It is number number disputed that passengers travelling in the appellants bus used to get down or get in at a bus stand within the town area of Karhal the appellant had a booking office situate within the Town Area and tickets were issued to passengers and an account of the business was maintained in the said booking office.
Mainpuri, and the town of Karhal falls on the route between Etawah and Mainpuri.
It may be stated here that the appellant was asked to submit an account of his income, but numbersuch account was submitted and the assessing officer worked out the income of the appellant at about Rs.
800 a year.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 7th May 1954 of the Allahabad High Court in Civil Miscellaneous Writ No.
The appellant then filed a writ application in the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad and the ground taken by him was that there companyld be numberassessment under clause f of sub section 1 of section 14 of the Act, because he resided outside the jurisdiction of the Town Area.
67 a month, that is, about Rs.
224 of 1955.
The appellant preferred an appeal against the assessment of the tax under section 18 of the Act, and the grounds taken by the appellant were 1 that he did number reside within the limits of the Town Area and 2 that he did number carry on any trade or business within that Area.
The appellants bus plies on.
800 for the year.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
By his order dated the 20th October 1951 the Appeal Officer held that the appellant carried on his trade or business within the limits of the Town Area and was therefore rightly assessed to tax under clause f of sub section 1 of section 14 of the Act.
He accordingly dismissed the appeal.
The appellant resides in the town of Mainpuri and carries on the business of plying a motor bus on hire.
Naunit Lal for the appellant.
133 of 1952.
September 20.
No question about the amount of the tax has been raised before us, and it is number necessary to say anything further with regard to the quantum of assessment.
C. Mathur and C. P. Lal for respondents Nos.
25 on the appellant for the year 1950 51 under the provisions of clause f of sub section 1 of section 14 of the Act, being a tax on circumstances and property and assessing the income of the appellant from his business within the Town Area of Karhal at a sum of Rs.
The appeal raises the question of the validity of the assessment of a tax on the appellant for the year 1950 51 by the Town Area Committee of Karbal under the provisions of clause f of sub section 1 of section 14 of the United Provinces Town Areas Act, 1914 U. P. Act II of 1914 , hereinafter referred to as the Act.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by K. DAS J. This is an appeal by special leave from the judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dated the 7th of May 1954 by which the High Court dismissed an application of the appellant for the issue of a writ of certiorari under the provisions of article 226 of the Constitution.
alternate days between Etawah and.
The Town Area Committee of Karhal imposed a tax of Rs.
