Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Dec-20-1955
Reported in : AIR1956SC246; 29ITR349(SC); 2SCR1196
..... provides otherwise. if, therefore, the same principle prevailed in that state, travancore act xiv of 1124 would have come into force on the 7th march, 1949 when it was passed by the travancore legislature. what prevented that result the answer obviously points to section 1(3) which authorises the government to bring the act into force on a later date by issuing a notification. how ..... article 226 for a writ restraining the election commission, a statutory authority constituted by the president and having its office permanently located at new delhi, from enquiring into his alleged disqualification for membership of the assembly, and a single judge of the high court had issued a writ of prohibition restraining the election commission from doing so. the election commission filed ..... be relied upon by the respondents before it and followed the position in law as it had been enunciated in saka venkata rao's case, supra, and held that the punjab high court had jurisdiction to issue a writ under article 226 to the investigation commission which was located in delhi in spite of the fact that the assessees were within ..... the full investigation period, viz., from 1940 to the last completed assessment year. 15. the petitioner thereupon filed on the 6th may, 1952 a writ petition in the high court of travancore-cochin, being o.p. 41 of 1952 against respondent 1 as also the indian income-tax investigation commission, hereinafter called respondent 2, for a writ of prohibition or any other .....Tag this Judgment!