Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: punjab municipal act 1911 Court: karnataka Year: 1962 Page 1 of about 3 results (0.019 seconds)

Mar 29 1962 (HC)

G.M. Gopalkrishna Vs. Wealth-tax Officer, Mysore

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Mar-29-1962

Reported in : [1964]51ITR575(KAR); [1964]51ITR575(Karn)

..... refer to the decision of the federal court in ralla ram v. province of bombay. the question for determination in that case was whether the provisions of the punjab urban immovable property tax act were beyond the powers of the provincial legislature which enacted it. 40. the court opined that, in substance, the property tax levied under section 3 of the ..... invited our attention to the decision of the judicial committee in commissioner of income-tax v. shaw wallace and company. therein their lordships stated that 'income' in the income-tax act connotes a periodical monetary returns 'coming in' with some sort of regularity, or expected regularity, from definite sources. the source is not necessarily one which is expected to be ..... that 'coffee points' cannot be considered as 'assets'. it was further contended on their behalf that if 'coffee points' were intended to be included within the reach of the 'act', then the same being 'agricultural income', parliament was incompetent to legislate in that regard. let us first address ourselves to the question whether 'coffee points' allotted to the petitioners can ..... the impugned tax is a tax on income. it was, therefore, within the legislative competence of the punjab legislature to levy such a tax. 41. the decisions in sir byramjee jeejeebhoy v. province of bombay, j. n. duggan v. commissioner of income-tax, municipal commissioner, municipal corporation of the city of ahmedabad v. gordandas hargovandas and mammad keyi v. wealth-tax officer, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 27 1962 (HC)

Shankareppa Vs. Shivarudrappa and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Jul-27-1962

Reported in : AIR1963Mys115; ILR1962KAR630; (1963)1MysLJ297

..... the scope of the decision of the privy council in air 1926 pc 9 came up for consideration before a full bench of the lahore high court in punjab v. natha, air 1931 lah 582 (fb). the full bench opined that the decision of the privy council is an authority for the proposition that where ..... 10. it is true that sri mahajan's contention is amply supported by several decided cases. we shall now proceed to consider them.11. as early as 1911 a full bench of the allahabad high court in muhammad sherif v. bande ali, ilr 34 all 36 upheld the view taken by mookerjee, j. in srinath ..... 1957 andh pra 380. after an exhaustive examination of the decided cases, their lordships came to the conclusion that the presumption under section 108 of the evidence act extends to the fact of death at the expiration of seven years during which the person concerned was not heard of. they negatived the view that the ..... observed (at page 11)'now upon this question there is, their lordships are satisfied, no difference between the law of india as declared in the evidence act and the law of england range balaji v. mudiyeppa ilr 23 bom 296 and searching for an explanation of this very persistent heresy, their lordships find it ..... presumptions arising under the general provisions must yield place to the presumptions arising under the special provisions.5. this takes us to section 107 of the evidence act which says that:'whew the question is whether a man is alive or dead, and it is shown that he was alive within 30 years, the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 25 1962 (HC)

Thippiah Manjappa Vs. Huvinakuli Ramiah and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Jan-25-1962

Reported in : AIR1963Mys210; (1963)1MysLJ61

..... , air 1939 nag 269 : maung ohn, tin v. p.r.m.p.s.r.m. chettyar firm, air 1929 rang 311; hoshnak ram v. punjab national bank ltd., air 1936 lah 555; and ebadullah khan v. municipal board, : air1950all450 .17. it is not necessary to make a detailed reference to these cases because the reasoning on which they proceed is based on .....

Tag this Judgment!

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