In dealing with Issue No. The Income-tax Officer rejected this claim. The Special Officer in his order stated that "The result of the above findings is that this Tribunal shall now proceed to decide the only remaining Issue which is Issue No. On appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, the latter concurred with the view of the Income-tax Officer. The learned AdvocateGeneral stoutly resisted this move, which was at variance with the case as set out before the High Court, because it is obvious enough that if one accepted the theory of hypoglycemic coma, the only injections of insulin causing such shook would be proved to have been given at the hospital and not by the appellant.

I dealt with the question whether ss. 8 requires that the use of iron and steel must conform to the conditions governing the acquisition. " It was urged on behalf of the appellant that the Special Officer had unduly restricted the scope of the enquiry by taking an erroneous view as to the scope of the enquiry before him and thus had refused to exercise jurisdiction which was vested in him under the Act. " Along with this Issue, Issue No.

6 did not arise for consideration. That the charges of such use and occupation shall be Rs. 19 of the Constitution. The Special Officer had framed 7 Issues of which Issues Nos. I therefore order that the case should proceed with the determination of this Issue. 153A of the Act offends Art. " Issues 2 and 3 were decided by the Special Officer in favour of the appellant and need not be referred to for the purpose of the present appeal.

It may be pointed out that as a result of the combined operation of cl. 7 of the Act, the Order must now be deemed to have been issued under s. Of the 7 Issues framed Issue No. 4 is decided in the negative, is it proved that the effluents discharged by the factory of the respondent corrupt potable waters of the wells in the surrounding area so as to render them unfit for any use, and also affect prejudicially the fertility of the soil in the surrounding area by percolation? 6 had to be considered which was as follows:- it If the Point No.

The Order applies to all iron and steel of the categories specified in its Second Schedule. Clauses 4 and 5 regulate the acquisition and disposal of iron or steel, and cl. Having found this he held that Issue No. , 1st immediately on signing the contract, 2nd on the 1st of August, 1949, 3rd on the 1st November, 1949 and the 4th on the 1st February, 1950, whether the Licensee occupy the premises and carry on the business or not.

The Controller specified in the Order is the person appointed as Iron and Steel Controller by the Central Government and includes any person described by cl. 19 of the Constitution. On behalf of the appellants it was argued that the courts below had fallen in error in convicting the appellants by placing an implicit reliance upon the depositions of PW1-Ved Pal and PW2-Prakash and in the process, ignoring the defence version about the genesis of the incident.

It was further submitted that s. No universal and invariable rule, therefore, can be laid down; and every case must depend upon its own particular circumstances; and the corpus delicti must, like anything else, be proved by the best evidence reasonably capable of being adduced, and by such an amount and combination of relevant facts, whether direct or circumstantial, as to establish the factum probandum (1) [1955] 1 Q.

It is necessary to examine briefly the broad features of the scheme of this Order. It would be most unreasonable and lead to the grossest injustice, and in some circumstances to impunity for the worst of crimes, to require, as an imperative rule of law, that the fact of poisoning shall be established by any special and exclusive medium of proof, when that kind of proof is unattainable, and specially if it has been rendered so by the act of the offender himself.

1 to 4 were 392 treated by him as preliminary Issues of law. This contention was rejected by the Special Officer. This clause shows that, in exercise of the powers conferred on the Controller by the proviso to it, the Controller has to take into account the requirements of persons holding stocks, the requirements of persons needing such stocks, the transport facilities available and any other factor including a strike or lock-out affecting the production or fabrication.

4 was one of the most important ones for consideration and it was to the following effect:- " Is it shown that the question whether the discharge of the effluent from the factory of the respondent company is polluting water and adversely affects the fertility of the soil, is a question of the subjective satisfaction of the Municipality and that this question is beyond the scope of the present enquiry ?

4 in the affirmative and held that the question whether the discharge of the effluent polluted the water and adversely affected the fertility of the soil was one for the subjective satisfaction of the respondent Municipality and was beyond the scope of the enquiry before him. 9,600 a year payable in four quarterly installments i. 5 of Ordinance XVIII of 1946 and s. When the matter came before the Special Officer he recorded the order which is the subject matter of the present appeal by special leave.

It was pointed out by the Special Officer that during the course of the argument on behalf of the appellant it was not pressed that the 393 fundamental rights covered by Articles 14 and 31 were infringed. 5 whether the notice issued by the respondent Municipality was mala fide, arbitrary, capricious and that the same had been issued without the respondent Municipality sufficiently applying its mind, the Special Officer was of the opinion that it wag, " out of the purview of the present enquiry.

The assessee went up on further appeal to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. 153A to 153G of the Act violated the fundamental rights of the appellant guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 and 31 of the Constitution. The submission was confined to the infringement of Art. " This Issue was in these words:- " If it is found that the effluents of the factory of the respondents corrupt the potable waters and fertility of the soil, what final recommendation should be made about the method and manner of the discharge of these effluents?

" The Special Officer decided Issue No.