Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: debentures companies act Sorted by: recent Court: kolkata Year: 1943 Page 1 of about 3 results (0.026 seconds)

Apr 13 1943 (PC)

K. Roy and Bros. Vs. Ramanath Das and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Apr-13-1943

Reported in : AIR1945Cal37

..... the property is required and there is nothing making it compulsory to give any further details of property, so that there is nothing in the registration under the companies act of these debentures which would inform any person exactly what the immovable property was that was charged. it should be remembered that under the provisions of section 109 a ..... 'a general description of the property charged' (i. e., what is required to be registered under the provisions of the companies act). i must mention here that there was no debenture trust deed accompanying the issue of these debentures. in the debenture deed itself the only reference to the property charged is its undertaking for all, its property whatsoever, and wheresoever present and ..... 500 and paid for them. with the money realised from the issue of these debentures the company paid for the machinery it had installed. the debentures were duly registered under section 109, companies act, but they were never registered under the provisions of the registration act (act 16) of 1908. the company after working for a time got into financial difficulties and a winding up order ..... , enquire at the local registry whether there were any charges created on the land. if registration under the companies act of debentures of floating charges is in bombay and is sufficient he would find nothing in the local registry under the registration act. he might, therefore, on searching and finding nothing lend the money only to discover later before the money .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 08 1943 (PC)

Lomax (inspector of Taxes) Vs. Peter Dixon and Son, Ltd.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Jul-08-1943

Reported in : [1944]12ITR1(Cal)

..... it because the security which he pays is capital. he pays it because the security which he is getting is expressed in terms of capital. such a company, however, may prefer to issue its debentures at per but at a lower rate of interest. here the excellence of the security is expressed in terms of interest. here the excellence of the security ..... amount of instalments by reference to an interest table, a circumstance which would be sufficient to stamp the whole excess as interest. moreover, under section 8 of the money-lenders act, 1927, a money-lender is bound to supply to the borrower a signed statement showing the amount of principal and the rate per cent. per annum of interest charged. in ..... interested for the two years the justification for reaching this conclusion may well be that, as the transaction is obviously a commercial one, the lender must be presumed to have acted on ordinary commercial lines and to have stipulated for interest on his money. in the case supposed the pounds 10, if regarded as interest, is obviously interest at a reasonable ..... calculation can be made is, of course, no justification for asserting that the discount and the premium ought to be treated as income for the purposes of the income tax acts. whether they should be so treated is the question which arises for decision. the special commissioners answered it in favour of the appellants, holding that these amounts were capital sums .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 09 1943 (PC)

Raleigh Investment Co., Ltd. Vs. Governor-general in Council.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Apr-09-1943

Reported in : [1943]11ITR393(Cal)

..... of civil procedure as they were aware of the case and were represented by him.the suit is brought by the raleigh investment co., ltd., a joint stock company incorporated under the english companies act, having its registered office at 13, athol street, douglas, in the isle of man and its main office at egham, surrey, england. we are informed from the bar ..... payable to the absentee debenture-holder from the amount payable to them. dixon, j., however stated in clear words that the company could not escape assessment simply because foreign courts may, by reason of the laws of that foreign country, refuse to recognize the right of deduction ..... imposed on the company. no doubt the australian legislature intended that the incidence of the tax should be ultimately on the absentee debenture-holder . this was sought to be effected by giving the company the right to deduct and retain the amount of tax payable by it on the interest ..... the australian statute, dixon, j., pointed out that the purpose of that statute was not dependent on the liability of the debenture-holders to pay income-tax to the australian government, but its purpose was to impose only upon such companies which derived assessable income from australia and on no others, an original or independent liability. the liability to the growth was .....

Tag this Judgment!

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