SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
12th May, 1959.
S.R. DAS, C.J.I. N.H. BHAGWATI AND M. HIDAYATULLAH, JJ.
Shri Jagadish Mills Ltd, by its successor Shri Ambica Mills Ltd. Appellants
Versus
The commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay North, Kutch and Saurashtra, Ahmedabad, Respondent.
Civil Appeals Nos. 681 and 682 of 1957.
Advocate Appeared
M/s. R. J. Kolah and I. N. Shroff, Advocates, for Appellants; Mr. H. N. Sanyal, Addl. Solicitor General of India, (M/s. K. N. Rajgopal Sastri and D. Gupta, Advocates, with him), for Respondent.
Judgement
BHAGWATI, J. : These two appeals with special leave under Art. 136 of the Constitution are directed against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal of India, Bombay Bench "A" (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") dated August 3, 1954, in Income-tax Appeals Nos. 3756 of 1948-49 and 2161 of 1950-51 whereby the Tribunal held that the amounts of cheques of Rs. 1,98,643 and Rs. 4,96,365 for the assessment years 1943-44 and 1944-45 were received by the appellant from the Government in the taxable territories & were as such liable to tax under S. 4(1)(a) of the Indian Income Tax Act (XI of 1922) (hereinafter referred to as "the Act").
2. At all material times the appellant was a public joint stock company incorporated under the then Baroda State Companies Act and having its registered office at Baroda. The appellant was the owner of a textile mill and carried on business in manufacturing and selling textiles at Baroda.
3. In the accounting years 1942 and 1943 tenders were invited by the Government of India for some of the articles manufactured by the appellant and the appellant submitted its tenders to the Government of India which accepted the tenders and placed orders for supply of goods manufactured by the appellant. These orders were accepted by the appellant at Baroda and the deliveries of the goods manufactured by the appellant and sold by it to the Government of India were pursuant to the said orders to be and were in fact effected F. O. B. Baroda. In fact so far as the manufacture and sale of the goods supplied to the Government of India were concerned, as also the deliveries thereof, everything took place at Baroda, outside the then British India.
4. According to the conditions of the contracts governing the supplies made by the appellant to the Government, the system of payment was, that unless otherwise agreed upon between the parties, payment for delivery of the goods would be made on submission of the bills in the prescribed form in accordance with the instructions given in the acceptance of the tender by a cheque on a Government Treasury or a Branch of the Reserve Bank of India or the Imperial Bank of India transacting Government business. The appellant after effecting deliveries of the goods, submitted bills in the prescribed printed form which contained the sentence that "Government should pay the amount due to the appellant by cheque" but the appellant did not request or write to the Government, in what way the payment by cheque was to be made by Government to the appellant. After submission of the bills the appellant received at Baroda, in payment of its bills cheques through post from the Government drawn on a Government Treasury or on a branch of the Reserve Bank of India or the Imperial Bank of India transacting Government business. The said cheques were received at Baroda by the appellant from the Government, along with a memo stating:
"The undersigned has the honour to forward herewith cheque No. dated in payment of the bills noted below."
then followed a tabular statement setting out the number amount and date of the bills. On the top of the memo there was a direction that "it be immediately returned to the Controller of Supplies Accounts, with the acknowledgment form on the reverse duly signed and stamped." The acknowledgment form was expressed as follows:
"The undersigned has the honour to acknowledge cheque No. dated for Rs. in payment of the bills noted in the first column on the reverse."
The payments made by cheques were accepted by the appellant unconditionally and in full satisfaction of its claim for goods supplied to the Government. On receipt of such cheques, the appellant endorsed the same and sent them either to Bombay or Ahmedabad in the Banking account of the appellant at such places.
5. 5. By his orders dated September 20, 1945, and March 16, 1943, for the assessment years 1942-43 (account year being calendar year 1941) and 1943-44 (account year being calendar year 1942) the Incom
followed : Commr. of Income-tax Bombay south v. Messrs Ogale Glass Works Ltd. Ogale
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.