Court : Supreme Court of India
K.S. Hegde, C.J.(1) Both these appeals arise from the decision of the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Delhi. The appellants along with cue Manglu were prosecuted for an offence under section 307, read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Manglu was the third accused in the case was acquitted The appellants in these appeals accused Nos. I and 2 were convicted under section 307 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and for that offence each one of them was- sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for lour years and six months and to pay a line oil Rs. 50.00. In default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month. Aggrieved by that decision, they have come upto this court in these appeals. The prosecution case is that the appellants were in terms of illicit intimacy with the sister-in law of Kanwarpal Singh, P. W. 10. P. W. 10 took up the objection to the behaviour of the appellants and in that connection there were quarrels between them and P. W. 10. On April 22, 1961,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
K.S. Hegde, C.J.(1) The principal question that arises for decision in this writ petition under Articles 228 and 227 of the Constitution is whether rule 104 of the Rules framed under the Displaced Persons (Compensation' Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 (to be hereinafter referred to as the Act'), is ultra virus section 24 of the Act. (2) The petitioner is a partnership firm. The partners of that firm are evacuees horn an area, which now forms a part of West Pakistan. Plot No. l/5. Industrial Area, Kirtinagar, New Delhi, was allotted to the petitioner by the Rehabilitation Department in March. 1952. The petitioner's case is that though it accepted the offer of the Government to purchase the plot on the terms stipulated by the Rehabilitation Department, the Department has now sold the same by public auction on June 19, 1963, and purchased by the 4th respondent. The petitioner's objection to the sale of that property has been overruled by the Managing Officer. The petitioner's appeal against tha...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1967]66ITR159(SC)
RAMASWAMI J. - These appeals are brought, by special leave, from the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court dated April 29, 1964, in Income-tax Reference No. 2 of 1963.The appellant is a private limited company having its mines, factory and head office at Bhilwara in Rajasthan which was at the relevant periods in a Part B State. The appellant carried on mining business at Bhilwara and was engaged in the cutting, processing, sorting and packing of mica which was exported by it Kodarma and Giridih which were situated in Part A and Part C States and sold there to purchasers. The mica was sent almost entirely by railway from Bhilwara to kodarma and Giridh. The appellant followed the mercantile method of accounting and the assessment years in question are 1950-51 and 1951-52, the corresponding previous years being the years from November 2, 1948, to October 21, 1949, and October 22, 1949, to November 9, 1950, respectively. The total sale proceeds of the appellant during the two assessment yea...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1968SC5; [1967]3SCR981
Hidayatullah, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment and order of the High Court of Allahabad. December 6, 1966, in civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 4287 of 1966. 2. The appellant Jai Charan Lal Anal was elected as a member of the Municipal Board, Sikandrao in December, 1964. He was later elected as the President of the Board. On October 26, 1966 a notice of intention to move a motion of non-confidence in the appellant was presented by certain members of the Board to the District Magistrate, Aligarh. The District Magistrate issued notices to the members on November 17, 1966 fixing November 25, 1966 as the date for the meeting of the Board to consider the non-confidence motion. This was done under s. 87-A of the Uttar Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1916. On November 22, 1966, the petitioner filed a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution in the High Court of Allahabad asking that the meeting be stopped. The case was listed before the High Court on December 1,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1968SC189; [1967]3SCR946
Sikri, J.1. These four appeals by special leave are directed against the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in Income Tax Reference No. 19 of 1962. whereby the High Court answered the question referred to it by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal against the Commissioner of Income-tax, who is the appellant before us. The reference was in respect of assessment years 1955- 56 and 1956-57 in the case of Shri Jayantilal Amratlal (Individual) and in respect of assessments years 1958-59 and 1959-60 in the case of Jayantial Charitable Trust Ahmedabad. The questions referred are : (1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the income of Jayantilal Amratlal Charitable Trust was not assessable in the hands of the settlor Jayantilal Amratlal under the first proviso to Section 16(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act - Section 16(1) for the assessment years 1955-56 and 1956-57 (2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribuna...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1967]66ITR725(SC)
Shah, J.1. An association of five persons carried on a business in the name and style of 'Morning Star Bus Service' - hereinafter called 'the service'. On may 31, 1955, the business was transferred to the morning Star Bus Service (Private) Ltd. - hereinafter called 'the Company'. The assets transferred by the service to the company consisted of seven motor buses and a workshop and the consideration for the transfer as entered in the profit and loss account of the service was Rs. 74,000. The written down value of the seven motor buses in the books of account of the service was Rs. 24,302. In a proceeding for assessment to tax in the year 1956-57 the Income-tax Officer held that out of the consideration of Rs. 74,000, Rs. 4,000 should be allocated to the workshop assets (in respect of which no depreciation has been previously allowed), and the balance of Rs. 70,000 be taken into account under section 10(2) (vii), proviso two of the Indian Income- tax Act, 1922, as profit of the service. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1967]66ITR710(SC); [1967]3SCR957
Shah, J.1. The respondent - hereinafter called 'the assessee' -carries on the business of manufacture and sale of cotton yarn. In the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1956-57, the assessee spent Rs. 93,215/-for introduction of 'Casablanca conversion system' in its spinning plant. Substantially this involved replacement of certain roller stands and fluted rollers fitted with rubber aprons to the spinning machinery, removal of ring-frames from certain existing parts, introduction, inter alia, of ball-bearing jockey-pulleys for converting the original band-drivers to tape-drivers and other additions and alterations in the drafting mechanism. 2. The Income-tax Officer disallowed the claim of the assessee for Rs. 93,215/-because it was not admissible as 'development rebate' since the introduction of Casablanca conversion system did not involve installation of 'new machinery'. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner agreed with the Income-tax Officer. In appeal to the Appellate Tri...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1968SC9; [1967]66ITR714(SC); [1967]3SCR971
Shah, J.1. These are cross appeals from the order passed by the High Court of Bombay recording answers to questions submitted in a reference under s. 66 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. 2. Messrs Killick Nixon & Co. - hereinafter called 'the assessee' - was a firm which carried on diverse trading activities in Bombay. The assessee agreed to sell on November 28, 1947 to a Company called 'Killick Industries Ltd. ', the benefit of managing agency contracts held by it, shares of limited Company (including 240 shares of the Cement Agencies Ltd.) and debentures, and book and other debts in consideration of 79,993 shares of the face value of Rs. 100/-each of Killick Industries Ltd. and Rs. 700/-in cash. By another agreement dated January 29, 1948 the assessee agreed to sell to 'Killick Nixon & Co. Ltd. ' goodwill of the business of the assessee freehold and leasehold hereditaments, plant and machinery, stock in trade and book debts, Government securities and shares and full benefit of all ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1967SC1626; [1967]3SCR961
Ramaswami, J. 1. These appeals are brought, by special leave, from the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court dated April 29, 1964, in Income- tax Reference No. 2 of 1963. 2. The appellant is a private limited company having its mines, factory and head office at Bhilwara in Rajasthan which was at the relevant periods in a Part B State. The appellant carried on mining business at Bhilwara and was engaged in the cutting, processing, sorting and packing of mica which was exported by it Kodarma and Giridh which were situated in Part A and Part C States and sold there to purchasers. The mica was sent almost entirely by railway from Bhilwara to kodarma and Giridh. The appellant followed the mercantile method of accounting and the assessment years in question are 1950-51 and 1951- 52, the corresponding previous years being the years from November 2, 1948, to October 21, 1949, and October 22, 1949, to November 9, 1950, respectively. The total sale proceeds of the appellant during the two assessm...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1968]67ITR1(SC)
SIKRI J. - These four appeals by special leave are directed against the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in Income-tax Reference No. 19 of 1962, whereby the High Court answered the questions referred to it by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal against the Commissioner of Income-tax, who is the appellant before us. The reference was in respect of the assessment is the years 1955-56 and 1956-57 in the case of Shri Jayantilal Amratlal (individual) and in respect of the assessment years 1958-59 and 1959-60 in the case of Jayantilal Amratlal Charitable Trust, Ahmedabad. The questions referred are :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the income of Jayantilal Amratlal Charitable Trust was not assessable in the hands of the settlor, Jayantilal Amratlal, under the first proviso to section 16 (1) (c) of the Income-tax Act for the assessment years 1955-56 and 1956-57 ?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the cas...
Tag this Judgment!