SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1962 Supreme(SC) 24

K. N. WANCHOO, M. HIDAYATULLAH, P. B. GAJENDRAGADKAR, J. C. SHAH, B. P. SINHA
A. B. Abdulcadi: A. K. Mamoo – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent


Judgment

WANCHOO, J : These five appeals on certificates granted by the High Court of Kerala raise a common question of law and will be dealt with together. Two of them (appeals 89& 90) are from what was formerly the Cochin area and the other three are from what was the Travancore area. They relate to a tax on tobacco in these areas. As the facts, laws and rules in the two areas are similar we propose to deal in detail with the appeals from the Cochin area.

2. In 1909, Act VII of 1084 Was passed by the Maharaja of Cochin to consolidate and amend the law relating to tobacco and was called the Cochin Tobacco Act, VII of 1084 (hereinafter called the Cochin Act). Section 4 of the Cochin Act prohibited the possession for sale, transport, import or export, sale and cultivation of tobacco except as permitted under the Act or the Rules framed thereunder. Section 5 of the Act gave power to the Diwan to make rules from time to time consistent with the Act to permit absolutely or subject to any conditions, & also to regulate the possession for sale, transport, import or export, sale and cultivation of tabacoo as well as the form of duty leviable on the sale of tobacco by retail. The remaining p
























































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top