Allahabad Court August 1944 Judgments
Gappumal Kanahiyalal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, United and Centra ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-31-1944
Reported in: AIR1945All147
Allsop, J.1. A Hindu family known as Gappumal Kanhaiya Lal of Ranimandi, Allahabad, (hereafter referred to as the asses-see) was assessed to income-tax upon income derived from house property in the occupation of tenants. The assessee claimed that it was not liable to income-tax on a sum of Rs. 13,500 paid by it to the municipality on account of house-tax and water-tax. Its claim was disallowed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal which has prepared a statement of the case and referred the following four questions to us under the provisions of Section 66 (1), Income-tax Act:(1) Whether, in determining the bona fide annual value of a property under Sub-section (1) read with Sub-section (2) of Section 9, Income-tax Act, 1922, the amount of house-tax imposed by the Municipal Board of Allahabad under el. (i) of Sub-section (1) of Section 128, U.P. Municipalities Act, 1916, and paid by the owner as a lessor under Section 149 of the latter Act, should be deducted from the gross amount payabl...
Tag this Judgment!Gappumal Kanhaiyalal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, C. P. and U. P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-31-1944
Reported in: [1945]13ITR210(All)
ALLSOP, J., - A Hindu family known as Gappumal Kanhaiya Lal of Rani Mandi, Allahabad, (hereafter referred to as the assessee) was assessed to income-tax upon income derived from house property in the occupation of tenants. The assessee claimed that it was not liable to income-tax on a sum of Rs. 13,500 paid by it to the Municipality on account of house tax and water tax. Its claim was disallowed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal which has prepared a statement of the case and referred the following four questions to us under the provisions of Section 66 (1) of the Income-tax Act :-'(1) Whether, in determining the bona fide annual value of a property under sub-section (1) read with sub-section (2) of Section 9 of the Income-tax Act, 1922, the amount of house tax imposed by the Municipal Board of Allahabad under clause (i) of sub-section (1) of Section 128 of the United Provinces Municipalities Act, 1916, and paid by the owner as a lessor under Section 149 of the latter Act should be d...
Tag this Judgment!Nawab Col. Dr. Sir Hafiz Mohd. Ahmad Said Khan Vs. Shiam Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-30-1944
Reported in: AIR1944All273
Sinha, J.1. This is an application under Section 205, Government of India Act, inviting us to certify that this is a fit case for being taken to the Federal Court in that it 'involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Government of India Act, 1935.' The facts briefly are these:The village in dispute is Chhatari in the District of Bulandshahr. It has extensive abadi which is divided into houses and shops. They are occupied by ryots who pay rent only for the shops and not for residential houses, The plaintiff is admittedly its sole zamindar. Shiam Lal is defendant 1, and Shiva Shankar alias Sallo and Baldeo Shankar alias Ballo, defendants 2 and 3, are his sons. Defendant 4 is the son of the brother of Shiam Lal. The first three defendants occupy a house in the abadi of mauza Chhatari. They do not, however, pay any rent or other dues to the plaintiff. The plaintiff came to Court with the following allegations:The defendants lived in the abadi of mauza Chhatari ...
Tag this Judgment!Shivkali Goswami Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-28-1944
Reported in: AIR1944All257
Iqbal Ahmad, C.J.1. This is an application in revision by Sheokali Goswami against his conviction under Section 161, Penal Code, by a Special Tribunal constituted under Ordinance 29 of 1943. The tribunal sentenced the applicant to 2 1/2 years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of ns. 500. In default of the. payment of fine, the applicant was ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further term of six months.2. The applicant was posted as chief goods clerk at Shahjahanpur railway station and the charge against him was that he on 15th July 1943, when posted as chief goods clerk and thus directly concerned in that capacity with transport of goods, in his capacity as a public servant as such, obtained Rs. 100 as illegal gratification from one Abdul Hakim in respect of five wagons, booked for Abdul Hakim, in June and July 1943, for transport of bones, and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 161, Penal Code. Even though the offence was alleged to have been committed i...
Tag this Judgment!Jamuna Das Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-25-1944
Reported in: AIR1945All26
ORDERMathur J.1. This is an application in revision by one Jamuna. Das, who has been convicted under Section 448, Penal Code, and has been sentenced to a fine of Rs. 5. He was further ordered under Section 522, Criminal P.C. to return possession of the property in dispute. He appealed against his conviction to the District Magistrate, but his appeal was dismissed. He filed a revision before the Sessions Judge, but that was summarily rejected. The facts of this case are that there are two contiguous houses in the city of Benares Nos. 33/9 and 37/104. The applicant claimed a share in house No. 33/9 as being the daughter's son of one of the owners. It was alleged on behalf of the complainant that on 28th May 1943, while the complainant was at his shop, the applicant some time after 12 noon broke open the lock of the kothri in dispute containing articles for the puja of Thakurji and took possession of it, and when he was questioned by the complainant at about 8 P.M. when the latter returne...
Tag this Judgment!Shamlal Prag NaraIn Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P. and C. P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1944
Reported in: [1945]13ITR359(All)
ORDERThis is an application under Section 66 (3) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and the prayer contained in the application is that the Income-tax Commissioner be directed to refer the questions of law formulated in the application to this Court for decision. The application arises under the following circumstances.The Income-tax Officer in making assessment for the year 1937-38 disallowed certain items on account of alleged depreciation in machinery and on account of interest paid by the applicants, the assessee. The applicants, then appealed to the Assistant Commissioner, who with sight modifications, affirmed the order of the Income-tax Officer. The applicants then applied to the Income-tax Commissioner praying in the alternative that either the Income-tax Commissioner should exercise the power of review vested in him by Section 33 of the Act, or should refer the matter to the High Court in accordance with Section 66 (2) of the Act. The Commissioner heard the application on Jan...
Tag this Judgment!Khuda-i-tala Through K.B. Qazi Mohammad Zafar Ahmad Khan Vs. Mt. Hamid ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-16-1944
Reported in: AIR1945All70
Mulla, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell and in the alternative for return of the earnest money paid under the agreement. The plaintiff-appellant, Khan Bahadur Qazi Mohammad Zafar Ahmad Khan, is the mutwalli of a Muslim Waqf appertaining to the Jama Masjid Kalam in the city of Saharanpur and he has brought the suit in that capacity. The sole defendant in the suit, who is now the respondent in this appeal, is Mt. Hamida Khatoon, the only daughter of one Mohammad Ahmad Khan by one of his two wives. By his other wife Mohammad Ahmad Khan had three children, including two sons named Mahmood Ahmad Khan and Mashkoor Ahmad Khan who at the material date were minors under the guardianship of their uncle Asghar Ali Khan. The agreement sought to be enforced by the specific performance was entered into between the plaintiff-appellant and the defendant-respondent on 18th October 1937. The property to which it relates consists of ...
Tag this Judgment!Amar Nath Vs. Dwarka Das Jai Kishun Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-15-1944
Reported in: AIR1945All42
Allsop, J.1. Brij Mohan Das and the appellant, Amar Nath, obtained mortgage decrees for the sale of the same property against Ram Das and Mt. Jiwan Kunwar, the son and daughter of Ganesh Das, in the year 1932. It appears that Brij Mohan Das was the prior mortgagee. He put the property to sale and recovered a sum of Rs. 16,100 out of the decretal amount of Rs. 24,451. He applied for a money decree for the balance on 1st August 1934. It is conceded that Amar Nath' also obtained a money decree, although the date of it is not known. In execution of this decree he attached a box of ornaments deposited by Ganesh Das in the Allahabad Bank in the year 1920. After the death of Ganesh Das, Mt. Jiwan Kunwar attempted to recover the ornaments from the Allahabad Bank upon the ground that they were really her property and had been deposited by Ganesh Das on her behalf. The bank refused to deliver the property until Mt. Jiwan Kunwar could establish her claim to it in a Court of law and the result was...
Tag this Judgment!Mustafa Khan Vs. Ram Bharosey
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-14-1944
Reported in: AIR1945All23
ORDERWaliullah, J.1. This is an application in revision against an order passed by the Judge of Small Cause Court of Cawnpore. The learned Judge has held that the execution application filed by the applicant was barred by time. The opposite party - judgment-debtor - was admittedly an agriculturist within the meaning of the term as defined in Section 2, Temporary Postponement of Execution of Decrees Act (U. P. Act 10 of 1937). Prom the materials on the record it is clear that he was an agriculturist paying more than Rs. 250 as land revenue, per annum. He was, thus, an agriculturist within the meaning of Section 3 (2), Temporary Postponement of Execution of Decrees Act of 1937. The decree in question was passed on 30th September 1937. The application for execution was filed on 29th January 1941, that is, more than three years after the decree. Obviously, therefore, the application was 'barred by time unless limitation is saved by Section 5 of the Act referred to above. This Act came into...
Tag this Judgment!Jugal Singh Alias Jugal Kishore Vs. Lochan Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-09-1944
Reported in: AIR1945All10
Mathur, J.1. The suit out of which this appeal arises was brought by Lochan Singh plaintiff-respondent to enforce a hypothecation -bond dated 6th December 1928 executed by one Darbari Lal to secure a sum of Rs. 4000. Darbari Lal is dead and is now represented by respondents 2 to 4. The appellant Jugal Singh alias Jugal Kishore is a transferee of the mortgaged property and has been impleaded as such. It appears that one Mt. Mul Kunwar, widow of one Lala Hoti Lal who died in the year 1869 was in possession of the zamindari property in dispute situated in village Nehrai, pargana Hathras, district Aligarh holding a life interest therein. She made certain alienations in favour of certain persons and Darbari Lal as a reversioner of Lala Hoti Lal brought a suit No. 31 of 1928 in the Court of the Additional Subordinate Judge of Aligarh against the alienees from the widow to recover the property as well as the mesne profits. The suit was decreed conditional on the payment of Rs. 1655 in Court. ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »