Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1972SC319; 1972LabIC177; (1971)IILLJ479SC; (1971)2SCC658; [1972]1SCR373
P. Jaganmohan Reddy, J.1. These three Appeals are by the Workmen of the three Respondent Companies respectively-Civil Appeal No. 1239 of 1966 is against Greaves Cotton & Co. Ltd., Civil Appeal No. 1240 of 1966 is against Greaves Cotton & Crompton Parkinson Pvt. Ltd., (later amalgamated in 1966 and a new Company formed as Crompton Greaves Ltd.) and Civil Appeal No. 1241 of 1966 is against Kenyon Greaves Pvt. Ltd.2. On the 29th April 1958 a charter of demands was presented by the Workmen through their Trade Union Greaves Cotton and Allied Companies Employees Union to the Respondents in the above three Appeals and to Ruston & Hornby India Pvt. Ltd. These demands were in respect of the wage scale, dearness allowance, leave gratuity etc. After the conciliation proceedings under Sub-section (4) of Section 12 of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 (hereinafter called the 'Act') had failed, the disputes in respect of the aforesaid matters were ultimately referred by the Maharashtra Government to ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC2444; [1972]83ITR86(SC); [1972]1SCR357
A.K. Grover, J.1. In these appeals this Court by an order dated January 21, 1971 directed the Income tax Appellate Tribunal to submit a supplementary statement of the case on the question whether the proceedings under Section 10-A were started in the course of assessment or reassessment proceedings commenced under Section 15 of the Excess Profits Tax Act 1940, hereinafter called the 'Act'.2. The facts set out in the supplementary statement of the case may be recapitulated. M/s. Gurbux Rai Harbux Rai hereinafter referred to as the 'assessee' is a registered firm carrying on business in piece goods. During the chargeable accounting period July 4, 1943 to June 21, 1944 and June 22, 1944 to July 10, 1945 Gurbux Rai and Harbux Rai (each representing his joint family) were the two partners of the assessee with equal shares. In the proceedings for assessment of tax under the Act for the above two chargeable accounting periods the assessee informed the Tax Officer that the joint family of Gurb...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1972SC801; (1971)3SCC602; [1972]1SCR351; 1971(III)LC834(SC)
S.M. Sikri, C.J.1. Civil Appeal No. 1021 of 1971, by special leave is directed against the judgment of the Bombay High Court, dated February 16, 1970, dismissing First Appeal No. 152 of 1970, summarily. The judgment of the High Court reads:No appeal lies.Even on merits we do not find any substance.Dismissed.2. This First Appeal was purported to be filed under Sub-section (9) of Section 32 of the State Financial Corporation Act (63 of 1951)-hereinafter referred to as the Act-from the judgment and order dated January 16, 1970, passed by Gopal U. Rijhsinghani, Joint Judge, Thana, in Miscellaneous Application No. 111 of 1969. Two points arise in this appeal : (1) Whether an appeal lies to the High Court under Section 32(9) of the Act (2) if the appeal lay, was it a case for a summary dismissal 3. In order to appreciate these points it is necessary to set out a few facts. One of the appellants, Asnew Drums Private Ltd., hereinafter referred to as the appellant company, made an application t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1972SC156; [1971]82ITR372(SC); (1971)3SCC377; [1972]1SCR368
A.N. Grover, J.1. These appeals by certificate from a judgment of the Calcutta High Court arise out of Income Tax References in which the main point involved was whether the assessee company could be regarded as one in which the public are substantially interested within the meaning of the Explanation in Section 23A of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922, hereinafter called the 'Act'.2. The appeals relate to the assessment years 1952-53 and 1954-55. The assessee is a public company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1913. Article 37 of its Articles of Association provided as follows:The Directors may at any time in their absolute and uncontrolled discretion and without assigning any reason decline to register any proposed transfer of shares.3. The Income Tax Officer held that the assessee was a company in which the public were not substantially interested within the meaning of the Explanation in Section 23A of the Act. Accordingly he applied the provisions of that section. The as...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1972SC51; (1971)2SCC650; [1972]1SCR346; [1971]28STC599(SC)
K.S. Hegde, J.1. In these appeals by certificate a common question of law arises for decision viz., on the facts and circumstances of these cases what is the point of levy of purchase tax in respect of certain transactions relating to purchase of groundnut or groundnut kernel by the assessees appellants under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1956 (in brief 'the Act') 2. The Commercial Tax Officer came to the conclusion that a critical event took place when the assessees purchased the groundnut with which we are concerned in these appeals. In appeal the Assistant Commissioner upheld the order of the Commercial Tax Officer. On a further appeal by the assessees, the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal disagreeing with the conclusion reached by the Commercial Tax Officer as well as the Assistant Commissioner came to the conclusion that the turnovers relating to the purchases of groundnut in question became eligible to tax either when the groundnut purchased was crushed by the millers or ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1972SC283; 1972CriLJ233; (1972)4SCC773; 1971(III)LC830(SC)
