Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1972SC2576; 1973CriLJ39; 1973MHLJ2(SC); (1973)3SCC672
D.G. Palekar, J.1.This is an appeal by special leave from an Order of conviction and sentence passed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court reversing the order of acquittal recorded by the Court of Session, Raipur.2. The appellants were charged for the murder of Moujiram who was formerly the Malguzar of village Puran, Tahsil Baloda Bazar. At the time of the incident he was living with his wife in his Wada in the village, his children being away. The appellants are residents of village Puran and they had a dispute with Moujiraim over the waters of a natural stream flowing in the village. He had filed a suit in 1962 in the Court of the Civil Judge, Baloda Bazar, for a permanent injunction to restrain some 11 cultivators from diverting the water of the stream to their own lands. Some five or six of the accused were parties to the suit. The suit ended in favour of Moujiram and an appeal filed against that decision was pending in the District Court.3. Moujiram had extensive cultivation in the vil...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1972SC2267; 1972CriLJ1526; (1973)3SCC83; [1973]2SCR1
J.M. Shelat, Acting C.J. 1. The appellant was charged of having committed on April 24, 1970 the murder of a lady doctor, Dr. Vaidya, at Kulu. On May 4, 1970, he was arrested on the aforesaid allegation. On May 9, 1970, his advocate made an application before the Magistrate, Kulu Under Section 464 of the CrPC, 1898. The application stated that the advocate had interviewed the appellant in the judicial lock-up where he was detained and found him talking incoherently and showing symptoms of impairment of the cognitive faculties of mind and otherwise of an abnormal behavior. The applicant prayed that he should be removed to the mental hospital at Amritsar for ascertaining whether he was in a position to make his defence. Since there was no response to the said application, a similar application was again addressed to the Magistrate on June 3, 1970. To this application were annexed three medical certificates by Dr. B. N. Sur, Dr. Pathak and Dr. K. P. Singh respectively dated May 10, 1970, M...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC524; [1972]86ITR38(SC); (1973)3SCC30; [1973]1SCR1077
H.R. Khanna, J.1. This appeal on certificate granted by the Allahabad High Court is directed against the judgment of that court whereby it answered the following two questions referred to it under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the appellant and in favour of revenue :(1) Whether on the facts and on a true and proper interpretation of the agreement dated 31-7-1956, between the British India Corporation and the appellant company, the letters of Sri Kailash Nath Agarwal, the letters of Managing Directors, the sum of Rs. 43,333/ retained by the British India Corporation and adjusted by it to the credit of Sharma & Co. was the assessable income of the appellant company ?(2) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 43,333/- represented an expenditure under Section 10 ?2. The matter relates to the assessment year 1956-57. The appellant is a private limited company and Kailash Nath Agarwal is one of its di...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC1016a
K.S. Hegde, J.1. The principal question of law arising in these appeals by certificate is whether on the facts and in the circumstances of each of these cases the Department was right in applying Section 44-F read with Section 2(6-A)(c) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (to be hereinafter referred to as the Act). The Income-tax Officer, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal answered that question in favour of the Department but the High Court answered the same in favour of the assessee. As we are in agreement with the conclusion reached by the High Court, we do not think it necessary to examine the other questions arising in these appeals.2. For deciding the said question of law it is sufficient if we take up the facts of any one of these cases. For the sake of convenience we shall set out the facts in Civil Appeal No. 2348 of 1968. The assessee in that case is Vadilal Lallubhai. He is assessed as an individual. The relevant assessment year Is 1958...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1972]86ITR757(SC); (1973)3SCC67; [1973]1SCR1084
P. Jaganmohan Reddy, J.1. These two appeals are by certificate against the judgment of the High Court of Bombay answering four out of the five questions referred to it in favour of the assessee and one question in favour of the revenue.2. A partnership firm (hereinafter referred to as the firm) comprising of some of the members of the Sassoon family was carrying on business under the name and style of E. D. Sassoon & Co. for a number of years prior to 1920 at Bombay, Calcutta, Karachi, Hongkong, Shanghai, London, Manchester, Basra and the Persian Gulf. The business which it was carrying on was that of the bankers, commission agent, agents of joint stock companies, dealers in shares and securities, foreign exchange etc. In the accounting year 1919 the firm incurred net loss of Rs. 12,37,413-12-2 but in 1920 it seems to have made large profits mostly 'in London Exchange Account'. It however claimed depreciation in shares and securities amounting to Rs. 9,26,730-5-8 shown under the head d...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1972SC2488; 1972CriLJ1707; (1973)1SCC56; [1973]1SCR1050; 1973(5)LC302(SC)
J.M. Shelat, Acting C.J.1. This appeal, by special leave, is directed against the judgment and order of the High Court of Patna whereby the High Court set aside the order of acquittal passed by the Additional Sessions Judge and restored the order of conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Magistrate under . Sections 482 and 486 of the Penal Code.2. One Sheojanam Prasad (who died during the pendency of his appeal before the High Court) was at all material times the proprietor of a provisions store in Arrah. He claimed to have evolved a formula for manufacturing a scent to which he gave the name of 'BASANT BAHAR'. The scent, when put into market, soon became popular and in the course of time gathered custom. The scent used to be packed in cartoons and other receptacles which carried on them the picture of a pari ' (an angel) holding a bunch of flowers in her hands and an inscription 'BASANT BAHAR SCENT KHUSHBUON Ka Badahah' The cartoons and receptacles were of green colour and had on...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1972SC2544; 1973CriLJ29; (1973)3SCC246; 1973(5)LC276(SC)
Grover, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave from a judgment of the Allahabad High Court.2. Ram Narain and seven others were tried by the Sessions Judge, Barabanki, on charges under Sections 302/149, 325/149, 323/142 and 147, Indian Penal Code. They were all acquitted. The State preferred an appeal to the High Court. The High Court set aside the acquittal of Ram Narain, Jag Mohan, Hari Prasad and Ghasity and they were convicted under Section 302/34, 325/34, 323/34 and 147, IPC, and were sentenced to imprisonment for life, three years' rigorous imprisonment, one years rigorous imprisonment and one years rigorous imprisonment respectively, under the four counts. The acquittal of Sri Ram, Rahim Bux, Ram Saran and Ram Lakhan under Section 302/149 was upheld but each one of these persons was convicted under Section 325 and 323 read with Section 149 as also under Section 147 of the IPC. They were awarded the same sentences as the others on charges under these sections. The sentence in the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC520a; [1972]86ITR11(SC); (1972)4SCC37; [1973]1SCR1097
K.S. Hegde, J.1. This is an assessee's appeal by certificate under Section 66A(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (to be hereinafter referred to as the Act). The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. Calcutta 'B' Bench as per the directions given by the High Court in an application under s, 66(2) submitted the following question for ascertaining the opinion of the High Court.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the sum of Rs. 1,56;806/- was wholly and exclusively laid out for the purpose of business and as such allowable as a business expenditure. 2. The High Court has answered that question in the negative and in favour of the Revenue. The correctness of the decision of the high Court is challenged before us by the assessee.3. The question referred to the High Court for its opinion proceeds on the basis that the facts and circumstances of the case as found by the Tribunal are not in dispute but what is disputed is the legal affe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC1016; [1972]86ITR2(SC); (1973)3SCC17; [1973]1SCR1058
K.S. Hegde, J.1. The principal question of law arising in these appeals by certificate is whether on the facts and in the circumstances of each of these cases the Department was right in applying Section 44-F read with Section 2(6A)(c) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (to be hereinafter referred to as the Act). The Income-tax Officer, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal answered that question in favour of the Department but the High Court answered the same in favour of the assessee. As we are in agreement with the conclusion reached by the High Court, we do not think it necessary to examine the other questions arising in these appeals.2. For deciding the said question of law, it is sufficient if we take up the facts of any one of these cases. For the sake of convenience, we shall set out the facts in Civil Appeal No. 2348 of 1969. The assessee in that case is Vadilal Lallubhai. He is assessed as an individual. The relevant assessment year is 195...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC515; [1972]86ITR29(SC); (1973)3SCC43; [1973]1SCR1068
H.R. Khanna, J.1. This appeal on certificate granted by the Bombay High Court is directed against the judgment of that court whereby it answered the question referred to it under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in favour of the respondent assessee.2. The reference arose out of the assessment made upon the respondent firm for the assessment year 1951-52, the account year for which is the Samvat year 2006 (that is, October 22, 1949 to November 9, 1950). The respondent was carrying on business for several years in the past in timber under the name and style of Manna Ramji & Co. in Bhavani Peth Poona City. The business premises consisted of an office and six sheds used for storing wood and timber of all kinds. The respondent firm constructed the six sheds for the purpose of its business after taking the site thereof on a long lease. On May 19, 1944 the Collector of Poona requisitioned the premises of the respondent under the Defence of ...
Tag this Judgment!