K.s. Rashid And Son v. The Income Tax Investigation Commission, Etc
Supreme Court
[1954] 1 S.C.R. 738 22 Jan 1954 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
Supreme Court
Parties
K.s. Rashid And Son v. The Income Tax Investigation Commission, Etc
Date of order
22 Jan 1954
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case analysis
⚙️ Auto-generated structured summary from the order — a quick research aid, not a hand-reviewed analysis. Read the original judgment below for authority.
In K.s. Rashid And Son v. The Income Tax Investigation Commission, Etc, the Supreme Court (1954) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Sections referenced in this judgment
Original judgment (source document)
The analysis above is EaseValue's editorial summary. Below is the court's original order, reproduced from the public record as a source document — the OCR text is cleaned for readability but may retain scanning artifacts; rely on the official source for the authentic version.
▸ Show the full original order (source text)
1953 Dwarkadas Shrinivas of Bombay v.
The Sholapur spinning and Weaziing Co. Ltd., and Others.
1954 Jan. 22.
738 SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1954)'
to our Parliament to deprive a person of his property merely by passing an Act. The two parts of the article form an integral whole and cannot be dis-associated from each other.
The result is that I agree with the order proposed by my learned brother.
Appeal allowed.
Agent for the appellant : /. N. Shroff.
Agent for respondents Nos. 1 to 4 and 6 to 8 ~ Rajinder Narain.
Agent for respondent No. 9 : G. H. Rajadhyaksha.
K. S. RASHID AND SON
THE INCOME-TAX INVESTIGATION COMMISSION, ETC.
(With connected appeals)
[MEHR CHAND MAHAJAN C. J., MuKHERJEA,
S. R. DAs, VIVIAN BosE and GHULAM HASAN JJ.]
Constitution of India, art. 226-/urisdiction of Punjab High Court to issue writs to Income-tax Investigation Commission located in Delhi-Remedy under art. 226-Discretionary-Taxation on Income (Investigation Commission) (Act XXX of 1947), ss. 5 and 8(5).
The Punjab High Court has jurisdiction to issue a writ under art. 226 of the Constitution to the Income-tax Investigation Commission located in Delhi and investigating the case of the petitioner under 5 of the Taxation on Income (Investigation Com-mission) Act, ·1947, although the petitioners were assessees within the U. P. State an<l their original assessments were made by the Income-tax authorities of that State.
Article 226 of the Constitution confers on all the High Courts new and very wide powers in the matter of issuing writs which they never possessed before. There are only two limitations placed upon the exercise of such powers by a High Court ; one is that the power is to be exercised "throughout the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction", that is to say, the writs issued by the court cannot run beyond the territories subject to its jurisdiction. The other is that the person or authority to whom
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
the High Court is em.powered to issue writs "must be within those tertitories" and this implies that they must be amenable to its jurisdiction either by residence or location within those territories. , The remedy provided in art. 226 of the Constitution is a dis-cretionary one and the High Court has always the discretion to refuse to grant any writ if it is satisfied that the aggrieved party can have an adequate or suitable relief elsewhere.
Ryots of Garabandho v. Zamindar of Parlakimedi (70 I.A. 129) and Election Commission v. Saka Venkata Subba Rao [1953] S.C.R. 1144 referred to.
C1v1L APPELLATE JuR1so1ct10N : CIVIL APPEALS Nos. 118 to 121 of 1952. (Appeals under article 133 ( 1) ( c) of the Constitu-tion of India from the Judgment and Order dated the 10th August, 1950, of the High Court of Judicature, Punjab at Simla (Khosla and Kapur JJ.) in Civil Miscellaneous Nos. 256, 260, 261 and 262 of 1950). Dr. Bakshi Tek Chand (T. N. Sethi, with him) for the appellants.