I.D. Dua, J.1. Five persons were tried in the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, First Court, Monghyr for charges Under Sections 395, 307 and 398, I.P.C. All of them were convicted Under Section 395, IPC and acquitted of the charge Under Section 398, IPC. Accused, Akal Yadav, was in addition convicted Under Section 307, IPC and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life under each count. The other accused persons were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years each Under Section 395, IPC.2. On appeal the High Court set aside the convictions of Akal Yadav, Anandi Yadav and Ashique Mian and allowing their appeals acquitted them. The convictions and sentences of Sheikh Habib alias 'Tabarak, the appellant in this Court and of Sheikh Quddua alias K.hudwa were maintained Sheikh Hasib alias Tabarak alone has appealed to this Court with Special leave under Article 136 of the Constitution.3. According to the prosecution case on January 28, 1963 at about 7.45 p.m....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1971]82ITR892(SC)
K.S. Hegde J.1. In this appeal by special leave the department-appellant prays that this Court may be pleased to direct the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay Bench 'B', to state a case and submit the three questions of law set out in the special leave application. But, at the time of hearing, Mr. S. T. Desai, learned Counsel for the department, informed us that he is pressing the appeal only in respect of one question of law and that question is :Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was competent to rectify its order dated 29th April, 1966, in respect of the assessment year 1960-61, in regard to the sum of Rs. 1,65,718, being the amount paid by the assessee as consultation fees ?2. We may mention at this stage that this is the only question the department asked the Tribunal to submit to the High Court and that is also the question that it wanted the High Court to call upon the Tribunal to submit to it after stating a case.3. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1972SC161; (1973)3SCC602; [1972]1SCR334; 1971(III)LC822(SC)
A.N. Ray, J.1. This appeal is by certificate against the judgment dated 6 November/6 December, 1962 of the Bombay High Court dismissing the appellants' suit filed on 14 September, 1959 against the respondents, inter alia, for possession of suit property.2. By an indenture of lease dated 16 March, 1944 the respondents became lessees of the appellants for a period of 5 years from 1 March 1943 in respect of the agricultural lands belonging to Jivanji Jamasji Mistry's Adarian Charities. The appellants terminated the tenancy of the respondents by notice to quit dated 25 October, 1955. The notice to quit was effective on the expiry of 31 March, 1957. The appellants without prejudice to the October, 1955 notice gave another notice to quit dated 10 June, 1958 to deliver possession within 7 days.3. The respondents contended that they were protected tenants under the Bombay Tenancy Acts 1939 and 1948 and therefore, the appellants would not be entitled to possession.4. The trial Court held that a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1971]82ITR888(SC)
K.S. Hegde, J.1. These appeals by certificate raise a common question of law, namely, whether the assessees (respondents in these appeals) have been properly served before action was taken under Section 33B of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, which will be hereinafter referred to as ' the Act '.2. The assessment year with which we are concerned in these appeals are 1959-60, 1960-61 and 1961-62. The assessment for those assessment years was completed by the Income-tax Officer on November 28, 1961. There-after, the Commissioner of Income-tax initiated proceedings under Section 33B and issued notices to the assessees on October 19, 1963. Notices were issued by registered post. They were also entrusted to the income-tax inspector for personal service. It is conceded that the notices sent to the assessees by registered post were served long after the Commissioner passed his orders under Section 33B. He passed those orders on November 2, 1963, and the notices sent by registered post were onl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1972)4SCC379
K.S. HEGDE, J.— 1. These appeals by certificate raise a common question of law namely whether the assessees (respondents in these appeals) have been properly served before action was taken under Section 33-B of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922 which will be hereinafter referred to as “the Act”. 2. The assessment years with which we are concerned in these appeals are 1959-60, 1060-61 and 1961-62. The assessment for those assessment years was completed by the Income Tax Officer on November 28, 1961. Thereafter the Commissioner of Income Tax initiated proceedings under Section 33-B and issued notices to the assessees on October 19, 1963. Notices were issued by registered post. They were also entrusted to the Income Tax Inspector for personal service. It is conceded that the notices sent to the assessees by registered post were served long after the Commissioner passed his orders under Section 33-B. He passed those orders on November 2, 1963 and the notices sent by r...
Tag this Judgment!