Allahabad Court November 1962 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.
Bishambar Dayal Shri Niwas Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-14-1962
Reported in: [1963]14STC184(All)
M.C. Desai, C.J.1. The following question has been referred to this Court for its opinion by the Judge (Revisions) Sales Tax:Whether red lead and zinc oxide are covered by the term 'dyes and colours' within the meaning of the Notification No. ST.-1429/X-1012-1948, dated 30th March, 1949, or fall under the head of 'chemicals of all kinds' under the Notification No. ST-117-X-923-1948, dated 8th June, 1948, under the U. P. Sales Tax Act.2. The question is for assessment of the sales tax for the years 1950-51 and 1952-53. The assessee is a manufacturer of glassware and dealer in glassware, zinc oxide and red lead in Firozabad, which is well-known for its bangle industry. It imports zinc oxide and red lead, uses some in manufacturing glass and sells the rest as a part of its business. Zinc oxide in known popularly as safeda and red lead as sindur. Under Notification No. ST-117/X-923-1948, dated June 8, 1948, issued by the State Government in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3-A o...
Ram Sahai Vs. Commissioner S.T.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-13-1962
Reported in: AIR1964All176; [1963]14STC275(All)
Desai, C.J.1. This is 3 reference made by the Judge (Revisions) at the instance of the assessee under Section 11(1) of the O.P. Sales Tax Act. The question referred is:1. Whether Rule 44(f) of the U. P. Sales Tax Rules applies only to the transfer of business as a whole; (a) in the case of multi-point goods, (b) and in the case of single point goods, (c) when transfer is made by a person who is not liable to pay tax? 2. It appears from the statement of the case that the assessee was a dealer in cloth liable to tax at a single point. The question is of assessment to sales tax for the year 1955-56. The assessee closed the business on 28-11-1955 and sold the entire business together with the stock in trade for the lump sum of Rs. 72,477/-/6. Though what was sold included some cloth, it is not known what was the price for which that cloth was sold because the business and the stock in trade were sold together for one sum. The assessee is admittedly a person liable to pay sales tax. It sub...
Om Prakash Vs. Maya Ram and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-11-1962
Reported in: AIR1964All430
Uniyal, J.1. This is an appeal by Om Prakash, plaintiff against the appellate order of the Additional Civile Judge, Muzaffarnagar returning the plaint for presentation to the proper Court.2. The plaintiff filed a suit in the Court of the Munsif for dissolution of a partnership firm and for accounts on the allegation that the said firm came into existence on 31-10-1953 and carried on its business till 16-11.1955. It was alleged that the defend-dants dissolved the said firm on 16-11-1955 without his knowledge or consent. In para. 5 of the plaint it was asserted that the plaintiff made a capital investment of Rs. 22,000/- in the partnership business which was going on well till it was dissolved, and that he owed a sum of Rs. 4,383-4-9 only to the partnership in respect of the accounts of an old firm. In para. 7 o the plaint it was pleaded that it was not possible of the plaintiff to ascertain the exact amount due to him from the firm and he was, therefore, valuing the suit at Rs. 1,000/- ...
Dalel and anr. Vs. Baroo and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-09-1962
Reported in: AIR1967All59
Takru, J. 1. I have had the advantage of reading the judgment prepared by brother Oak, but regret my inability to share the view expressed by him therein. 2. The question raised in this second appeal is, whether the suit filed by the plaintiffs in the Civil Court for a declaration that they, along with defendant No. 3, were the bhumidhars of the grove in question, was barred by Section 49 of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act (hereinafter called the Act).3. The facts giving rise to this appeal are stated in full in the judgment of brother Oak, and it is unnecessary therefore, to repeal them. Suffice it to say, that the necessity for seeking the declaration mentioned above arose as a result of the fact that the village in which the said grove was situate had come under consolidation operations in the course of which defendants Nos. 1 and 2 succeeded in getting their names recorded over the said grove by the Assistant Consolidation Officer. One of the pleas raised in defence was tha...
Bhagwan Sahai Vs. Daryao Kunwar and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-09-1962
Reported in: AIR1963All210
Takru, J.1. The following question has come up before us on a reference by a learned single Judge:'Whether the appeal is barred by Section 11, Civil P. C., or by the general principles of res judicata as the appeals preferred against the decisions in suits Nos. 77 and 91 of 1951 were rejected and dismissed by this Court and those decisions have become final and binding between the parties.'2. The facts of the case have been set out in detail in the referring order, and it is unnecessary therefore to repeat them, except in so far as it is relevant for answering the question posed above.3. Ch. Bhagwan Sahai, the appellant in the aforesaid appeals, brought a suit No. 37 of 1950, against Smt. Daryao Kuer, the first respondent in these appeals, for a declaration that he and his son Ch. Shiv Dan, the second respondent, were the owners of the properties in suit, and for possession in the alternative. According to Ch. Bhagwan Sahai the recorded owner of these properties was his uncle Sri Harna...
Shyam Sunder Lal Vs. Shagun Chand
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-08-1962
Reported in: AIR1967All214
Mukerji, J. 1. This is a reference to a Full Bench by a Bench of which one of us was a member on the ground that there was a conflict in this Court between two decisions, one reported in Raja Ram v. Madho Prasad : AIR1954All592 and the other in Sharafat Ullah Khan v. Raja Udairaj Singh : AIR1959All416 . In the latter decision the learned Judges, Beg and Tandon. JJ. doubted the correctness of the decision in : AIR1954All592 on the ground that they were unable to hold that Sections 3. 14 and 15 of the U. P. (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act, 1947. had the effect of conferring retrospective operation on an Amending Act. Before we fully comprehend the scope of the controversy it is necessary to know a few facts of the case: this was also necessary because the whole case was referred for decision to the Full Bench.2. The plaintiff in this case filed a suit for the ejectment of the defendants on the ground that he required the accommodation which was a house, for himself. The defe...
Prem Ballabh Khulbe Vs. Income-tax Officer, A-ward, Bareilly.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-08-1962
Reported in: [1964]54ITR637(All)
This is a revision petition against the order of the District Judge, Kumaun, allowing the application of the Income-tax Officer, praying that the sum of Rs. 12,237-13-6 lying in deposit in the Government Treasury in respect of tax demands outstanding against the firm and the partners which far exceed the amount lying in deposit with the court.A civil suit for rendition of accounts was filed in the court of the District Judge. A final decree was passed by the District Judge on the 30th November, 1955. Rs. 12,237-13-6 were lying in deposit in the court as a result of the sale of certain movable of the firm. It was held that each of the four partners of the firm was entitled to one-fourth share therein subject to the claim of the income-tax department and the sales tax department against the firm. It was further ordered that, inasmuch as the claims of the taxing departments far exceeded the deposit in court, no party to the suit shall be allowed to withdraw any part of the deposit till th...
Gourdhan Das Badri Prasad Khemka and ors. Vs. Smt. Shilwati Devi and o ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-06-1962
Reported in: AIR1963All606
S.C. Manchanda, J.By The Court 1. This is a first appeal from order of the District Judge of Varanasi dated the 14th of January 1958 whereby under the provision of Section 176 of the Indian Companies Act and Rule 52 framed thereunder, one of the three liquidators appointed was removed on the ground that the expenses of liquidation could thereby be brought down without in any way impairing the efficiency of the liquidation proceedings.Benaras Cotton and Silk Mills Limited was a public limited company and by an order of this Court dated the 4th of May 1955 it was directed to be wound up on the application of some of the creditors under section 164 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). It was directed that the liquidation proceedings would be carried on under the supervision of the District Judge of Varanasi. The said District Judge appointed three persons as liquidators of the Company by an order dated the 13th August, 1955. These were Sri C. D. Parikh, ...
Raja Ajai Varma Vs. Assessing Authority, Powayan and Others.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-06-1962
Reported in: [1964]51ITR308(All)
These three writ petitions under article 226 of the Constitution are consolidated for the sake of convenience. The writ petitions are directed against the order of the assessing authority under the Agricultural Income-tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and of the order of the Board of Revenue dated 26th March, 1962, whereby the order of the Additional Commissioner remanding the case to the assessing authority for making a fresh assessment in accordance with law was set aside.The facts leading up to these writ petitions are these. The relevant assessment years are 1361, 1362 and 1363 Fasli. The petitioner was served with a notice under the Act calling for a return of income. In the provisional assessment which was completed, the assessing authority included in the assessment of the assessee the income from the land which was standing in the separate name, possession and cultivation of his wife, sons and the daughters.The petitioner filed an objection against the inclusion of t...
Niranjan Prakash and anr. Vs. Manni Lal Dwivedi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-02-1962
Reported in: AIR1964All433; 1964CriLJ369
ORDERK.B. Asthana, J.1. Sri Niranjan Prakash and Sri B.P. Singh have filed this application under Section 561-A, Cr. P. C. praying that the proceedings in a criminal case pending against them in the Court of the Bench Magistrate No. III, Kanpur, be quashed. The opposite party to the application is Sri Manni Lal Dwivedi on whose complaint the case against the applicants has been registered. The brief facts necessary for the appreciation of the controversy between the parties in this application may be stated as follows:2. On 30th June 1959 a truck on Bedford Chassis was purchased in the name of Smt. Brij Dulari wife of Sri Manni Lal Dwivedi for a sum of Rs. 26,300/-.. It appears that Rs. 6300/- were paid in cash and for the balance of Rs. 20,000/- an Hire Purchase agreement was entered into between Smt. Brij Dulari and Messrs. Automobile Financing Corporation of Lucknow hereinafter described as corporation. It further appears that there was default in payment of instalment under that ag...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »