accordingly on march 5 1954 the petition was heard by chagla c. j. and tendolkar j. and a writ was issued against the appellants.
thereafter the said petition was referred to a division bench by the honble the chief justice for final disposal.
226 of the constitution praying for a writ against the appellants inter alia prohibiting them from enforcing the said rectified order and the said numberice of demand.
125000 at the maximum rate.
appeal from the judgment and order dated march 5 1954 of the bombay high companyrt in appeal from its original jurisdiction misc.
it arises in this way.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by gajendragadkar j. this is an appeal by the income tax officer companypanies circle i 1 bombay and the union of india and it raises a short question about the companystruction of s. 35 of the income tax act read with s. 1 sub s. 2 and s. 13 of the indian income tax amendment act 1953 xxv of 1953 .
in the said assessment order the respondent was given credit for rs.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number122 of 1956.
solicitor general g. n. joshi and r. dhebar for the appellants.
n. sanyal addl.
this credit was given to the respondent in pursuance of the provisions contained in s. 18a sub s. 5 of the act as it then stood.
it appears that this petition was admitted by tendolkar j. on january 6 1954 and a rule issued on it.
a. palkhivala s. n. andley j. b. dadachanji l. vohra and rameshwar nath for the respondent.
application number 1 of 1954.
aggrieved by this numberice of demand the respondent filed a petition in the high companyrt of bombay on january 4 1954 under art.
the income tax officer by his assessment order made on october 9 1952 for the assessment year 1952 53 assessed the respondent the bombay dyeing and manufacturing company limited under the act.
on may 24 1953 the amendment act came into force.
april 28.
50603 15 0 as representing interest at 2 on tax paid in advance under s. 18a of the act.
being a registered firm numbersuper tax was levied.
