Skip to content


Search Results Judgments > Act:CUSTOMS ACT 1962 Section 24 Year:1965

Dec 13 1965

States of Orissa Vs. Utkal Distributors (P) Ltd.

  • Decided on : 13-Dec-1965

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1966SC1170; [1966]3SCR55; [1966]17STC320(SC)

... Tax, if any,incurred on the sale to the Customer.' 5. This Notification was issued under the Iron and Steel Control Order,1956, which order was passed in exercise of the powers conferred by s. 3 of theEssential Commodities Act, 1955. Section 2 of the Control Order defined'Controlled Stockholder' as ... 24(1) of the Orissa ales Tax Act, 1947. The following questions were referred : '1. Whether in the facts and circumstance of the case, the Tribunal is right in holding that the Central Sales Tax Paid by the opposite party at its purchase point and charged on to its customers ... iron material sold by him to his customers. Hewas not entitled to charge anything higher. In addition to that price he waspermitted to charge central sales tax which he was subsequently required tocredit to Government. Section 9 (A) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act says that anyamount collected by a ... customers at the time of sale of iron andsteel goods to them could not be treated as sale price of goods and could notbe included in the taxable turnover. The Commissioner of Sales Tax beingdissatisfied with the order of the Tribunal sought a reference to the HighCourt and the Tribunal referred the case under s. 24(1) of the Act ... Government Treasury. It is true that by its ownforce this section would apply only to Orissa Sales Tax Act. But by virtue ofsub-section (2) of section 9 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1957 (nowsub-section (3) in consequence of the amending Act of 1958) it would also applyto the Central Sales Tax ...

Dec 09 1965

Seth Durgaprasad etc. Vs. H.R. Gomes

  • Decided on : 09-Dec-1965

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 1983(13)ELT1501(SC)

... 24, 1963 issued by the Assistant Collector of Customs, Raipur to the Superintendent of Central Excise at Nagpur under s. 105 of the Customs Act which reads as follows : 'Shri H. R. Gomes, Superintendent (Prev.) H. Qrs., Central Excise, Nagpur. Whereas information has been laid before me of the suspected commission of the offence under section 11 read with section 111 of the Customs Act 1962 (52 of 1962 ... Sections 105 and 110 of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter called the 'Customs Act'). 2. Civil Appeal No. 678 of 1965 : This appeal arises out of Special Civil Application no. 490 of 1963 which relates to the search and seizure of the premises of Sri Durga Prasad on August 19, 1963 and August 20, 1963. The authorisation was granted by the 1st respondent - Assistant Collector of Customs ... 1963. In addition, I also found documents indicating that the petitioner had resorted to dealings constituting breach of the Customs Regulations and the Regulations under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act punishable under the Sea Customs Act, 1878 and/or the Customs Act, 1962., The documents, note-books and files which I came across also indicated that the petitioner had resorted to ... The State of Punjab [1962] 1 S.C.R. 364.. In that case, the question debated was whether the presumption under s. 178A of the Sea Customs Act, 1878 - Section 178 would arise in respect of an article which was originally seized by the police and handed over to the authorities of the Customs Department and was actually ...

Oct 18 1965

Vasnatal Ranchhoddas Patel and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors.

  • Decided on : 18-Oct-1965

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1967Bom138; (1966)68BOMLR223; 1967CriLJ715

... as a seizure under section 178, which corresponds to section 110 of the new Customs Act, 1962. The Supreme Court further held that the transfer of the possession of the goods to the Customs Authorities by virtue of the provisions contained in section 180 of the Sea Customs Act did not constitute a fresh seizure or a seizure within the meaning of section 178-A of the Act so as to ... investigation in regard to these diamonds. A summons under section 108 of the Customs Act was served upon the appellant and his statement was also recorded.(2) On the following day, 24th July, 1964, the safe was opened. It was found to contain seven packets of diamonds and currency notes of the value of Rs. 24,055. All these articles were seized by the ... seize is conferred by the Act and that in the context it could be referred to as a seizure under section 178, which corresponds to section 110 of the new Customs Act, 1962. The Supreme Court further held that the transfer of the possession of the goods to the Customs Authorities by virtue of the provisions contained in section 180 of the Sea Customs Act did not constitute a fresh ... the new Customs Act, 1962. The Supreme Court further held that the transfer of the possession of the goods to the Customs Authorities by virtue of the provisions contained in section 180 of the Sea Customs Act did not constitute a fresh seizure or a seizure within the meaning of section 178-A of the Act so as to shift the burden of proof on the appellants. Under section 178 ...

