Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (1962)IILLJ8All
B. Mukerji, J.1. This is a special appeal Against the decision of a learned single Judge in this Court made on the hearing of a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash two orders alleged to have been passed by the State of Uttar Pradesh in the year 1959. In the petition the relevant prayer was put in thus:To quash the order, dated 10 September 1969 (annexure 8), and order, dated 9 September 1959 (annexure 10), by a writ of certiorari or by any other suitable writ, order or direction.2. The petitioner also prayed for the issue of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to withdraw the demand of rupees one lakh and odd which, according to the prayer, included a demand of Rs. 50,654-9-6 Issued against the petitioner, and release the property of the petitioner from attachment, and farther not to proceed with the recovery proceedings.3. The petitioner was a private limited concern doing business at the time when the p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1963]48ITR324(All)
BRIJLAL GUPTA J. - This is an income-tax reference which comes to us on a requisition by this court under section 66(2) of the Income-tax Act. The question which has been referred to us for our opinion is as follows :'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the department discharged its burden of proof in establishing that the sum of Rs. 5,000 was income of the assessee within the meaning of the word income as given in section 28(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act ?'The facts giving rise to the reference may be stated as follows : During the assessment year 1946-47 the Income-tax Officer discovered certain cash deposits in the Amanat Khata of the assessee. The entries were as follows :Debit Credit Rs. Rs.Rokar Panna 31 Magh B. 1 Samwat 2,001, i.e., 30-12-44 Byopari ka Rakha ka Nakad ... 3,000Rokar Panna 27 Pus S. 7 (i.e. 22-12-44) Byopari Nakad tha so Deya Gaya ... 3,000 Rokar Panna 53 Ch. S. 7 70 Baisakh Samvat S. 9 (i.e., 20-5-45 Nakad Byo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1963]48ITR531(All)
BRIJLAL GUPTA J. - These are four references under section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act. Along with each reference there is an application under section 66(4) also. The point involved in the references and the applications is the same. There is also only one statement of the case in respect of all the four references. Accordingly, we propose to dispose of all the four references and all the four applications under section 66(4) by one consolidated judgment.The question referred to us for opinion is :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 2,72,500 being the 1/4th share of Rs. 10,90,000 received by M/s. Beharilal Kailashpat on termination of their managing agency of Mills Company has correctly been treated as a receipt in the nature of a capital receipt ?'The references were made at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax. The opposite parties in the references are four out of eight partners of firm, M/s. Beharilal Kailashpat (hereinafter called...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1964All53
K.B. Asthana, J.1. This is a defendants's appeal against whom a preliminary decree directing him to render accounts of the firm Ram Ratan Shyam Manohar from the year 1928 has been passed.2. The plaintiff came to the Court with the allegation that his father Shyam Manohar Lal and his grandfather Ram Ratan Lal were members of a joint Hindu family and carried un Sarafa business; that the defendant Gopinath who was an experienced hand in the wholesale cloth business persuaded the plaintiff's father and his grandfather to start a firm in the name and style of Ram Ratan Shyam. Manohar dealing in cloth business; that the said firm was started in the year 1918 and Gopinath defendant was taken in as a partner in the said firm.3. According to plaintiff's case the joint family of the plaintiff was to share the profits and losses to the extent of one half share and the defendant was to share the profits and losses to the extent of one half. It was further pleaded that the plaintiff's joint family ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1963]50ITR530(All)
M. C. DESAI C.J. - The following question has been referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, under section 66(2) of the Income-tax Act :'Whether there was material for the finding of the Tribunal that the sum of Rs. 15,021 out of the sum of Rs. 25,021 appearing as a deposit on the 20th of June, 1947, was income of the assessee liable to be included in the total computation of the assessees income for the assessment year 1940-50 ?'The question relates to the assessment year 1949-50, the corresponding accounting year being the year from Asarh Sudi 2,2004 (corresponding to June 20, 1947) to Asarh Sudi 1, 2005 (corresponding to July 7, 1948). The facts, as they appear from the statement of the case submitted by the Tribunal, are as follows :The assessee, who is an individual, commenced business on June 20, 1947, with a capital investment of Rs. 25,021, which amount was credited to his personal account. The Income-tax Officer called upon him to explain th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1964]52ITR220(All)
DESAI C.J. - The following two questions have been referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act in the circumstances given belo :'1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the assessee having voluntarily submitted return under section 22(3) before the completion of the assessments, could be considered to have waived the issue of the notice under section 34?2. Whether on a true interpretation of the provisions of section 34, clause (a) or clause (b) of sub-section (1) of that section would be attracted in a case where no return under section 22(1) was filed by the assessee in due time?'In this reference we are concerned with the assessment year 1948-49 and 1949-50. The assessee is an association of persons. No return was filed by it in response to the general notice issued under section 22(1) in either year of the assessment years. No special notice was issued against it in either year under section 22(2). Before any p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1964]54ITR133(All)
BRIJLAL GUPTA J - These three references under section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act relate to the same assessee for different assessment years and arise more or less a common question and can be conveniently disposed of by a common judgment.The first reference relates to the assessment years 1948-49, 1949-50, 1950-51, 1951-52 and 1952-53. The second reference relates to the assessment year 1953-54 and the third reference to two assessment years, namely, 1954-55 and 1955-56.The question which has been referred in the first reference is :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the lease money and rent paid by the assessee to the lessor is a permissible deduction within the meaning of clause (xv) to sub-section (2) of section 10 of the Indian Income-tax Act ?'It will be clear from the form of the question that relates to two classes of money paid : (1) the 'lease' money; and (2) the rent. It may be stated that in the fifteen leases which are under consideration in the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1963]49ITR502(All)
BRIJLAL GUPTA J. - This is a reference under section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act. Two questions have been referred for the opinion of the court. They are :'(1) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the receipt by the assessee of the transferable U. P. Encumbered Estate Bonds amounted to receipt of interest included in the full value of the bonds on the date when the bonds were received ?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the proceedings under section 34(1)(a) and the resultant assessment were valid in law ?'The case relates to the assessment year 1946-47, relevant to the previous year, which was the financial year 1945-46. The facts in brief are : the assessee is a Hindu undivided family. It carries on money-lending business. Its method of accounting is the cash basis. In the course of its money-lending business it lent a sum of Rs. 51,315 to one Swaleh Khan. The debtor was landlord within the meaning of the U. P. Encumbered Estates Act. A de...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1963]49ITR458(All)
BRIJLAL GUPTA J. - This is a reference under section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act. Two questions have been referred to us for opinion.'1. Whether the notice dated January 27, 1949, issued by the Income-tax officer under section 34 was legal and valid 2. Whether the receipt of Rs. 2,50,000 was a revenue receipt liable to tax under the Act ?'The assessee is a firm registered under section 26A of the income-tax Act. The case relates to the assessment year 1944-45. The constitution of the firm is as follows :Rs. A. P.1. Lala Laxmipat Singhania ... 0-4-32. Chiranjiv Gaur Hari, s/o Lala Padampat Singhania ... 0-4-33. Vijaypat, s/o. Lala Kailashpat Singhania ... 0-4-34. Sri S. D. Garg ... 0-2-05. Lala Murlidhar ... 0-0-66. Lala Viswanath Bhartiya ... 0-0-37. Lala Mahabir Prasad Jatia ... 0-0-6By an agreement dated August 8, 1941, the assessee firm was appointed managing agent of J. K. Cotton . This company was originally a private limited company. It was reconstituted into a public company by ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1963]49ITR801(All)
BRIJLAL GUPTA J. - This is a reference under section 66 of the Income-tax Act. Three questions have been referred to this court for opinion :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, proceedings undertaken by the income-tax authorities under section 34 of the Income-tax Act are valid in law (2) Whether the receipt of Encumbered Estate Bonds during the previous year 1947-48 amounted to receipt of cash during that previous year and not during the previous year 1948-49, when the bonds were in fact sold at less than their face value ?'(3) Whether, in the circumstances of the case, the mere receipt of the Encumbered Estate Bonds was tantamount to receipt of income assessable in the year 1948-49 The assessment year in question is 1948-49 relevant to the accounting period the financial year ending March 31, 1948. The facts giving rise to the reference are that the assessee which is a Hindu undivided family carries on a money-lending business. In the course of that busin...
Tag this Judgment!