Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 1 of 1 (0.26 seconds)

M/S.Deepmani vs The State Of Maharashtra on 21 January, 2011

18. Mr.Joshi submits that it is well settled that when the words have acquired a particular meaning flowing from the authoritative construction given by the superior Courts, then they are presumed to have been used by the Legislature in the same sense that was assigned to by the Courts. Reliance is placed on Kesheji Ravji v. C.I.T. 183 ITR 1 SC; Gandhi v. C.W.T. 184 ITR 34 SC; and Sunandadevi v. C.W.T., 204 ITR 842. The relevant extracts of pages 71 and 72 from the Publication Maxwell on the Interpretation of Statutes 12th Edition is produced on record to show that the construction that have been placed on the statutes having similar scope can be referred to in case the Parliament uses the same language that was used in another Act of Parliament referring to the same subject.
Bombay High Court Cites 34 - Cited by 0 - V C Daga - Full Document
1