Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1910 (3) TMI 2

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 1899 and the 24th of April 1899 and also to recover a sum of ₹ 1,510-15-5 alleged to have been charged against the company for octroi duty on goods similarly imported between the 24th of April 1899 and the 6th of March 1901 in excess of the maximum duty chargeable. The allegation of the company is that in respect of the duty charged during the first mentioned period, culinary goods are distinctly exempted from duty by the resolution of the Governor-General in Council dated the 6th of November 1868 and as to the rest of its claim the company says that from the 24th of April 1899 to the 6th of March 1901, the Board wrongly charged the plaintiff company the sum above mentioned in excess of the maximum duty chargeable under the resolution .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on No. V of 1886, the Municipal Committee of A jmere Merwara was empowered with the previous" sanction of the Chief Commissioner and subject to any general rules or special orders which the Governor-General in Council may make in this behalf" to impose in the whole or any part of the Municipality among other taxes an octroi on goods brought within the Municipality for consumption or use therein. 6. It will be observed that the power thus conferred is subject to any general rules or special orders passed by the Governor General in Council. From the 6th of November 1868 up to the 24th of April 1899 the Resolution of the Government of India of the 6th of November 1868 was in force and sea-borne goods were exempted from liability to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... consideration is whether the present case is governed by Article 2 of Schedule II of the Limitation Act or Articles 61 or 62 or 120. Articles 61 and 120 clearly do not apply., The language of Article 62 is borrowed from the form of count in vogue in England under the Common Law Procedure Act of 1852. Prior to the passing of the Supreme Court of Judicature Acts of 1873 and 1875, there was a number of forms of pleading known as the common indebitatus counts, such as, counts for money lent, money paid by the plaintiff for the use of the defendant at his request, money received by the defendant for the use of the plaintiff &c. These forms are no longer in use. Statements of claim must now be more specific and must contain a statement in a summa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ipality, one sum representing amounts received between the 20th of January 1899 and the 24th of April 1899 and the other representing sums taken after the 24th of April 1899, being the difference between 6 1/4 per cent, actually taken for duty and ₹ 1-9-0 per cent, which the Municipality was by the Resolutions of Government permitted to realise. This is in the nature of a claim for money had and received by the defendant Municipality for the plaintiff's use and is not a claim for compensation or damages. It is the old count for money had and received in modern dress. If the plaintiff company had sought compensation under Article 2, it would have been open to it to claim a much larger sum than the sum actually claimed. For example, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as also relied upon by the Courts in Ajmer, it is stated that to bring a suit for a refund under Article 2, it is requisite for the defendant to show amongst other things that the relief sought falls under the term "compensation" as used in this schedule. We agree as to this. But if it was intended by the learned Judge in these cases to lay down the proposition that where a plaintiff has an option to bring his suit in the form of a suit for money received by the defendant for his use or in the form of a suit for compensation for doing or omitting to do an act, alleged to be in pursuance of an enactment in force for the time being in British India, and he elects to proceed for money received for his use, the fact that he might have .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates