LexLords NRI Legal Services Companies House By NRI Legal Services LexLords

NRI legal services https://lexlords.com/maintenance/. and unless there exists a difference in the constitution of the Recorder's Court at Sierre Leone the same power must be conceded to be inherent in that court. But even such grounds would be available only in cases involving complex questions of facts or law. In this particular case it is not clear whether any of the creditors except the Unao Commercial Bank had made a claim under section 10. It is also -not clear whether any decree under section 14 has been passed in favour of any of the creditors.

It is unnecessary to dwell on, this point at any great length in view of the circumstance that the decision in 'Commissioner of Income-tax v. Glasgow Expanded Metal Co. 911), Inland Revenue commissioners V. It is submitted that the original landowners in the instant case executed the general power of attorney in favour of Mr. The next objection to the conclusion arrived at by me is that police power of depriving a person of his property is amply provided for in article 31 (5) (b) and it is not necessary to read it into article 31 (1).

The learned senior counsel further questions the locus standi of the appellants in filing the first batch and second batch of appeals. Hodgkinson (Salford) Ltd. (ii) The only valid ground for claiming that the disciplinary proceedings may be stated would be to ensure that the defence of the employee in the criminal case may not be prejudiced. It is further submitted that the preliminary notification was issued under Section 4(1) of the L. Partial exemption was granted under the said notification at the rate of 50%/75% on the basis of increase in the percentage of the entire inter-State sales and decrease in percentage of stock transfers but the benefit under the said notification was not available on levy cement.

1986 allowing partial exemptions from the sales tax payable in respect of inter-State sales in the manner and subject to the conditions mentioned therein. It is submitted that within a few days, Mr. 573), Commissioners of Inland Revenue v. In view of these provisions it seems difficult to hold that the technical and 515 strict rules as to impleading of parties can have appli- cation to proceedings under section 11 of the U.

24 and 25 of the industrial Disputes (Appellate Tribunal) Act, 1950, even though the appeal is not a valid or competent one. 1985 entered into between the respondent-Society and M/s. It is thus, contended that since the alleged sale of lands in favour of some of the appellants by Mr. It is submitted that the agreement dated 12. XXI of 1947) came into force on the 11th April, 1947, having taken 28 206 the place of the Excess Profits Tax Act which was repealed on the 30th March, 1946.

1988, and the final notification issued under Section 6(1) of the L. Rangarajan to get the lands in question acquired. The respondents filed the writ petition in 1992 claiming that they were appointed originally in a department of PEPSU described as PEPSU Roadways, between January 1955 and September 1956. 1986 except for the assessment year 1995-96 and 1996-97 as no claims were made by the appellants being not eligible. we are of opinion that it is a court of record and that the law must be considered the same there as in this country.

It is not in dispute that in the PEPSU Roadways the respondents appointment was only on temporary basis. This Act, as is we] I known, was designed to assess large profits made by companies carrying on business during the boom years of the war. British American Tobacco Co. Srinivasa Enterprises stipulates the respondent- Society to pay consideration to Mr. Rangarajan sold the lands in question in favour of his daughter, son and son in law, who are the appellants in first batch of appeals.

Commissioners of Inland Revenue (12 Tax Cas. Rangarajan for getting the layout plan approved, costs of the entire lands purchased, execution of layout work etc. (1), has been dissented from and for good reasons, in subsequent cases. From the assessment year 1989-90 to 1997-98 the appellant had been granted benefit of partial exemption under the notification dated 06. Western India NRI legal services - my site, Life Insurance Co. 1989 were challenged by the respondent-original landowners by way of Writ Petitions before the High Court of Karnataka, wherein the learned single judge, by way of common judgment and order dated 12.

This argument, however, overlooks the fact that in order that the possession of the servant or agent may be juridically regarded as the possession of the master or principal, the servant or agent must be obedient to, and amenable to the directions of, the master or principal. 167), Commissioner of Income-tax v. The Business Profits Tax Act (No. It is contended that NRI legal services (my site) the purported sale transactions in respect of lands covered in the acquisition notifications is illegal as the same is nothing but fraud played by the said middleman on the original land owners and the society with a mala fide intention to deprive the landowners of their constitutional rights, thereby deceiving not only the original landowners, but also the respondent-Society.

It was revived, as it were, after a year in the shape of the present Act, though in a modified form. Section 4 Which is the charging section, so far as it is material for our purposes, permits the levying on the amount of the "taxable profits" during any "chargeable accounting period", a tax called the "business profits tax" which shall be equal to sixteen and two-thirds per cent of the taxable profits.

Bipin, Silk Mills Ltd. 687 power and control of the Central Government and the normal function of the company as a corporate body came to an end. A strike during the pendency of an appeal would be an illegal strike under ss. 344) and Commissioners of -Inland Revenue v. An inquiry for the determination of the quantum of the debts of the landlord can only be made after third party claims have been settled under the provisions of section 11(2). "In this country every court of record is the sole and exclusive judge of what amounts to a contempt of court.

Justice Das on this part of the case said as follows :- "It is, however, urged by the learned Attorney-General that the mills and all other assets now in the possession and custody of the new directors who are only servants or agents of the said company are, in the eye of the law, in the possession and custody of the company and have not really been taken possession of by the State. 1996 quashed the land acquisition proceedings.