Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Sorted by: old Court: supreme court of india Year: 1958 Page 1 of about 23 results (0.212 seconds)

Mar 11 1958 (SC)

M.P.V. Sundararamier and Co. Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-11-1958

Reported in : AIR1958SC468; (1958)IMLJ179(SC); [1958]1SCR1422; [1958]9STC298(SC)

venkatarama aiyar, j.1. the petitioners are dealers carrying on business in the city of madras inthe sale and purchase of yarn, and they have filed the present applicationsunder art. 32 of the constitution for the issue of a writ of prohibition orother appropriate writ restraining the state of andhra from taking proceedingsfor imposing tax on certain sales effected by them in favour of merchants whoare residing or carrying on business in what is now the state of andhrapradesh, on the ground, inter alia, that the said sales were made in the courseof inter-state trade, and that no tax could be levied on them by reason of theprohibition contained in art. 286(2) of the constitution. 2. the course of dealings between the parties resulting in the above saleshas been set out in para. 5 in petition no. 220 of 1955. it is therein statedthat the dealers in andhra would place orders for the purchase of yarn with thepetitioners in madras, that the contracts would be concluded at madras, that thegoods would be delivered ex-godown at madras and would thereafter be despatchedto the purchasers either by lorries or by rail as might be directed by them,that when the goods were sent by rail, the railway receipts would be takeneither in the name of the consignees, and sent to them by post or in the nameof the consignor and endorsed to the purchasers and delivered to them in madrasor sent to them by post endorsed in favour of a bank and the purchasers wouldtake delivery of those receipts after .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 19 1958 (SC)

Express Newspapers (Private) Ltd. and anr. Vs. the Union of India (Uoi ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-19-1958

Reported in : AIR1958SC578; (1961)ILLJ339SC; (1964)ILLJ9SC; [1959]1SCR12

..... shed and continue to shed, more light on the public and business affairs of the nation than any other instrumentality of publicity; and since informed public opinion is the most patent of all restraints upon mis-government, the suppression or abridgment of the publicity afforded by a free press cannot be regarded otherwise than with gave concern. the tax here involved .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 21 1958 (SC)

Keshavlal Lallubhai Patel and ors. Vs. Lalbhai Trikumlal Mills Ltd.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-21-1958

Reported in : AIR1958SC512; (1958)60BOMLR948; [1959]1SCR213

..... . if the normal state of affairs contemplated by the second condition refers to the normal state of affairs in the political situation in the country that would be absolutely and patently uncertain. even if this normal state of affairs is construed favourably to the appellants and it is assumed that it has reference to the working of the mills, that again .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 24 1958 (SC)

Raigarh Jute Mills Ltd. Vs. Eastern Railway and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-24-1958

Reported in : AIR1958SC525; (1958)IIMLJ86(SC); [1959]1SCR236

..... . w. &; sons, limited, were competitors of lever brothers, limited, and that eliminated the application of section 27(1) of the railway and canal traffic act of 1888. similarly in lancashire patent fuel company limited v. london and north-western railway company ([1904] xii railway and canal traffic cases, 77, 79), it was held that no competition existed between coal carried for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 31 1958 (SC)

Kanhaiyalal Vs. D.R. Banaji and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-31-1958

Reported in : AIR1958SC725; [1959]1SCR333

..... the high court of judicature at nagpur, the case was heard by a single judge, niyogi j. who allowed the appeal by judgment dated march 29, 1945. on a letters patent appeal by the auction-purchaser, kanhaiyalal, the matter was heard by a division bench (mangalmurti and deo jj.) the bench affirmed the decision of the learned single judge, and held .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 11 1958 (SC)

The Nagpur Electric Light and Power Co., Ltd. and ors. Vs. K. Shreepat ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-11-1958

Reported in : AIR1958SC658; (1958)IILLJ9SC; [1959]1SCR463

..... relevant act by approaching a recognised union to move in the matter. 4. on the dismissal of his petition, the respondent preferred an appeal under clause 10 of the letters patent. this appeal was heard and allowed by a division bench on september 26, 1956, on the findings that (1) the standing orders did not apply to the respondent, though he .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 24 1958 (SC)

Moti Ram Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-24-1958

Reported in : AIR1959SC63; [1958]34ITR646(SC)

sarkar, j.1. this is an appeal by the assessee against the order of the appellate tribunal dated may 8, 1953, whereby that tribunal confirmed the appellate assistant commissioner's order of july 23, 1951, and the only question is whether the appellant is liable under section 4(1)(b)(iii) of the income-tax act to pay tax on rs. 1,20,000 remitted by him from srinagar in kashmir to british india in the relevant accounting year as his profits accumulated outside british india and brought by him into british india. 2. this appeal arises out of the proceedings for the assessments of the appellant's income for the year 1945-46. the judgment had been carrying on a business in cloth in srinagar for a long time. in 1943- 44 he started a similar business in amritsar. it appears that in the relevant previous year, that is, between march 25, 1944, and april 12, 1945, the appellant had remitted from srinagar to british india and aggregate sum of rs. 5,00,850 for the purchase of goods there of which rs. 3,00,000 were found by the income-tax officer, amritsar, who was in charge of the assessment, to have been his income in kashmir accrued prior to such year and after march 31, 1940. the income-tax officer had therefore directed him to pay tax on the said sum of rs. 3,00,000. 3. the appellant preferred an appeal from this order to the appellate assistant commissioner who held that the amount remitted out of the income in srinagar was rs. 1,20,000 and not rs. 3,00,000 as found by the income- .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 28 1958 (SC)

M.K. Venkatachalam, I.T.O. and anr. Vs. Bombay Dyeing and Mfg. Co., Lt ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-28-1958

Reported in : AIR1958SC875; [1958]34ITR143(SC); (1958)IIMLJ182(SC); [1959]1SCR703

..... glaring and obvious cannot be similarly rectified. prima facie it may appear somewhat strange that an order which was good and valid when it was made should be treated as patently invalid and wrong by virtue of the retrospective operation of the amendment act. but such a result is necessarily involved in the legal fiction about the retrospective operation of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 28 1958 (SC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay Vs. Amritlal Bhogilal and Co.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-28-1958

Reported in : AIR1958SC868; [1958]34ITR130(SC); (1958)IIMLJ174(SC); [1959]1SCR713

..... section 26a either refusing to register the firm or cancelling registration of the firm, no appeal can be filed by the department against the order granting registration. indeed it is patent that the scheme of the act in respect of appeals to the appellate assistant commissioner is that it is only the assessee who is given a right to make an .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 01 1958 (SC)

Raghunath Das Vs. Gokal Chand and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-01-1958

Reported in : AIR1958SC827; (1958)36MysLJ(SC)738; [1959]1SCR811

..... 's plea and dismissed the execution application. on appeal by raghunath das to the high court a learned single judge on april 5, 1944, accepted the appeal, but on letters patent appeal filed by gokul chand the division bench on march 15, 1945, reversed the order of the single judge and restored the order of dismissal passed by the subordinate judge .....

Tag this Judgment!


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