M. C. Setalvad, Attorney-General for India (Poru! A. Mehta, with him) for the respondents.
1954. January, 22. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
vaNeil
1954
:22
acنىسنشگنىmyay& owre r- LUI)
[lrle Pie si def esrb RA? Ply ey]گنىسنىسنhoe KESoer نUibis -226 EAates’Tگنىسنىسنio oنSalles alsoe FS226At— Je |Ay 6sus (۔ 5 )S yl 5 eeled9 ،(1947) ،Xxx Lb oi!UtbedLگنىسنىسنY &نvfگنىسنىسنLe eS et Lo5 a1947 2&1 (* نrTLee lek FIL yiUI Lei g-20 6WSeAguZLibJF Aad226KUTKfTEvrae SA See tt Mu Lute tt Weea WI" N16MAS Sc LE Foe 52 2 SIL eeSe lt BUF he Use Ot LIP I We"2 bb IL US eA
LMP AL ee WE pel PL AUF ol Se ye ULIeaa
UL Neewe GarOLevats226 futLfTCoe aa!2 O ere ee it fPt Pal1291 (770) uw 5 ZWei L Se cr L PLUeبى[Pa]U3aw7b11427Ua1953 |sLe[ى ن ٹ] ۔ 1952،121va118Alu:ABAskaysئىت[{]پئى[ئ]ا
1950 JL، اور262261 ،260 ،2564 a bys)a wyT1950"LOL.Bowes Lehiey?hee& )1 ()c (133 275CPL hee yideLe[of e]Kbpe Eu wt
Wer RF Lylety A De UESZbtid![ow]Us AI
. 22659.1954
lHLBAOR Leb
abeL ()c ( )133 TL Teknee be pub y1950-1OL Gul He tend aeiWe AS Necei tl?OkJt“Gece He LL So IEi“wita1947 JL،XXX LL) Ge £ WF S796ee)oeSS اور227226گنىسنىسننryiJf1934(Ss5c دارى MAHiSdKBrLaatsietLeLAal
Lor Soy1946757)TESSb EB sshebe1946537!PE Le ctyles8K Sak Cet AteFrEL P/U!Ler SS pol1947 * 3we 5 5 x951947J ،XXX Geel ie LotidNECELگنىسنىسنNSE pbulst FS fHنofweS(3) (4)53324wesussite a>SSت تىع[ضض]resAH Se vcs Suet Bil tbs Fe ete ulCIEsweedybxCou fwe 19436A31 few ey testx!1949LomiLZ1949URste IB IESShar uke tse uteAF Leet LVF AL uit tik F EGR1943 G131 Abici?OMptf1949fe17 UGS ke? LEPaareds-tre Liv Let LESeHCr to Are2S 99UeBp Gas Sl nt ae be Lie Lt SOee ttt line AG Lie Sobuie Lie Late £&Sethe etee £ت تىعضTe1946($y37sree AGS1950W re Li SU ee? FMHe era Suit EC1950Je،262eo259 4LEIPIE Poot St ushkeee LeSesSE Sect hi tPF Eb Sub ey! la ak Ie aol PE
Slt feet Soe FS fF L5 3951947 JL،XXXiz G lu2 Less /eol6S Mee bed xls Pa MesCSSee BEG LOK ble le Fe SE SFL277 UTLeگنىسنىسنbene ftنvyLUMI PalxUcGS Sybrr 12 ZL bib wl do1950due2wLEbLok tel Aut AL Less LAS eAgy Seal y iferarer WeKAaHb SES eo & Feweb LekwtJiLele ce Lyet&LiuWIگنىسنىسنKIL LTS oe tee ut borekiنPySe? 1?226ares etme eeetesaSREienedo \9 (leyolswt hipMehid £ Sins227V226 KUT bef TtBESO= oss ( اور9 3)5 ahh1947 JL،XXX oeSKU bxLd Sa6 SusitySebi We cot cout hit etyeats. °f csi HESUsb ute rittinay Se Se Ll bIiiL Pen beLowsebyiud ehidenVee ebSUSBistNixLelyL let ie 6 POEL BULicUsoat’eS Sie euSereAyaIeU~ law Nos SoeLS Bc tyk[1]بى[Pa]aweda[ب]Soest SE irk LFHaheireseG lerues(2)xy)Lape
LeeISIE[جج][گئخ]CP oe LEئى[A]UseLE Uiles FestLS Fuel? eeCie IG phe se SU OS bhesPEP bLLE HueUPbt SO la IVEESSHBAsgrewMeeeLiSibyAAs LAr de Pee LUFoo Ne Kei ele? L AbytPhos?Sle rsAesSIGN 2 the WB As lish ssf 6MAiArsoSeFLS Ae Sta SV ded ye YokU-ALESsi Sees)NehSF Veet.[گئض]ete WS eslean2 Ltt ielt,L£uI23 L eu It So!Evie Cle si ule Z UreBe bo SUT Se Sy BL Ot a leetOlt FsBEBIE tk LES LR Arby,Borie te bt Siok GS FVLF We GS Mec BU FLO La £([1]Sit La sipe ble GLOWSSoe Br Lota ito &® Buel oid oSoeNazueIe5)LeSE gine[جج][گىز]Uae beer ri 6b eI Se wir"4aDL MoH Se Myde thaoi bf LE Fy Spi Bab ee Le St Th theWe FSU 6 SE Fee FS tein Sh Sd LbeNey Sy lee elleSe GESTrE MBA Se SEGALL
izG leLS LUI PL ep ST bates SentLILLSNee FANNKPA LUANESbib[گىن]a4er eb tb £ BFL SLMalebuteLF lo7lytet ,AdnuiuLuieett Ce LesLui hrewte" Ge SLbye LY?Ut teSeb teUn”eatGo Feu ul LY Geگنىسنىسن796eنvyJ ble ti td bemry S dleede cee PY KiHwl ik SLAtAiLoe KiSosiutWi?گنىسنىسنSaarنrb SLeek Fito al bb Sab Le Si!IGE b eS ee tT See tok be YA LedSY ded yee Ur AMIN OF Ab SESEASSeSeedABASefbt Utdee ee dyUtbeer
b([1]Vat £5تى[Pa]OO eee tt uel.ord WapLery226 fut £ wTAeU=¢[2]ا راؤ )Leste! PL eee bu Pate Se bir L[ى ن ٹ]Una US eels J3\ Us Jz Y98 oustry it & JeeVIL Nee ee Peete lL & sethy Lyبى VxMe HL fTLefeSS atta 2h Ot eaiebeeLES bb oateasLU Sle Bue (IS oe Phe d et F wai? SL[3])luo d isl Mas bilo F +clasts Ae Leh Ar bp OL Plن 3 IeUi Seb Sue beOG6 SoeHeb of LF KES
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.