High Court at Calcutta which upheld the judgment and order of the Single Judge of that High Court dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant company. 2. The appellant company was at all material times carrying on the business of manufacturing barrels and for that purpose required steel sheets. By reason of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, the Iron and Steel (Control) Order, 1956 and diverse orders passed by the Iron and Steel Controller the appellant company could get supplies of steel sheets only by obtaining release orders form the Controller on stockist and importers. The Controller would direct under such a release order an importer or a stockist to supply steel sheets to the appellant company at rates and on terms and conditions specified by him therein. By three such release orders, of October 28 and 29, 1960 the Controller directed the 6th respondent M/s. Amichand Pyarelal & ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1967SC923; 1967(0)BLJR117; [1967]1SCR752
Wanchoo, J. 1. This is an appeal on a certificate granted by the Allahabad High Court and arises in the following circumstances. An election was held for one seat to the U.P. Legislative Council from the Rohilkhand Graduates Constituency on April 22, 1962. There were 14 candidates, and election was held in accordance with the system of proportional representation by means of single transferable vote. Total number of votes case were 4412 and 2207 first preference votes were required to secure the return of any candidate at the first count. As no candidate secured the minimum votes at the first count, subsequent counts had to be made excluding the candidate who had received the lowest number of votes on each count. Eventually, Satya Ketu, respondent, got the highest number of votes after the last count and he was declared elected by a margin of 47 votes. Thereupon the appellant filed an election petition claiming that a declaration be made that the election of Satya Ketu was void and tha...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1967SC517; [1967]63ITR273(SC); [1967]1SCR727
Bhargava, J.1. The appellant is a senior partner in a firm in which the two other partners are his wife and a stranger. In addition, two minor sons of the appellant were admitted to the benefits of the partnership. Under the deed of agreement constituting the partnership, the shares in the profits of all the five persons were defined. There was also specification of the shares in which losses were to be shared by the three partners. There was a clause in the deed of partnership that 'if the firm requires any sum for meeting the expenses for its management and if any of the partners has and is willing to give such amount, he may advance (such amount) as loan. He may receive interest for such sum at the rate of 12 annas per cent per mensem.' The firm earned profits which were distributed in accordance with their shares between the three partners and the two minors who were admitted to the benefits of the partnership. The amounts of profit falling to the share of the wife of the appellant...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1967SC681; [1967]1SCR732; [1967]19STC144(SC)
Ramaswami, J.1. This appeal is brought by special leave against the judgment of the Madras High Court dated the 13th September, 1961 in T.C. 162 of 1958. 2. The Madurai Mills Co., Ltd., (hereinafter called the respondent) is a dealer in yarn, purchasing raw material like cotton staple-fibre, etc., manufacturing them into yarn and selling the yarn. In the assessment year 1950-51, the respondent showed a return of Rs. 15,27,61,883-8-4 before the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Madurai who after scrutiny of the account books determined the net turnover at Rs. 15,44,09,109-3-11. The respondent preferred an appeal before the Commercial Tax Officer, Madurai South. It was contended on behalf of the respondent that a sum of Rs. 1,44,294-14-4 was wrongly included by the first assessing authority in the purchase value of cotton purchased by it for production of yarn as that amount only represented the commission paid by it to Comorin Investment Trading Company Limited for the purchase. It was als...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1967SC412; [1967]1SCR721
Mitter, J.1. This is an appeal from a judgment of the High Court at Madras on a certificate granted by it. 2. The main question in this appeal relates to the rate of interest payable in respect of four mortgages executed in between March 20, 1936 and January 2, 1938. Both the learned trial Judge, Ramaswami J. of the Madras High Court and the Bench of two Judges in appeal were of the view that the provision for interest in the impugned mortgages should be reduced; but whereas the learned trial Judge reduced the rate of interest from 15 per cent compoundable every quarter to 15 per cent compoundable with yearly rests, the Judges in appeal after taking all the circumstances into consideration held that 10 per cent compound interest with yearly rests would not be excessive and they reduced the rate accordingly. They also scaled down the rate of interest to 6 per cent from the date of the institution of the suit. The creditor has come up before this Court in appeal and his substantial compl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1967]63ITR288(SC)
Ramaswami, J.1. This appeal is brought, by special leave, from the judgment of the Allahabad High Court dated April 4, 1963, in Misc. I. T. Application No. 453 of 1960, holding that no question of law arises out of the order of the Income-tax Tribunal and dismissing the application of the appellant under section 66(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter called the 'Act'). 2. The respondent is a private limited company carrying on the business of manufacture and export of carpets having their head office at Bhadohi which was formerly in the State of Banaras. The respondent used to obtain yarn from a firm known as Allahabad Woollen Mills At Allahabad for the purpose of its business, viz., the manufacture and export of carpets. The Allahabad Woollen Mills supplied yarn to the respondent for three years ending March 31, 1947, March 31, 1948, and March 31, 1949. While making the assessment of the Allahabad Woollen Mills for the assessment years 1947-48, 1948-49 and 1949-50, the Income-...
Tag this Judgment!