Allahabad Court February 1957 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.
Kanpur Steel Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Uttar Pradesh.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-18-1957
Reported in: [1957]32ITR56(All)
The following two questions have been referred for our opinion in compliance with the order of this Court dated 5th February, 1953, under section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Ac :'1. The assessee company having followed the mercantile method of accounting whether the commission of Rs. 15,432 having been received in the subsequent accounting year, relevant for the assessment year 1948-49, could be brought to tax as accrued income in the assessment year 1947-4 ?2. Whether there was any material to hold that the sum of Rs. 25,000 being the value of the high denomination noted exchanged in pursuance to the demonetisation ordinance was an income of the assessee company from some undisclosed sourc ?'The assessee is a private limited company known as the Kanpur Steel Company Limited which, in addition, was carrying on the work of sole agency of the Aira Sugar Factory and was receiving a commission of one per cent. on the sales of sugar of that factory. The assessment year in question is 194...
Abdul Jalil Khan Vs. Agricultural Income-tax Board, Lucknow.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-18-1957
Reported in: [1958]34ITR421(All)
The Revision Board under the Agricultural Income-tax Act has referred the following question for our opinion. :'Whether an assessee should be assessed separately on the income of his personal property and the income of the waqf property held by him as a mutawalli of waqf-alal-aulad or there should be one assessment of both the properties taken together ?'According to the statement of the case, the assessee Abdul Jalil Khan is mutawalli of a waqf created by his wife Musratunnisa Begam in respect of property from which agricultural income is derived. In addition, Abdul Jalil Khan has his own property from which agricultural income accrues to him. The Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax by his order directed that the income received by the assessee from both the sources should be added together and agricultural income-tax should be assessed on the total income received by the assessee. The assessee thereupon came up in revision before the Revision Board. The Revision Board expressed i...
Sobha Vs. Ram Phal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-1957
Reported in: AIR1957All394
ORDERTandon, J. 1. This is a plaintiff's revision against the order of Munsif, South Faizabad, in a suit brought by him under Section 9 of the Specific Relief Act, for possession over plot No. 1165, area 9 biswa 15 biswans situated in mohal Sripalkhan, village Baiti Kalan, The defendant was Ram Phal, who is opposite-party. The munsif dismissed the suit on September 15, 1950. 2. The plaintiff's allegation in the court below was that he was in possession of the aforesaid plot for a considerable time but was dispossessed without authority by the defendant on July 3, 1950. On that, date, according to him, the defendant ploughed the field and sowed his crop. The suit was commenced on July 25, 1950, well within six months from July 3, 1950. 3. The defence put forward was that the defendant had been in possession of the plot for a very long time and it was also his tenancy land. The plaintiff is first cousin of the defendant. His case further was that if he (plaintiff) had, by any means, got ...
Subedar Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-1957
Reported in: AIR1957All396; 1957CriLJ698
ORDERJames, J.1. This Revision springs from an alleged violation of the fundamental right granted under Clause (3) of Article 20 of the Constitution in the words: 'No Person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself. The question is of importance and requires careful consideration.2. The facts are these. Dhanna filed a complaint for offences under Sections 420, 405, 467 and 384 I.P.C. against four persons including one Subedar, and when the Magistrate decided to make a preliminary enquiry under Section 202 Cr. P. C., got them summoned as his witnesses in order to satisfy the Magistrate that there was just ground for issuing process against them. Three of the accused duly appeared and were examined as witnesses. But Subedar did not respond, and consequently Dhanna got a warrant issued against him. When he appeared in execution of the warrant he claimed the privilege of Article 20(3) of the Constitution and contended that he could not be compelled to give ...
Mannilal Sagarmal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-12-1957
Reported in: AIR1957All649; [1957]32ITR15(All)
V. Bhargava, J.1. The question of law which has been referred to us in this reference is 'whether in the circumstances of the case as stated and in the absence of proceedings under Section 27 of the Income-tax Act, the Tribunal was right in law in refusing to look into the validity of the assessment made under Section 23 (4) of the Income-tax Act in appeal against the quantum assessment.'2. The facts and circumstances in which this question arose are very brief and simple. For the assessment year 1943-44, the assessee had account books showing a net profit of Rs. 29,375. The Income-tax Officer called on the assessee to produce certain documents under Section 22 (4) of the Act. The accounts and documents required were net produced, and it was held by the Income-tax Officer that the assessee had deliberately suppressed them even though they existed. The Income-tax Officer therefore proceeded to make a best judgment assessment under Section 23 (4) of the Act. The assessee did not file any...
Mannilal Sagarmal Vs. the Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-12-1957
Reported in: AIR1957All739
V. Bhargava, J. 1. The assessee, Mannilal Sagarmal, during the course of the assessment for the year 1943-44, made an application for registration of the firm under Section 26-A of the Indian Income Tax Act. The Income Tax Officer issued a notice under Section 22(4) Of the Act requiring the assessee to produce certain accounts and documents on the date fixed. The accounts and documents were not produced and on the facts before him, the Income Tax Officer held that they had been deliberately suppressed. Thereupon, the Income Tax Officer held that the notice had not been complied with and the assessee was liable to assessment under Section 23 (4) of the Act. Consequently, he refused registration and rejected the application under Section 26-A of the Act.The assessee appealed against this order but the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax dismissed the appeal holding that no application had been made under Section 27 of the Act to the Income Tax Officer for cancellation of the A...
Har Prasad Shiva Dutt Rai Vs. Commr. of Income Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-12-1957
Reported in: AIR1957All746
V. Bhargava, J.1. In compliance with an order passed by this court under Section 66 (2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following two questions for our opinion :--'Q. CD Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, there was any material on the record for the finding that Rs. 42,840/-were suppressed profits of the assesses; Q. (2) Whether it could be said that the whole amount or a major portion thereof was income which had been derived in the account year mentioned above.' 2. The reference relates to the assessment year 1945-46. The relevant account year in question began on 15th September, 1943, and ended on 1st September, 1944, The assessee, in its return, showed a loss of Rs. 5,783/13/9. During the assessment proceedings, the Income-tax Officer found three deposits in the name of Jagannath, minor son of Sheo Dutt Rai who was the karta of the assessee Hindu undivided family. These deposits were of Rs. 9000/- on 15th Se...
Kanahia Lal Vs. Ram Kishan and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-11-1957
Reported in: AIR1957All339
ORDERSrivastava, J.1. This is a defendant's application in revision. The plaintiffs filed a suit for ejectment. They alleged that one Jagannath was a tenant-at-will of the land in dispute. He had died and the tenancy had been determined on account of his death. The defendants were his executors and were in possession of the land. The plaintiff wanted that they should be ejected and also claimed mesne profits from them. The plaintiffs valued the relief for possession under Section 7(xi)(cc) of the Court-fees Act.2. The defendants contested the suit and pleaded inter alia that the suit was undervalued and the court-fee paid was insufficient. They contended that the suit was a simple suit for possession against persons who were not admitted to be tenants. The plaintiffs were therefore bound to value the suit at the market value of the property under Section 7(v) of the Court-fees Act. If they valued the suit at that figure it would be found that the court-fee paid was insufficient and the...
Jagpat and ors. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-08-1957
Reported in: AIR1957All764; 1957CriLJ1205
Roy J. 1. The appellants Jagpat and Chunbad are cousins and are by caste Araks. The other two appellants Ram Saran and Billa are also cousins and are by caste Brahmins. They are all residents of village Umrehnda within police circle Bilsenda in district Banda. They have been convicted under Section 302/34, I. P. C. for the murder of one Ram Jiwan on the 20th June 1954 at about 7 a.m. and each of them has been sentenced to life imprisonment together with a fine of rupees one hundred or in default to further six months R. I. They have preferred this appeal against their conviction and sentences.2. The prosecution alleged that three or four days before the present occurrence there was a quarrel between Ram Jiwan and Chunnabad in connection with a Charpai belonging to Ram Jiwan which had been removed by Chhunbad and had been concealed by him somewhere. Ram Jiwan had abused Chunbad on that account and had also given him a beating. On that score Chhunbad and his party were on the look out to...
Fateh Chand and anr. Vs. Brij Bhushan Prakash and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-08-1957
Reported in: AIR1957All801
Srivastava, J.1. These two appeals are connected with each other and the undisputed facts which have given rise to them are as follows:--On the 21st August 1923, Lala Fateh Chand and Lala Chatter Sen (appellants in Appeal No. 2041 of 1948 and respondents in Appeal No. 2250 of 1946, who shall be referred to hereinafter as defendants) obtained a lease of the premises in dispute from one Lala Devi Prasad. The landlord served a notice of eviction on the tenants and filed a suit for ejectment and recovery of arrears of rent. The defendants pleaded inter alia that a part of the property from which their ejectment was claimed belonged to them and not to the plaintiff. They also pleaded that the notice of eviction was invalid. This latter contention was accepted by the Court and the suit for ejectment was dismissed. Lala Devi Prasad, the ori-ginal landlord, then died sometime after 1942 leaving his widow, Srimati Asharfi Devi and two sons Brij Bhushan Prakash and Kirti Bhushan Prakash.Under th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »