Allahabad Court September 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.
Mukand Lal Vs. Income-tax Officer, a Ward, Varanasi.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-14-1962
Reported in: [1963]49ITR354(All)
These three writ petitions raise a common point and are therefore consolidated for the sake of convenience. The first two writ petitions, Nos. 1995 and 3069 of 1960, are by Mukand Lal Damodar Das, sons of L. Kanhaiya Lal Sarraf, and they are concerned with the assessment years 1947-48, 1948-49 and 1949-50. The third with petition No. 3068 of 1960 is by Hiralal, son of the aforesaid Mukand Lal Sarraf, and it is concerned only with the assessment years 1948-49 and 1949-50.The question which arise in these petitions is whether the petitioners can be assessed under section 34(1)(b) read with the second proviso to section 34(3) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, hereinafter referred to as the Act, for the aforesaid relevant years in the status of an individual in respect of the share income of the first two petitioners from the firm of Kanhaiya Lal Mukand Lal Sarraf, Raja Darwaza, Varanasi, and the third petitioner, Hira Lal, in respect of his share income from the firm, Kanhaiya Lal Damod...
Shyam Sunder Gupta Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-13-1962
Reported in: [1963]49ITR641(All)
BRIJLAL GUPTA J. - This is a reference under section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act. The question which has been referred for the opinion of the court is :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of this case the net surplus realisation of Rs. 31,000 by the sale of 9,000 shares of the Soora Jute Mills Co. Ltd. was revenue income of the assessee liable to take under the Indian Income-tax Act ?'There is a mistake in the question inasmuch as in place of the figure of 9,000 there should be a figure of only 4,500 as will be shown hereafter.The facts giving rise to the reference are that in the assessment year 1946-47 the assessee was assessed in the status of an individual. In that assessment a sum of Rs. 31,000 was included in assessment as the assessees share of the surplus realisation of the sale of 9,000 shares of Soora Jute Mills Co. Ltd. The assessee and three other purchased 36,000 shares of Soora Jute Mills Co. Ltd. on April 20, 1944 at the rate of Rs. 32 per share from Messrs. M...
Faruq Ali Shah Vs. Ghanshiam Dass and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-11-1962
Reported in: AIR1963All280
ORDERD.S. Mathur, J.1. This is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution by Faruq Ali Shah, judgment-debtor for quashing the order dated 7-3-1960 of the Additional District Judge, Meerut, Annexure 'C' to the affidavit, whereby the revision preferred against the order dated 23-5-1959 of the Judge, Small Cause Court, Meerut, Annexure 'B' to the affidavit, was allowed and the objection dated 25-10-1958 Annexure 'A' to the affidavit, against the maintainability of the execution application was dismissed. A request is also made for the issue of an order prohibiting the Judge, Small Cause. Court, Meerut, respondent No. 3, from proceeding with the execution application.2. The facts of the case are simple and are no longer in dispute. Ghanshiam Dass, respondent No. 1, obtained an ex parte decree on 28-9-1948 in S. C. C. Suit No. 998 of 1948. The first execution application No. 884 of 1951 was moved on 27-9-1951, Meanwhile on 14-6-1950, notification No. 2339-1/CW-302 (22)-46 under Se...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Lucknow Vs. Wheeler Club Ltd., Meerut
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-06-1962
Reported in: AIR1963All474; [1963]49ITR52(All)
Desai, C.J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (Delhi Bench) has referred to this Court for its opinion the following questions under Section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act:'(1) Whether the rent realised by the assesses from its members was income from property liable to be assessee a under Section 9 of the Indian Income-tax Act? if not (2) Whether the principle of mutuality entitling an assessee to exemption from Income-tax on his receipt would apply only to receipts assessable under Section 10 under the head 'profits and gains of business, profession or vocation' or would apply also to receipts assessable under the head 'income from property' under Section 9 of the Indian Income-tax Act?' it appears from the statement of the case submitted by the Tribunal that the assessee is a limited company running a club exclusively for the use of its members. Among the amenities provided by it to its members is the use of residential quarters owned by it, by members on payment of rent. All member...
Shakuntala Devi Vs. Beni Madhav
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-05-1962
Reported in: AIR1964All165
ORDERS.N. Katju, J.1. This is an application in revisionagainst an order of the Additional District Judge of Meerut dismissing the Applicant's application under Section 85 of the U.P. Z. A. and L. R. