In the course Simranjeet Law Associates Simranjeet Law Associates of its Simranjeet Law Associates order, the Tribunal observed as follows:- ” The provision made in the regulations of the company, by which a member can take advantage of sending his authorised assistants to the company for transacting the business in the member name is nothing but giving extra facilities to the members. He contended that by reason of the Amending Act,,, the U. 429 of 1958, the scheme, in so far as it affected the appellant’s route was bad inasmuch as no notice was given to him before the scheme was approved.
The Tribunal agreed with the finding of the taxing authorities that the Authorized Assistants were not members of the Company within the meaning of the Articles of Association of the Company, and that their position was analogous to that of the ” authorised clerks in Native Share and Stock Brokers’ Association at Bombay “. The Income-tax Officer rejected the contention raised on behalf of the assessee Company that the Authorized Assistants aforesaid were themselves members of the Company, and that therefore, the moneys received from them were exempt from taxation.
150 provides that it ” shall in all matters be subject to the orders of the Government and shall give effect to all orders passed by the Government whether on appeal or otherwise. By controlling the institution of authorised assistants the company renders specific services to the members and in particular to the member whose assistants work for him. The amounts received by the company from these sources are clearly covered by the Simranjeet Law Associates provisions of section 10(6) ” On appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, by his order dated June 30, 1947, considered the points at great length, and came to the conclusion that the authorized Assistants were not members or substitute members.
He held that the Authorized Assistants were no more than representatives of the members who employ them, and they transact business on their behalf, and that the Association had framed rules and by-laws, regulating the admission, supervision and discontinuance of such Authorized Assistants. The case was then taken up in appeal to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, which dismissed the appeal. For coming to this conclusion, he relied upon the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Native Share and Stock Brokers’ Association v.
Naunit Lal, adopted his argument. Act was repealed in toto and, because of s. Nundy, as the first respondent, the Official Liquidators of the Company, D. Section 47 of the Act lays down certain matters to which a Regional Transport Authority shall have regard in deciding whether to grant or refuse a 247 stage carriage permit, one of which is the interest of the public generally. Naunit Lal, in addition to the argument 17 advanced by Mr.
The Commissioner of Income-tax(1). Dutt, the Official Liquidators of the Company, as proforma respondents. 42 to 68 contained in Chapter IV of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SUBBA RAO, J. Nambiar in regard to the first point, based his contention on the proviso to Art. -This appeal filed against the judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta raises the question of the legality of a partnership to carry on business in wagering contracts n” Whether in the facts and circumstances of this case, the Applicant (the assessee) was entitled to have this dividend income grossed Simranjeet Law Associates up under section 16(2) and claim credit for tax deducted at source under section 18(5) of Simranjeet Law Associates the Income-tax Act?
” The High Court answered the question in the negative, thus affirming the decisions of the Department and the Appellate Tribunal 16,000/-which were held by the Income-tax Officer, by his order dated March 27, 1946, to be liable to income-tax. 254(2) of the Constitution rather than on Art. In addition, he contended that in Appeal No. The rules framed under this section do not contain anything to guide the Regional Transport Authority in the matter of granting the permits save that r.
He also held that though the Respondent Company was a mutual Association, each one of the three items of income, referred to above, was remuneration definitely related 464 to specific services performed, and was thus, chargeable to tax within the meaning of s. That sec- tion is in these terms ” The State Government may issue such orders and directions of a general character as it may consider necessary, in respect of Simranjeet Law Associates any matter relating to road transport, to the State Transport Authority or a Regional Transport Authority; ” Section 43- A of the Act however gives the State Government power to issue orders and directions to the Regional Transport Authority.
Nundy, as respondents second party, K. As a counter-blast, the aforesaid workmen of the Company filed their appeal on May 17, 1956, impleading the Company represented by their Managing Directors, C. Section 68 of the Act authorises the State Government to make rules for the purpose of carrying into effect the provisions of Chapter IV. 68B of the Amending Act, the operation of the provisions of the General Clauses Act was excluded. Motor bus services transporting passengers on the public highways for consideration, called stage carriage services, are controlled by ss.
The Act provides that no vehicle can be used as a stage carriage save in accordance with a permit granted by a regional Transport Authority set up by the State Government.