Mar 29 1965

The Union Bank of India Ltd. Vs. M. Pachappa

  • Decided on : 29-Mar-1965

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1967)69BOMLR782

... the Customs authorities.4. In the meantime, the Customs authorities had sent on October 3, 1962, a show cause memorandum to the Paramount Steel Industries, Varanasi, calling upon the latter to show cause why penal action should not be taken against them under Section 167(5) of the Sea Customs Act, 1878, read with Section 3(2) of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, ... that the order was passed behind its back and without giving it any hearing. ;6. Respondent No. 1, the Additional Collector of Customs, stated in his affidavit in reply that on or about July 24, 1962, the Bombay Customs House had received information that the said import licence of Messrs. Paramount Steel Industries, Varanasi, was 'fraudulently obtained'. Respondent No. ... Customs authorities had sent on October 3, 1962, a show cause memorandum to the Paramount Steel Industries, Varanasi, calling upon the latter to show cause why penal action should not be taken against them under Section 167(5) of the Sea Customs Act, 1878, read with Section 3(2) of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947. It was stated in the memorandum that the Customs ... customers of the Bank. No reply to this letter was sent by the Customs authorities.4. In the meantime, the Customs authorities had sent on October 3, 1962, a show cause memorandum to the Paramount Steel Industries, Varanasi, calling upon the latter to show cause why penal action should not be taken against them under Section 167(5) of the Sea Customs Act, 1878, read with Section ...

Sep 28 1965

A.S. Bava Vs. Collector of Customs and Ors.

  • Decided on : 28-Sep-1965

Court : Kerala

Reported in : AIR1966Ker195

... is Section 189 of the Sea Customs Act, 1878, and not Section 129 of the Customs Act, 1962. 10. It is to be noticed that Section 35 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 provides for appeals in unqualified terms without any limitation or requirement of deposit of duty prior to, or during the pendency of the appeal Section 189 of the Sea Customs Act, 1878 and Section 129 of the Customs Act, 1962, ... Act.'' 16. The question before us is not whether a right of appeal conferred in unqualified terms by Section 35 of the Central Excises and Salt Act can be alienated by a statutory rule such as Rule 215 above. We express no opinion on the point. We may observe that rule 215 was deleted by notification of the Government of India dated 24 ... /59 to be referred to, later. The Sea Customs Act, 1878, was repealed by Customs Act 1962, and there is no controversy before us that in view of the said repeal reference to the repealed Act, in Section 12 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, should be understood as reference to the Customs Act of 1969.6. The Customs Act of 1962 came into force on 1-2-1968, and ... Customs Act 1878 (or the Customs Act, 1962) regarding the procedure relating to appeals and the provision for deposit of duly before filing the appeal, is not a matter relating to procedure: (2) that the provision regarding the deposit of duty, applicable if at all, is Section 189 of the Sea Customs Act, 1878, and not Section 129 of the Customs Act, 1962. 10. It is to be noticed that Section ...

Mar 19 1965

Ishwara Bhau Sawant Vs. Pandurang Vasudeo Karmarkar

  • Decided on : 19-Mar-1965

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1965)67BOMLR558; 1965MhLJ893

... Act was repealed by the Bombay Agricultural Debtors Relief Act, 1947. This new Act came into force on May 27, 1947, about six months after Sections 2A and 3A of the Tenancy Act of 1939 had been inserted in that Act. The provisions of Section 24 of the Agricultural Debtors Relief Act of 1947 are similar to those of Section 45 of the old Act. Clause (v) in Sub-section (2) of Section ... the Bombay Agricultural Debtors Belief Act. The first Agricultural Debtors Relief Act was enacted in 1939 about the same time when the Tenancy Act of 1939 was placed on the statute book. Section 45 of this Act provided that notwithstanding anything contained in any law, custom or contract, the Board ... usually be construed as being limited to the actual objects of the Act; See Maxwell on Interpretation of Statutes, 1962 edn., pp. 78-79. If, therefore, it is possible, we must so construe Section 2A as to avoid repugnancy and as not to make ineffective the general ... Supreme Court in Dahya Lala v. Rasul (1962) 65 Bom. L.R. 328., where it has been observed (p. 330) :.Nor has the contention that the expression 'mortgagee in possession' (in Clause (c) of Section 4 of the Act of 1948) includes a tenant from such a ... Section 2A of the Act of 1939, there is no reason why a mortgagee should not also be so held. There is, however, a clear distinction between the position of a mortgagee and that of a tenant brought on the land by the mortgagee. This has been pointed out by the Supreme Court in Dahya Lala v. Rasul (1962 ...

Jul 26 1965

V.V. Iyer Vs. Jasjit Singh

  • Decided on : 26-Jul-1965

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1972)74BOMLR77

... . Desai of date March 29, 1962, dismissing the appellants Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, wherein he had challenged the validity of the order dated May 25, 1960 made by the Collector of Customs, respondent (No. 1) hereto, imposing a penalty of Rs. 80,000 under the provisions of Section 167(8) of the Sea Customs Act against the firm of M ... Express Sprayers was arranged and seen in the godown of the firm at Chinchpokali at about 3 p.m. on September 24, 1958. At the demonstration, Mr. Iyer was present on behalf of the firm, and on behalf of the Customs Department were present - Mr. Lal, Assistant Collector, Shri Rangachari and Shri Patil of the Special Investigation Branch, and Shri Rekhi, the ... of the Sea Customs Act. It is not in dispute that the Customs authorities in deciding cases falling under Section 167 of the said Act are in duty bound to act in a quasi judicial manner. It has been held by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Sewpujanrai I. Ltd v. Collector of Customs : 1958CriLJ1355 , that the enquiry under Section 167(8) of the Sea Customs Act is a ... in contravention of the Imports Control Order, 1955, and the firm thereby committed offence under Section 167(8) of the Sea Customs Act, 1878. As the imported goods were not available for confiscation, the Collector imposed a personal penalty of Rs. 80,000 under Section 167(8) of the Sea Customs Act, and directed that the penalty should be paid forthwith. As regards the seized goods ...

Jun 18 1965

Thomas Vs. John D'sa Marian D'sa

  • Decided on : 18-Jun-1965

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : AIR1967Kant3; AIR1967Mys3

... barred by limitation as the same was filed about 22 years after the plaintiff completed 24 years of age. But, it is said that the suit is not barred by time in view of Section 10 of the Limitation Act. This section has not been relied on in the plaint All that is staled in the ... a deposit within the meaning of Article 60 of the Limitation Act. That article provides:Description of suitPeriod of limitationTime from which periodbegins to run.60 For money deposited underan agreement that it shall be payable on demand,including money of a customer in the hands of his banker so payable.Three YearsWhen the ... 24-1-1959, and therefore the suit is within time. Evidently at the time of the institution of the. suit reliance was only placed on Article 60 of the Limitation Act.5. Both the courts below have come to the conclusion that the facts of this case fall within the scope of Section 10 of Ihe Limitation Act That section ... by time in view of Section 10 of the Limitation Act. This section has not been relied on in the plaint All that is staled in the plaint was that the amount in question had been deposited in the hands of the defendant; a demand for the same was made on 24-1-1959, and therefore ... age of 24 years. Therefore, it is difficult to accept the contention of Sri P. Raghavendra Rao, the learned counsel for the respondent, that the facts of this case disclose a case of trust, much less an express trust. It is not denied by Sri Raghavendra Rao that Section 10 of the Limitation Act applies ...

Nov 05 1965

Commissioner of Income-tax, Uttar Pradesh Vs. Manmohan Das (Deceased)

  • Decided on : 05-Nov-1965

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1966SC798a; [1966]59ITR699(SC); [1966]2SCR531

... section 24(2) of the Income-tax Act, as it was not a business loss. The Income-tax officer has under section 24(3) to notify to the assessee the amount of loss as computed by him, if it is established in the course of assessment of the total income that the assessee has suffered loss of profits. Section 24 ... (Rupees three hundred and fifty) for travelling expenses.(3) The duties, liabilities and responsibilities of the treasurer to the bank shall be such as either by custom or contract usually devolve on a treasurer in the service of the bank including the duties, liabilities and responsibilities hereinafter mentioned and the treasurer ... same business, profession or vocation under section 24(2). If the remuneration was received by the assessee as a servant of the bank, and on that account has to be computed under section 7 of the Act, the right to set off the loss cannot be claimed under section 24(2). The fact that the ... remuneration received by him was not 'salaries' within the meaning of section 7 of the Income-tax Act. But that is not sufficient to conclude the matter in favour of the assessee. The benefit of section 24(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act may be availed of by the assessee only if the ... allow the assessee to carry forward the loss under section 24(2) of the Act ?'3. The High Court held that the remuneration received by the assessee from the Allahabad Bank was income liable to be taxed under section 10 of the Income-tax Act, and that the assessee could claim to set ...

Nov 12 1965

Abdul Hameed Khan Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Andhra Pradesh, Hyde ...

  • Decided on : 12-Nov-1965

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1967AP211; [1967]63ITR738(AP)

... down that under clause (xi) of Section 10 (2) of the Income-tax Act, a debt was only allowable when it was a debt, and arose out of and as an incident to the trade. Except in money-lending trade, debts can only be so described if they were due from customers for goods supplied or loans to ... Basith is a typographical error. The adjustment was made on 30-9-1955. The above is a true extract from the books.Sd/- A.K. Khan, 18-10-1962. (27) In view of this statement, it cannot be said that the assessee's books did not show that any money was lent to his daughter. The ... year the assessee had no money-lending business. On the other hand, it suggests that Tribunal was prepared to assume that the assessee had money-lending business. (24) Sri Kondaiah then contended that the assessee's books did not show that any money was lent to the daughter; in other words that the debt in ... to go beyond that, and address arguments not based on the facts stated therein. (3) The jurisdiction of the High Court under section 66 of the Act is advisory in character. and it does not act as an appellate authority. (4) Where the facts appearing on the record have all been narrated in the statement of the case ... or even before the Tribunal. Subject to the provisions of Section 31 (2) of the Act and rule 29 respectively, and that means that when the Tribunal has disposed of the matter and is preparing a statement of the case either under Section 66 (1) or under section 66 (2), there is no scope for any further or ...

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //