It was contended on behalf of the appellant that the High Court was in error in placing the onus of proving the custom on him since the custom was a general custom as stated by Rattigan. 10 of the Income-tax Act. 4 of Schedule I to the Excess Profits Tax Act 1940 (XV of 1940) (which hereinafter will be referred to as the Act). It may not be unreasonable or improper if a higher tax is imposed on the shows given by a cinema house which contains large seating accommodation and is situate in fashionable or busy localities where the number of visitors is more numerous and in more affluent circumstances than the tax that may be im.
There remains one other matter to be mentioned. 136 of the Constitution – should be revoked. The Technical Consultant may own and possess patents, know- how, copyrights, and other intellectual property rights with respect to the Plant and its operation and maintenance and/or the Products, which will be disclosed by the Technical Consultant to ESSAR, to the extent required as per the Scope of Services for the purpose of this Project, while rendering Services to ESSAR under this Agreement.
The respondent had filed an application for an order that by reason of certain agreements and certain proceedings arising out of the decree in her favour passed in this case by the High Court, the appellant should not have been given leave by this Court to institute the present appeal and the leave granted under Art. The Tribunal found that the portion let out is about four to five times the floor area of the portion of the building occupied by the assessee for the purposes of its own business.
Ownership of any and all the patents, know-how, copyrights and other intellectual property rights shall remain vested in the Technical Consultant or its subcontractors, as applicable, and ESSAR shall secure and otherwise protect such patents, know-how, copyrights and other intellectual properties and keep them secret and confidential. He pointed out that the assessee carries on banking business which includes holding investments, and thus, the rental in- come in respect of its investments in immovable property, is included in its business income, even though it was not chargeable to income-tax under s.
The respondent, the sister, relied on a custom, which she termed a special custom, and on that basis claimed her brother’s property, and the appellant, a collateral of the 8th degree of her brother, resisted her claim relying solely on a general custom stated in paragraph 24 Of the Rattigan’s Digest of the Customary Laws of the Punjab to the effect that sisters were excluded by collaterals in the matter of inheritance to non-ancestral property. 4 of Schedule I to the Act.
The High Court also held that the respondent had succeeded Rent Lawyer in Chandigarh proving the custom set up by her. The question which was referred to the Full Bench apparently assumed that the agreement in question required registration and the point on which the decision of the Full Bench was sought for was whether such an agreement can be received in evidence in a suit for specific performance (1) where possession is given in pursuance of an agreement, Civil and Revenue Lawyer in Chandigarh (2) where it is not; and the Full Bench (1)  I.
It appears, however, from the record that no issue was raised and no evidence was adduced by the appellant before the trial court showing that there were other cinema Houses similarly situate as that of the appellant’s cinema Houses. the legal heirs of Jagdish Ram have been awarded a sum of Rs. ESSAR may disclose such information to other parties concerned for the Project only to the minimum extent necessary for implementation secrecy acceptable to all parties concerned prior to disclosure of information.
There was, however, no material on which the trial court could or we may now come to a decision as to whether there had been any real discrimination in the facts and circumstances of this case. posed on shows given in a smaller cinema house containing less accommodation and situate in some localities where the visitors are less numerous or financially in less affluent circumstances, for the two cannot, in those circumstances, be said to be similarly situate.
By an order dated March 31, 1949, the Excess Profits Tax Officer assessed the respondent on the said rental income in respect of the accounting period ending March 31, 1946, under sub-r. n2955 of 2013 and the High Court while disposing off the Criminal Revision addressed to the quantum of sentence and child custody law firm in Chandigarh that context observed that:- “. As, in our view, the respondent succeeds on the merits of the case we think it unnecessary to express any opinion on this question. The Subordinate judge, and the District judge on appeal, held in favour of the appellant but the High Court reversed their decisions holding that, there was no such general custom as recorded by Rattigan and that it was in any event for the appellants to prove that custom and this he had failed to do.
On appeal by the respondent, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, by his order dated January 3, 1950, upheld the assessment on the basis of sub-r. The question involved in this appeal was whether under the customary Best law firm in Chandigarh High Court of the Punjab a sister was a preferential heir in respect of her brother’s self-acquired property, to a collateral.