Allahabad Court April 1954 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
L. Baij Nath Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P. and Ajmer-merwarA.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-15-1954
Reported in: [1954]26ITR324(All)
ORDERThe Order of the Court was pronounced byMALIK, J. - This case has been referred to this Court under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, for an answer to the following question :'Does the circumstance that the property held jointly by Baij Nath group and another group of the family has not been divided in definite portions stand in the way of the family has not been divided in definite portions stand in the way of the appellant in obtaining an order under Section 25A (1) in view of the fact that the property has hitherto been treated as the property of a Hindu undivided family composed of both the above mentioned groups.'The facts which have given rise to the above question are that the assessee Baij Nath was assessed under the style of Amba Prasad Baij Nath as a Hindu undivided family from the year 1931-32 without any objection. During the assessment year 1938-39 Baij Nath claimed that he had been assessed wrongly as a member of a joint Hindu family and that he was a...
Mamanchand Fakirchand, in Re.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-14-1954
Reported in: [1954]26ITR112(All)
This is a reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act and the following question has been referred to us for decision :-'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances stated above, the sum of Rs. 11,787 in the assessment year 1946-47 and the sum of Rs. 11,515 in the assessment year 1947-48 are special allowances, benefits or perquisites specially granted to meet expenses wholly and necessarily incurred in the performance of the duties of an office or employment of profit within the meaning of Section 4(3) (vi) of the Income-tax Act and as such exempt from taxation ?'The assessee firm Messrs. Mamanchand Fakirchand works as commission agent and deals in tobacco and potatoes. Besides the usual commission, the assessee used to charge a sum of 8 annas per bag from customers to meet the expenses incurred in the supply of the commodities to them. These charges amounted in the assessment year 1946-47 to Rs. 11,787 and in the year 1947-48 to Rs. 11,515. The assessee showed in its...
Mahant Raghubar Prasad Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P., Lucknow.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-14-1954
Reported in: [1954]26ITR118(All)
This is a reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The question referred to us is as follows :-'Whether, in the circumstances of the case, the income received by the applicant from bhents was exempt from taxation under Section 4(3) (i) or 4 (3) (ii) of the Income-tax ?'The assessee is a Mahant of a temple at Ayodhya known as Barasthan. He was appointed Mahant under a deed of trust dated the 23rd of November, 1922. Clause 9 of this deed of trust runs as follows :-'A Mahant gets voluntary Puja offerings in two ways - one on account of his being Mahant of the gaddi and the second he gets are offerings made of the deity. Consequently, the managing Mahant shall have full control over the first kind of income. He can himself spend this income without the consent of the managing committee subject to this condition that he shall not spend this income against his position as a Mahant and it should not be spent against the tenets of the Virakt religion (Virakt means one ...
Mithai Lal and ors. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-13-1954
Reported in: AIR1954All689
ORDERAgarwala, J.1. The applicants were prosecuted under Sections 147 and 325 read with Section 149, I. P. C. and each of them was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- under Section 147, I. P. C., and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for sis months and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- under Section 325 read with Section 149, I. P. C.On appeal the conviction was set aside and the case was sent for retrial. During the pendency of the appeal, however, before the applicants were granted bail they had to go to jail for two or three days. But they were released on bail. On retrial the applicants were again convicted under Sections 147, 325 and 323, I. P. C. They were ordered to pay a fine of Rs. 100/-under Section 147, I. P. C. and to undergo a sentence of six months rigorous imprisonment under Section 325 read with Section 34. I. P. C. and to pay a line of Rs. 25/- under Section 323. The sentences of the applicants were made to run concurrently.On appeal their conviction under Section 147 has bee...
A. Grezo Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-13-1954
Reported in: [1954]26ITR169(All)
MALIK, C.J. - This is a reference under Section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act.The assessee is a Greek national who has been in India for a period of 45 years. He was an employee and representative at Kanpur of Messrs. Patel Cotton company Limited, Bombay. He was drawing a salary as also a commission. The salary and the commission were kept in deposit with his employers in Bombay. The amount had accumulated to a large sum and on 17th April, 1939, he sent a telegram to his employers to purchase nine bars of gold on his account and keep the same in the safe custody of the Lloyds Bank, Bombay. This gold was purchased for Rs. 2,21,250 and was deposited with the bank. In 1942 the Lloyds Bank of Bombay was no longer willing to keep the gold in its safe custody as the war situation had worsened and the assessee got the gold transferred to Kanpur and kept it with the Chartered Bank of India there. On 13th October, 1944, the gold was sold for Rs. 3,98,302. Thus there was a difference of Rs....
