Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.51 seconds)
Documents citing State Of Bombay vs Morarji Padamsey Of E. Eyres & Co. on 20 June, 1956

Kshitish Chandra Sarbajna vs The State Of West Bengal And Ors. on 22 December, 1966

26. The language of Section 18 of the Bombay Act interpreted by Chagla, C.J., in Padamsey's case A.I.R. 1956 Bom. 715 is almost identical. If we accept the interpretation of Chagla, C.J., and there is no reason why that interpretation should not be accepted, Section 17 of the Bengal Act which Bose, J., was called upon to interpret did not absolve the transferor from his liability.
Calcutta High Court Cites 21 - Cited by 4 - Full Document

Chhotalal Keshavram vs Additional Assistant Commissioner Of ... on 10 October, 1973

In this connection we might advert to the following cases which would support the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner, namely, State of Bombay v. Morarji Padamsey [1956] 7 S.T.C. 704, Hatim Mahmood v. Assistant Commercial Tax Officer, Mount Road, Madras [1959] 10 S.T.C. 510 and Deputy Commercial Tax Officer v. Sha Sukraj Peerajee [1968] 21 S.T.C. 5 (S.C.). Therefore, we are of the opinion that the petition deserves to succeed partly. We, accordingly, quash the order dated 29th April, 1971 (petitioner's annexure A-3), as also the demand notice (petitioner's annexure A-4) partly, stating that although the liability of the members or partners of the transferee-firm is there, an attempt should be made to recover the amount from the members or partners of the transferor-firm in the first instance and, in the alternative, from the members or partners of the transferee-firm. To that extent, we would modify the said order and the notice and issue a writ of mandamus accordingly. Consequently, this petition succeeds partly and is allowed to the extent indicated above. However, in the circumstances of the case, we order that there shall be no order as to costs of this petition in view of the divided success. The security amount shall be refunded to the petitioner.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 21 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1