Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1975SC481a; [1975]98ITR205(SC); (1975)3SCC435; [1975]2SCR881
A.C. Gupta, J.1. These two appeals by special leave arise out of two references, one under Section 66(1) of the Income-Tax Act, 1922, and the other under Section 256(1) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. The two appeals relate respectively to assessment years 1961-62 and 1962-63. The assessee in both cases is a private limited company, engaged in transport business and owns a fleet of lorries and buses. In both appeals the appellant is the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Central), Madras. In respect of the assessment year 1961-62, the Tribunal allowed the claim of the assessee for development rebate on the new diesel engines installed by the assessee in its Vehicles. the Tribunal however dismissed a similar claim made by the assessee in the assessment year 1962-63 when the Income-Tax Act, 1961 had come into force. Two questions were referred to the High Court, one in each of these two cases; both questions involve similar query though they, are framed somewhat differently because of the contrary...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1975SC171; [1975(30)FLR115]; (1975)ILLJ163SC; 1975MhLJ332(SC); (1975)3SCC613; [1975]2SCR873; 1975(7)LC22(SC)
R.S. Sarkaria, J.1. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment, dated August 4, 1971, of the Madhya Pradesh High Court whereby the appellants Writ Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution was dismissed.2. The appellant is the Jhagrakhan Collieries (P) Ltd., a Company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act. The Company owns three collieries in Jhagrakhan in Surguja District of Madhya Pradesh These collieries employ over 4,200 workmen. At the relevant time there were three Trade Unions functioning at the collieries, namely, (1) Madhya Pradesh Koyla Mazdoor Panchayat (for short, the 'Panchayat'); (2) Azad Koyla Shramik Sabha (for short, the 'Sabha'): (3) Madhya Pradesh Colliery Workers' Federation (for short, the 'Federation')3. At the material time, the Panchayat, according to the allegations of the Company, had about 75 per cent of the workers on its rolls. This Union conducted a complete strike for 57 days in the months of March and April 1968 at ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1975SC360; (1975)1SCC29; [1975]2SCR861
A.N. Ray, C.J.1. The principal question in these civil appeals and writ petitions is whether it is permissible for the State Government to auction licences for carrying on the business of selling foreign liquor Which is neither manufactured nor imported by the State Government. Some of these appeals relate to State of Madhya Pradesh and others relate to State of Kerala.2. The Madhya Pradesh appeals are governed by the Central Provinces and Berar Excise Act 1915 which became applicable to Madhya Pradesh as the Central Provinces Excise Act, 1915. This will be referred to as the Madhya Pradesh Act.3. The Kerala Appeals are governed by the Abkari Act (Act No. I 1700). This will be referred to as the Abkari Act.4. Prior to 1 April, 1964 licences for sale of foreign liquor in Madhya Pradesh were granted by the excise authorities under the fee per bottle system. In 1964-65 the State decided that licences for foreign liquor would be disposed of by public auction to the highest bidder. The appe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1975SC367; 1975CriLJ419; (1975)3SCC736; [1975]2SCR854
P.N. Bhagwati, J.1. This is yet another instance where this Court is reluctantly compelled to set free from detention a person believed to be an economic offender. We had occasion to point out in an earlier Judgment Dwarika Prasad Sahu v. State of Bihar, W.P. 346 of 1974, decided on 12-11-1974 that economic offenders are a menace to the society and it is necessary in the interest of the economic well being of the community to mercilessly stamp out such pernicious, anti-social and highly reprehensible activities as boarding, black-marketing and profiteering which are causing havoc to the economy of the country and inflicting untold hardships on the common man and the Court would, therefore, naturally be loath to interfere with 'an order of detention which is calculated to put an economic offender out of action by way of social defence. But here in the present case the attempt to curb this social menace has been frustrated and set at naught by want of due care, promptness and attention o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1975SC229a; (1975)3SCC321; 1975(7)LC27(SC)
N.L. Untawalia, J.1. In this petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has prayed for a writ of habeas corpus for directing his release from the allegedly unlawful custody in jail. The facts of this case are identical to those of Writ Petition No. 332 of 1974, the judgment of which has been delivered today. The dates of the order of detention and the arrest of the detenus and the grounds served in both the cases are identical. Each of them along with his associates is said to have been carrying 11 bundles of Telegraph Copper Wires weighing 300 kgs in a bullock cart on 13-5-1972. The reasons of detention of the petitioner in this case are the same as in the other case. It is plain that this Writ Petition has also got to fail in view of the judgment in the other case.2. But there is one special point which was urged by Mr. Pramod Swarup, learned Counsel for the petitioner who assisted the Court as Amicus Curiae. Counsel submitted that in the First Information ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1975SC168; 1975CriLJ275; (1975)3SCC292; 1975(7)LC67(SC)
N.L. Untawalia, J.1. The sole petitioner in this petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India was ordered to be detained by the District Magistrate of West Dinajpur, West Bengal, in exercise of his powers under Sub-section (1) read with Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971. The District Magistrate felt satisfied that it was necessary to detain the petitioner with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies and services essential to the community. The petitioner has filed this petition from Jail for releasing him from Jail custody by grant of a writ of habeas corpus. The order of detention was made against the petitioner on 20-6 1972 in pursuance of which he was arrested and put in poison on 22- 6-1972. The grounds of detention were also served upon the detenu on 22-6-1972 and they read as follows :You are being detained in pursuance of a detention order made in exercise of the power co...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1975SC550; (1975)2SCC81; [1975]2SCR832
P.N. Bhagwati, J.1. This is a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under Article 32 of the Constitution challenging the validity of the detention of the petitioner under an order of detention dated 3rd November, 1973 passed by the District Magistrate, Malda under Sub-section (1) read with Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971. The questions raised in this petition are of importance as they effect the fundamental right of personal liberty which is one of the most cherished fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution. It is necessary to state the facts giving rise to this petition in so far as they are material to a proper understanding of the important issues involved in this petition.2. The District Magistrate, Malda passed an order of detention dated 3rd November, 1973 under Sub-section (1) read with Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Act directing that the petitioner be detained on the ground that It was necessary so to do 'with a view ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1975SC1484; (1975)3SCC804; 1975(7)LC9(SC)
R.S. Sarkaria, J 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment, dated January 2, 1973, of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, declaring void the election of the appellant Bhagat Ram @ Bhagtu to the Haryana State Assembly. The material facts are these :2. Election to the Haryana State Legislature took place in March, 1972. Bhatu Ram Appellant, Bhagat Ram respondent and three others contested the election as rival candidates from Kalayat Constituency (Reserved). The result was announced on March 12, 1972. Appellant secured 17032 votes as against 15812 polled by Bhagat Ram, respondent herein. Appellant was declared elected.3. Bhagat Ram respondent filed an election petition under the Repre- sentation of the Peoples Act, 1951 (hereinafter called the Act) challenging the election of the appellant on three grounds Of them, only these two are relevant for the purpose of this appeal; (1) The returned candidate and his workers with his consent published a statement of fact (poster, Exh P.W....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1975SC236; (1975)3SCC343; [1975]2SCR823
Y.V. Chandrachud, J.1. This appeal by special leave is directed against a judgment dated January 7, 1970 of the Delhi High Court (Himachal Bench, Simla). This appellant Harnam Singh died during the pendency of the appeal, this Court by an order dated February 26, 1973 allowed his widow to be substituted in his place as his legal representative.2. There is nothing new in the story of bribe taking which forms the theme of this appeal, except perhaps the way the High Court heard the story and drew a moral. In September, 1967 Harnam Singh was working as a Patwari in Halqa Pali. On the 19th of that month Nitya Nand asked for copies of the revenue record. Harnam Singh said that the copies will not be supplied unless a hush-payment of Rs. 30 was made. Nitya Nand borrowed Rs. 30 from a friend Chet Ram and on the 20th he lodged his complaint with the Anti-Corruption Department. Sub Inspector Kewal Ram obtained permission from a Mandi Magistrate to investigate the offence and laid the trap. The ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1975SC425; (1975)3SCC798; [1975]2SCR801; 1975(7)LC18(SC)
A. Alagiriswami, J.1. In the election held to the Meghalaya Legislative Assembly from Songsak Constituency on 9th March 1972 the appellant was declared elected having received 819 votes as against 176 received by the 1st respondent and 98 votes received by the 2nd respondent. The appellant was a candidate set up by the All Party Hills Leaders Conference and the 1st respondent was supported by the Hill State People's Democratic Party (H.S.P.D.P.), though that party was not a recognised party. The symbol allotted to the 1st respondent by the Election Commission was 'two leaves'. The 1st respondent filed an election petition questioning the election of the appellant on the ground that he was guilty of a corrupt practice falling under Section 123(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. That election petition having been allowed and appellant's election set aside by the High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Manipur and Tripura this appeal has been filed against the decision of...
Tag this Judgment!