Allahabad Court August 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.
Nathu Ram Premchand Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-30-1962
Reported in: [1963]49ITR561(All)
JAGADISH SAHAI J. - This is the statement of case referring a question of law to this court in pursuance of an order passed by this court on 3rd August, 1959, under the provisions of section 66(2) of the Income-tax Act. That question of law is as follows :'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 10,000 credited to the account of Banarasidas was income of the assessee liable to assessment under the Income-tax Act ?'The facts, as they emerge from the statement of the case, are as follows : The assessee is a Hindu undivided family and carries on sarrafa business, purchases and sale of gold and silver bullion, purchase and sale of silver ornaments in the name and style of Nathu Ram Premchand.For the accounting year ending November 11, 1947, the relevant assessment year being 1948-49, the assessee submitted a return showing an income of Rs. 4,824 in the sarrafa business, and Rs. 1,030 as income from truck business. In the books of accounts there was a credit entr...
Smt. Kaniz Fatima Bibi Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-28-1962
Reported in: AIR1963All148; 1963CriLJ399
Nigam, J.1. On 31st May, 1960 Station Officer Nasirabad, district Rae Bareli submitted a report to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate Saion reporting that as usual the Urs fair was to be held from 1-6-1960 to 6-6-1960 at the Dargah Sharif situate at Jais, police station Nasirabad and that there was an apprehension of a breach of the peace in regard to the offerings made at the Dargah in connection with this Urs. This report for action under Section 145 of the Code at Criminal Procedure was submitted to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, who, on perusing the report, was satisfied of the existence of an apprehension of a breach of the peace and passed an order under Section 145 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure on 2-6-1960. in view of the emergency, the learned Sub-Divisional Magistral' further directed that the said Dargah Sharif along with cash, sweets and other offerings be attached and placed in the custody of five reliable persons who were directed to keep accounts of tna property and th...
Khalil-ul-rahman Khan Vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-28-1962
Reported in: AIR1963All383
ORDERA.P. Srivastava, J. 1. These are two connected petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution. The parties are identical and the petitions relate to the same order passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow. It will, therefore, be convenient to deal with them together.2. The petitioner Sri Khalil-ul-Rahman Khan had been granted a stage carriage permit No. 42I-A on Aligarh-Pahasu route on 25-3-1957. The permit was for a period of three years and the vehicle covered by it was No. UPB 1694. On 25-11-1957, the petitioner was allowed to replace vehicle No. UPB 1694 with vehicle No. UPB 1305. On the 7-8-1958 by an agreement of that date between the petitioner and the third respondent Sri Hazari Lal it was provided that for a consideration of Rs. 2,500/- the petitioner had sold the one-fourth share in the permit he held in favour of the third respondent and for a consideration of Rs. 2000/- he had sold to the third respondent one-fourth share in the vehicle No. UPB 1305 w...
Ramji Lal Rais Vs. Income-tax Officer, C-ward, Meerut.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-28-1962
Reported in: [1963]49ITR167(All)
M. C. DESAI C.J. - The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Delhi, has, at the instance of the assessee, referred a statement of the case to this court for its opinion on the three questions given below :'(1) Whether on a true interpretation of the provisions of section 18 and 14(7) of the U. P. Government Encumbered Estates Act, 1934, the liability for the debts and interest thereon due from Wahiduddin had passed on the U. P. Government with the passing of the decree on February 18, 1940, by the special judge appointed under the U. P. Encumbered Estates Ac ?(2) If the answer to question No. 1 is in the affirmative whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the surplus of Rs. 79,347 being the difference between the market price of the U. P. Government Encumbered Estate Bonds and the balance of the debt due from Wahiduddin was revenue income liable to ta ?(3) Whether the receipt by the assessee of the sum of Rs. 58,266 in April, 1935, during the execution proceedings of the decr...
J.A. Dixit Vs. Official Liquidator
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-24-1962
Reported in: AIR1963All284
Mukerji, J.1. All the three above-mentioned appeals arise out of a single liquidation proceeding, and relate to claims preferred by creditors as against the Company -- claims which they attempted to prove before the Official Liquidator in liquidation.2. The Jagdish Sugar Mills Limited went into liquidation upon a winding-up order having been made on the 21st February, 1958, though the application for the winding-up of the Company had been made as far back as the 17th April, 1949, by one of the share-holders of the Company Sri Madan Pal Siugh. It may here be noticed that before the actual winding-up order had been made the Mills had been placed under the control of an authorised Controller under the provisions of Section 3 of the United Provinces Industrial Ordinance, 1947 (U.- P. Ordinance II of 1947). Raja Bahadur Brij Narain Singh was appointed the authorised Controller of the Company and certain agreements had been entered into with the Raja Bahadur in respect of the running of the ...
Seth Madan Gopal Bagla Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-24-1962
Reported in: [1963]49ITR546(All)
BRIJLAL GUPTA J. - This a reference under section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act. Two questions have been referred for opinion of the court :'(1) Whether, on a true interpretation of the terms of the deed of lease, the sum of Rs. 6,000 received by the assessee as compensation for leasing out a land for a period of five years for the purposes of digging earth and moulding bricks therefrom, etc., was a capital receipt or a revenue receipt (2) If the above receipt is held to be a revenue receipt whether the entire amount of Rs. 6,000 would be taxed as the income of the year of receipt or should be spread over a period of five years, i.e., the tenure of the lease ?'It is clear that the second question will arise only if the answer to the first question is that the amount of Rs. 6,000 is revenue receipt and not capital receipt. If on the other hand the answer is that the amount is capital receipt, the second question would not arise. As in our opinion the answer to the first question would not...
Bareilly Bank Ltd. Vs. Nawal Kishore
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-1962
Reported in: AIR1964All78
Mukerji, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendant who happened to be a limited Bank, namely the Bareilly Bank Limited. The plaintiff was a constituent of the Bank and he sued the Bank for the recovery of a large sum of money, to wit, Rs. 19,900/- on account of principal and Rs. 811/- on account of interest etc., totaling a sum of Rs. 20,741/-.2. The plaintiffs case, in brief, was that on the 13th of September 1944, the plaintiff had deposited with the defendant-Bank a sum of Rs. 19,900/- in cash, and that the deposit was entered in the Bank's books. The plaintiff's case further was that when he deposited the sum of money with the Bank he filled in a voucher and put his signature on that and when the money was accepted by the Bank, the Bank put their acknowledgment on the voucher showing the receipt of the money. The plaintiff further stated that after he had made the deposit aforementioned, the money was credited to his current account which was entered by the Bank in their books to the...
Ramdeo and ors. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-1962
Reported in: 1963CriLJ198
S.K. Verma, J.1. These are two connected criminal appeals. Criminal Appeal No. 1757 of 1961 has been filed by Ramdeo, Uma, Abhiraj, Gurbhari and Sahban while the appellant in the connected Criminal Appeal No. 1762 of 1961 is Jagannath. All the appellants have been convicted by the learned Sessions Judge of Deoria of offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 149 and Section 148 I.P.C. Each of the appellants has been sentenced to imprisonment for life for the former offence and to three years' R.I. for the latter offence. The sentences have been ordered to run concurrently, Eight other persons also stood their trial along with the present appellants but they have been acquitted by the learned trial Judge and we are no longer concerned with them.2. The appellants, the eight acquitted accused persons and the complainant Ram Nakshatra are residents of village Maheshpur, Police, Station Rudrapur, district Deoria. The deceased Ram Narain, brother of the complainant, was also a r...
Niranjan Lal Ram Chandra Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-1962
Reported in: [1964]52ITR60(All)
BRIJLAL GUPTA J. - This is an income-tax reference under section 66(1) of the Act. The question which has been referred to this court for opinion is 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 5,347 was income arising to the assessee during the course of the business and liable to tax?'The facts giving rise to the reference are that during the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1950-51, the assessee was given a sum of Rs. 16,000 by the State Government as compensation for loss and expense sustained by him by reason of the abandonment by the Government of the scheme of floating the Hind Roadways Corporation. The assessee was a motor operator and was also a dealer in motor-cars and trucks. Some time prior to the previous year the State Government decided that motor transport business should be taken over by a Corporation and should not be allowed to be done by individual operators. As the assessee had experience of motor transport business he wa...
Maharaj Singh and ors. Vs. Hukum Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-20-1962
Reported in: AIR1964All136
S.S. Dhavan, J.1. This is a defendant's second appeal from the concurrent decisions of the Courts below decreeing the plaintiff-respondent's suit for an injunction to restrain the defendants from interfering with his possession over three plots of land in the village. The plaintiff alleged that he was the sirdar of the plots but the defendants had threatened to take forcible possession of them and cutting his crops; hence the suit.2. The defendants alleged that the plaintiff was not the sirdar of the plots and denied that he was the son of Angad who was admittedly the sirdar of the land. The first and second defendants claim to be sirdars of one plot and the third defenant of the remaining two plots. Both the Courts below disbelieved the defendants' story completely and held that the plaintiff is the son of Angad who was a tenant of the plots and was now the sirdar. The defendants' testimony that they were in possession of the plots was also disbelieved and the Courts have held the pla...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »