Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.93 seconds)P. Krishna Menon vs The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, ... on 7 October, 1958
6. Mr. Baluswami, learned Counsel for the petitioner, referred to the decision reported in P.K. Menon v. Income-tax Commissioner , where it was held that teaching of Vedanta is a vocation; Syed Jalal Sahib v. Commissioner of Income-tax Madras , where it was held that betting on horse was not a business, and Krishna Kumar v. Jammu and Kashmir State , where it was held that business and trade are synonymous.
Janab A. Syed Jalal Sahib (Deceased) By ... vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, Madras on 16 February, 1960
6. Mr. Baluswami, learned Counsel for the petitioner, referred to the decision reported in P.K. Menon v. Income-tax Commissioner , where it was held that teaching of Vedanta is a vocation; Syed Jalal Sahib v. Commissioner of Income-tax Madras , where it was held that betting on horse was not a business, and Krishna Kumar v. Jammu and Kashmir State , where it was held that business and trade are synonymous.
P.K. Kesavan Nair vs C.K. Babu Naidu on 18 December, 1953
In Kesavan Nair v. Babu Naidu (1954) 2 M.L.J. 149, this Court held that the term " business " had no technical meaning, but is to be read with reference to the object and intent of the Act in which it occurs.
R.M. Solai Nadar vs A.T.A.V. Guruswami Nadar And Co. ... on 24 January, 1969
7. Mr. Baluswami, learned Counsel submitted that this Court has taken a contrary view in a recent decision reported in Solai Nadar v. A.T.A.V. Guruswami Nadar & Co. (1969) 1 M.L.J. 629. In the case cited the landlord challenged the finding of the lower Court that the landlord had made no application to secure a quota of iron and therefore the landlord's plea that it was required for his or his son's business was an after-thought and that the requirement, even if true, was not a bona fide one. This Court on the facts came to the conclusion that the landlord required the premises and the requirement was bona fide for the business of himself. There was no dispute in the case that if the requirement was bona fide it was not for the purpose of a business. The question whether the activities like thanneerpandal activity would be business or not did not arise for consideration in that decision. Strong reliance was placed by Mr. Baluswami on the following observation in the judgment:
Section 106 in The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
Krishna Kumar Narula Etc vs The State Of Jammu And Kashmir & Ors on 1 March, 1967
6. Mr. Baluswami, learned Counsel for the petitioner, referred to the decision reported in P.K. Menon v. Income-tax Commissioner , where it was held that teaching of Vedanta is a vocation; Syed Jalal Sahib v. Commissioner of Income-tax Madras , where it was held that betting on horse was not a business, and Krishna Kumar v. Jammu and Kashmir State , where it was held that business and trade are synonymous.
Madras Pinjrapole vs Their Workmen And Anr. on 18 November, 1966
127, Madras Pinjarapole v. Their Workmen (1967) 2 L.L.J. 399, and In re Wallis ex parte Sulley (1884-85) 14 Q.B.D. 950. It is not necessary to refer to these decisions as they relate to the construction of the word " business " in the context of the enactment concerned. As the word " business" has a very wide import, the decision rendered in a particular enactment cannot be made applicable to the word used in a different enactment.
Anand Mahanti vs Ganesh Maheswar on 4 March, 1913
He also referred to Anand Mahanti v. Ganesh Maheswar I.L.R. (1913) 40 Cal.
1