Ram Lal Singh Vs. State Through Anandi Chamar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-12-1954
Reported in: AIR1955All46; 1955CriLJ102
Asthana, J. 1. This is a reference by the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Jaunpur recommending that the order dated 29-10-1951 passed by the Sub-divisional Magistrate of Shahganj district Jaunpur for the release of the attached property in favour of the first party, i.e., Anandi Chamar and others, be quashed.2. The proceedings arose out of a case under Section 145, Cr. P. C. The learned Magistrate after considering the evidence produced before him came to the conclusion that there was no apprehension of a breach of the peace and he, therefore, dismissed the application under Section 145, Cr. P. C. He, however, proceeded to decide the question of possession and found that the first party was in possession of the property on the relevant date, i.e., within two months of the preliminary order and it was from his possession that the attachment was made. He passed an order that the attached property might be released in favour of the first party. Against this decision the second party ...
K. P. Bhargava Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P., Lucknow.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-12-1954
Reported in: [1954]26ITR489(All)
MALIK, C.J. - This is a reference under Section 21 of the Excess Profits Tax Act (XV of 1940) read with Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act (XI of 1922).The question referred to us reads as follows :-'Whether in the circumstances of the case and on a true interpretation of the agreement dated 8th December, 1935, between the applicant and the Central Bank of India, the Tribunal were right in law in holding that the income earned by the former as a guarantee commission agent and as a treasurer was income from business as defined in Section 2(5) of the Excess Profits Tax Act ?'There was an agreement entered into between the assessee and the Central Bank of Indian Ltd., on the 8th of December, 1935, and the assessee was appointed treasurer and guarantee commission agent of the Bank at Agra and at other branches. The agreement is printed at page 5 of the statement of the case. For his work as treasurer the assessee was to get a remuneration of Rs. 100 per mensem. The duties that he w...
Municipal Board, Hardoi Vs. State Through Gauri Shankar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-08-1954
Reported in: AIR1955All109; 1955CriLJ286
ORDERBeg, J.1. This is a revision against an order of acquittal filed by the Municipal Board, Hardoi.2. It would appear that one Gauri Shanker, son of Kalika Prasad, had been carrying on a grocer's shop in the town of Hardoi. As a grocer, he had also been dealing in biris. The Municipal Board, Hardoi, suspected that he had been importing goods especially biris within the Municipal limits without payment of the octroi dues. In order, however, to ascertain the truth, they issued a notice against Gauri Shankar under Section 158, U. P. Municipalities Act, 1916 (Act 2 of 1916). This notice is dated 2-7-1952, and is to the following effect:'Notice under Section 158 of the Municipalities Act is hereby given to furnish accounts within three days to ascertain whether full tax has been paid on the import of goods, especially on biris or not.'Gauri Shankar refused to accept this notice and did not furnish the accounts demanded from him. Under the circumstances the Municipality had no other altern...
Ram Saroop and ors. Vs. Board of Revenue, Uttar Pradesh, Allahabad and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-07-1954
Reported in: AIR1954All639
ORDERChaturvedi, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petitioners filed a suit under Section 180, of the U. P. Tenancy Act in respect of certain plots of land against the respondent-No. 2. The suit was decreed by the trial court but was dismissed by the Additional Commissioner of Agra. The petitioner then filed a second appeal before the Board of Revenue. This appeal was filed on 29-7-1950. Before, however, the appeal could be heard on merits, a vesting order was passed under Section 4, U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act (No. 1 of 1951), on 1-7-1952. Certain rules were framed under the said Act and under Rule 4 of the Rules the Board of Revenue ordered the hearing of the appeals to be stayed on the merits and fixed 10-11-1953 for hearing the parties under Rule 5(a) (I) of the rules in order to determine whether the appeal should be abated or not.One Member of the Board of Revenue heard the appeal on that date and passed an order on 12-11-1953 h...
Kaley Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-05-1954
Reported in: AIR1955All420; 1955CriLJ1144
Roy, J. 1. On the Night between the 27th and 28th of February, 1953, an armed dacoity was committed at the house of Raghubar Dayal and Dhanni Mal at about 1 a.m. in village Piana Kalan in the district of Bulandshahr. The dacoits were 15 or 20 in number. Two of them, namely, Kaley and Atri appellants, were armed with guns and the others were armed with lathis. They entered the house of Raghubar Dayal and Dhanni Mal, overpowered both of them and looted their property. The shouts raised by these two persons attracted their neighbours. During the commission of the dacoity, the neighbours did not actually enter the house. The dacoits, after committing the dacoity, escaped with the looted property. On their retreat, the villagers chased them. When the dacoits had just passed out of the village and were near the Takia of, a Faqir by the side of the field of Raja Faqir, they turned round and made an attack on the villagers who were pursuing them. The appellants fired with their guns. Kaley app...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »