Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1968SC105; [1967]3SCR891
Vaidialingam, J. 1. This appeal by certificate, is directed against the order of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, allowing a writ petition, filed by the respondent, under Art. 226 of the Constitution. 2. The facts leading up to the finding of the Writ Petition, by the respondent, may be briefly indicated. In respect of Sri Swami Hathiramji Math, Tirumalai, Tirupati, disputes arose regarding the succession to the office of the Mahant of the Math, after the death in 1947, of the then Mahant Prayag Dossji. An agreement seems to have been arrived at, on October 29, 1947 laying down the procedure for choosing a successor to the office of the Mahant when a vacancy arises. The Akada Panchayat appears to have been constituted the supreme authority, in such matters. That agreement also provided as to who, among the respondent, and one Chetham Doss, was to succeed to the office of the Mahant, on the death of one Narayan Doss succeeded as Mahant on December 9, 1958 and Chetham Doss succeeded as Mah...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1968SC111; [1967]3SCR886
Bhargava, J.1. The respondent firm, K. B. Bass & Co., instituted a suit on 13th April, 1951, for rendition of accounts against the appellant firm, Messrs. Hulas Rai Baij Nath, alleging that the appellant was, the commission agent of the respondent and that the accounts between respondent as the principal and appellant as the agent had not been settled since the dealings began in the year 1941 onwards. Tentatively, a sum of Rs. 2,100/- was claimed in the plaint. In the written statement filed on behalf of the appellant, the suit was contested on various grounds; but for the purposes of this appeal, we need mention the pleas taken in only two paragraphs 8 and 112. In paragraph 8, it was pleaded that one Lala Shiva Charan, a partner of the respondent firm, had come with a Munim in the month of Agahan last and accounts were fully explained to him as worked out up to Kartik Sudi 15, Sambat 2007. In that statement of account, a sum of Rs. 120,677-124-3 was found due to the appellant from the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1967SC1541; [1967]65ITR656(SC); [1967]3SCR864
Ramaswami, J.1. This appeal is brought by special leave from the Judgment of the Mysore High Court dated March 20, 1962 dismissing writ petition No. 109 of 1960. The appellants had prayed therein for the grant of writ for quashing a notice dated January 16, 1960 issued by the respondent under s. 15 of the Excess Profit Tax Act 1940 (Act XV of 1940), hereinafter called the 'Act' calling upon the appellants to submit a return of the standard profit and the profits actually made during the chargable accounting period from October 30, 1943 to October 30, 1944 on the ground that the profits had been under assessed. 2. The appellants carried on a business constituting themselves into a partnership called ' Guduthur Thimmappa & Brothers in 1934. On the date of commencement of the business the Partners were G. Thimmappa, G. Ekambarppa and G. Padmmabhan each of the partners representing their respective joint families. The business of the firm was in Bellary town and the partners of the firm we...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1967SC1831; (1968)70BOMLR146; 1968MHLJ239(SC); [1967]3SCR855; [1968]21STC10(SC)
Ramaswami J. 1. This appeal is brought by special leave, from the judgment of Bombay High Court dated December 17, 1962 in Letters Patent Appeal No. 29 of 1960. 2. Respondent No. 2 the firm of Chandmal Manmal was indebted to the 1st respondent Central Bank Of India Aurangabad branch. On March 11, 1955 the first respondent filed a suit being Civil Suit No. 28/1 of 1955 against the second respondent for recovering a sum of Rs. 14,541/-and odd in the Court of subordinate Judge at Aurangabad.. On the application of the first respondent an order for interim injunction was passed in respect of certain properties belonging to the second respondent. The Court had ordered the second respondent to furnish security for the amount of the decree which may be passed against the firm in the suit. On April 28, 1955 Jogilal Mulchang one of the partner of the second respondent furnished security by creating a charge on his immovable property which was a house at Aurangabad. After the security bond was f...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1967]66ITR692(SC); [1967]3SCR876
