Senior Lawyers in Supreme Court of India - SimranLaw 815, Sec 16D, Chandigarh - 5 Easy Facts About.

14A takes us back to the question as to whether the proviso to r. 19 has been contravened. 1 can be granted by directing respondent no. (28) It is apposite to reproduce the operative portion of the order of the High Court in paragraph 43 infra, In fine, I find that the prosecution of the accused for the offences under the Arms Act, 1959 is not maintainable. So there is no substance in the argument that Joshi's case should be reconsidered. Section 45 (a) with which we are concerned reads as under: These cases are specified in clause (a) to clause (d) of Section 45.

He is then held exempted from the applicability of the Arms Act. It cannot, therefore, be construed to mean that Section 45(a) enable every vessel to carry any number of arms/ammunition regardless of its purpose, necessity and requirement to carry such arms/ammunition on the vessel. 272, 274, 279, 280 and 286; but none of these documents has been found to be subversive and so it is idle to contend that Joshi's connection with any of the three subversive documents is established.

So the argument urged under s. The main question in this case is whether on the facts alleged if true and at this stage nothing can be said about the truth or otherwise of that allegation, the appellant can be said to be in possession of the revolver for being charged with an offence under Section 25(a) of the Act. 14A itself refers to the restrictions and conditions which may be prescribed and, as we have already seen, these conditions and restrictions are prescribed by the Rules in general and by r.

45 acres, said to be mortgaged, and 21 acres as unencumbered, out of the total area of 63. Opposing the contentions advanced on behalf of the appellants, Shri Gurukrishna Kumar, learned senior counsel for the Revenue has urged that the opinion of the Attorney General relied upon and the CBDT Circular has no relevance to the present case inasmuch as the agreements between ONGC and the non-resident companies made it abundantly clear that what is paid to the non-resident company are fees for technical services rendered.

14A and be otherwise unjustified or improper; but it does not amount to the contravention of any provision of s. 6, in the list of properties as detailed in the foregoing paragraphs. Dudinik Valentyn [A3], the Captain of the Ship will be liable for abetment of the offence committed by Mariya Anton [A38] under the Essential Commodities Act within the Indian territorial waters. If the argument is that the first respondent was not liable to pay any tax and as such was not entitled to make any corresponding collection, then the collection made by him may fall outside s.

It does appear that Joshi admitted that he had taken part in the drafting of documents P. 45 acres, as mentioned at serial no. 14A can be said to have been contravened. 43,692-11-9 in their totality even though a sum of Rs. The second part with which we are concerned in effect means nothing more than this, that a registered dealer can make collections of such tax only as is payable by him in accordance with the restrictions and conditions as may be 345 prescribed. (111) The object of Section 45(a) is to give exemption from applicability of the Arms Act to those arms/ammunition, which form part of any ordinary armament or equipment of the vessel and not to all arms/ammunition on the vessel.

Anand has invited us to consider some individual cases. Section 25(a) insofar as it is relevant states: Section 14A consists of two parts both of which are put in a negative form. Mariya Anton [A38] will be liable for prosecution for violating the Control Order, 2005 punishable under Section 3(ii)(d) r/w 7(1)(a)(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Before we conclude, we are bound to observe that having accepted- the receipts of Rs. 14,300 which had not been received by it during the accounting year, it was hardly open to the Revenue to urge that the sum of Rs.

29,392-11-9 only was actually received by the appellant in cash, thus making the' appellant liable for income-tax on a sum of Rs. In the premises discussed hereinabove, we are of the considered view that the relief as sought in prayer no. In other words, if the case of the accused falls in any of the clauses of Section 45 and he is able to satisfy the requirement of such clause then such accused cannot be prosecuted for commission of any offence punishable under the Arms Act. In dealing with this question we cannot ignore the fact that the relevant provisions which fall to be construed in the present appeal impose a serious penalty on the registered dealer, and so, even if the view for which the appellant contends may perhaps be a possible view, we see no reason why the other view for which the first respondent contends and which appears to us to be more reasonable should not be accepted.

Hence, the prosecution of the petitioners in both petitions under the Arms Act, 1959 is quashed. (107) Section 45 of the Arms Act sets out certain type of cases to which the provisions of Arms Act are not made applicable. According to him the case against Joshi had not been properly considered by the appellate tribunal.