In the alternative, it is submitted that the appellant was 84 years of age and keeping that in mind, the sentence for imprisonment may be set aside and instead, the fine may be increased. Consequent upon the return of Company Application No. In case the business of the company is to operate qualifying ships only, then the income from that sole business will be under this Chapter. In the relevant income tax returns filed by the assessee, the assessee had also included the income earned from such slot charter arrangements for the purpose of computation thereof under Chapter XIIG.
The other important issue thrown up by this case and that causes us both grave concern and dismay is the decline of ethical and professional standards among lawyers. The appellants were then tried by Mr. , was of the opinion that 1048 the section was hit by article 14. , who in agreement with S. However, in addition to operating its qualifying ship, in the relevant Assessment Years i. It requires a pre-arranged plan because before a man can be vicariously convicted for the 1095 criminal act of another, the act must have been done in furtherance Chandigarh Lawyer of the common intention of them all: Mahbub Shah v.
The income that is generated from the said qualifying ship is exigible to tax as per the special provisions contained in Chapter XIIG, as assessee has exercised the requisite option in this behalf. As a matter of fact, the respondent-assessee owns a qualifying ship and fulfills all other conditions as well to make it a qualifying company under Section 115VC. , took the view that the impugned section did not bring about any discrimination or inequality between persons similarly circumstanced and consequently did not offend the equal protection clause of the Constitution, while C.
There was a difference of opinion between the two learned Judges as to the constitutionality of section 30 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Accordingly there must have been a prior meeting of minds. The conduct of the two appellants (one convicted of committing criminal contempt of court and the other found guilty of misconduct as Special Public Prosecutor), both of them Lawyers Chandigarh of long standing, and designated Senior Advocates, should not be seen in isolation.
The appellants preferred an appeal to the High Court of Judicature at Patna. In other words, is the income derived from ‘slot charter’ operations of a ‘Tonnage Tax Lawyer in Chandigarh Company’ liable to be excluded while determining the ‘Tonnage Income’ under the ‘TTS’ if such operations are carried on in ships which are not ‘qualifying ships’ in terms of the provisions of that Chapter of the Act and the relevant provisions of the Income Tax Rules, 1962?
, in continuation of the recovery certificate issued by the DRT dated 15. Such a company may have various businesses and one such business may be the business of operating qualifying ships. Several persons can simultaneously attack a man and each can have the same intention, namely the intention to kill, and each can individually inflict a separate fatal blow and yet none would have the common intention required by the section because there was no prior meeting of minds to form a pre-arranged plan.
(i) In the first place, the assessee has to be a ‘company’. It is in this context the question has arisen as to whether the assessee was eligible to include the income derived from activities through ‘slot charter’ arrangements as relevant shipping income to determine the deemed tonnage in terms of Rule 11Q of the Income Tax Rules. 2005-2006 and 2008-2009 it had also ‘slot charter’ arrangements in other ships. As their Lordships say in the latter case, “the partition which divides their bounds is often very thin: nevertheless, the distinction is real and substantial, and if overlooked will result in miscarriage of justice”.
1300 of 2003, it came to be assumed by the State Bank of Mysore, that leave of the High Court, was not required for the sale of the assets of Deve Sugars Ltd. In a case like that, each would be individually liable for whatever injury he caused but none could be vicariously convicted for the act of any of the others; and if the prosecution cannot prove that his separate blow was a fatal one he cannot be convicted of the murder however clearly an intention to kill could be proved in his case: Barendra Kumar Ghosh v.
The word ‘company’ is defined in Section 2(17) of the Act. Now in the case of section 34 we think it is well established that a common intention presupposes prior concert. The learned counsel, thus, submitted that the action initiated against the appellant was not just and proper and the impugned judgment awarding punishment to the appellant under the Act is bad in law and therefore, deserved to be set aside. The question that has arisen for consideration pertains to ‘slot charter’ i.
The appeal was thereupon placed before Reuben, C. However, it is only that income which is generated from ‘The Business of Operating Qualifying Ships’ that will be computed as per the special provisions in Chapter XIIG. Accordingly, the State Bank of Mysore approached the Recovery Officer, for the disposal of the assets of Deve Sugars Ltd. King- Emperor(2) and Mahbub Shah v. The appeal was heard by a Bench consisting of S.
Azam, Magistrate of the first class exercising powers under section 30 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on charges under sections 366 and 143 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them was convicted under both the sections and sentenced to rigorous imprison- ment for five years under section 366, Indian Penal Code, no separate sentence having been passed under section 143. Income from other businesses will be computed in the same manner as provided in Sections 28 to 43C.
should the ‘slot charter’ operations of a ‘Tonnage Tax Company’ Advocates in Chandigarh be carried on only in ‘qualifying ships’ to include the income from such operations to determine the ‘tonnage income’ under ‘TTS’ in terms of the provisions of Chapter XIIG of the Act?