Ramaswami, J.1. This appeal is brought, by special leave, on behalf of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Hyderabad from the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court dated October 30, 1964 in case Referred No. 6 of 1963. 2. The respondent (hereinafter referred to as the 'assessee-company') is a private limited company owning a cinema house called 'Sree Rama Talkies', at Bobbili. It was being taxed on the profits made by exhibition of films therein. At a meeting of its Board of Directors held on September 9, 1955, it was resolved that the managing director, the Raja of Bobbili may be authorised to negotiate with the Zamindar of Chikkavaram or his nominee for the sale of the entire concern with all its equipment and machinery, fittings, etc. for a consideration of Rs. 1,20,000/-. An agreement was concluded to effect a sale and this was confirmed by the assessee-company at an extra-ordinary general body meeting on October 4, 1955. Pursuant thereto, a deed called the 'exchange deed' was brou...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1967SC1550; 1967CriLJ1398; [1967]3SCR871
Vaidialingam, J. 1. In this appeal, by special leave on behalf of the State of Andhra Pradesh, the appellant herein, Mr. P. Ram Reddy, learned counsel, challenges the order dated January 17, 1964, of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, setting aside the conviction of the respondents, for an offence under S. 4(1)(a), of the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Prohibition Act, 1937 (Act X of 1937), hereinafter called the Act. 2. According to the prosecution, the respondents were found transporting, in a bullock cart, on the early morning of June 10, 1962, fifty gallons of arrack. It is the case of the prosecution that the prohibition staff found, on the day in question, a bullock cart, driven by the first respondent, in which the fifty gallons of arrack were found in 13 tins. Accordingly, they were prosecuted for an offence under S. 4(1) (a), of the Act. All the respondents substantially denied, having committed the offence, with which they were charged. 3. The prosecution let in the evidence of the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1968SC158; 1968LabIC190; (1969)ILLJ509SC; [1967]3SCR848
Hidayatullah, J. 1. This is an appeal by the State of Uttar Pradesh against the judgment and order of the High Court of Allahabad, October 24, 1962, confirming in special appeal the decision of a learned Single Judge dated July 10, 1962. By that order the High Court has set aside the order of dismissal made by the State Government against the respondent C. S. Sharma on the ground that he did not have a fair enquiry before the Commissioner of sales tax when certain charges against him were inquired into. 2. The facts of the case are as follows. The respondent C. S. Sharma was appointed as a Sales Tax Officer in January 1949 and was transferred on April 1, 1950 to Hathras where he remained till the end of September 1952. An enquiry was made with reference to certain allegations against him during his period of stay at Hathras. On October 3, 1952, he was transferred to Lakhampur Kheri and was ordered not to visit Hathras until allowed by the authorities. It appears that in November 1952. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1968SC162; [1967]66ITR680(SC); [1967]3SCR833
Sikri, J. 1. On January 24, 1963, the Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal, sent the following notice to Smt. Kalawati Harlalka, appellant before us, hereinafter referred to as the assessee : 'Sub : Income-tax assessment of 1952-53 to 1960-61. Assessments erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue-Revision of assessments under Section 33B of the Indian Income-tax Act 1922 proposal for-Notice regarding. On calling for and examining the records of your case for the assessment years 1952-53, 1953-54, 1954-55, 1956-57, 1957-58, 1958-59, 1959-60 and 1960-61 and other connected records, I consider that the orders of assessment passed by the Income-tax Officer 'D' Ward, Howrah, on 7th February, 1961, are erroneous in so far as they are prejudicial to the interests of revenue for the following reasons amongst others. 2. Enquiries made have revealed that no business as alleged was carried on from the address declared in the returns. Also the said Income-tax Officer was not justifi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1968]67ITR84(SC)
Sikri J.1. This appeal by certificate of fitness granted by the High Court is directed against the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court at Calcutta, affirming the judgment of the single judge. This appeal was heard together in this court along with Civil Appeal No. 1421 of 1966 (Kalawati Devi Harlalka v. Commissioner of Income-tax ) in which we have just delivered judgment, and apart from the questions involved in that case, the only additional point raised before us in this appeal is that no fair and reasonable opportunity was given to the appellant, Rampyari Devi Saraogi, hereinafter referred to as the assessee, by the Commissioner of Income-tax who passed the order dated March 15, 1963, under section 33B of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. Following our judgment in Kalawati Devi Harlalka v. Commissioner of Income-tax : [1967]66ITR680(SC) we hold that the Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal, Calcutta, had jurisdiction under section 33B of the Income-tax Act, 1922, to ...
Tag this Judgment!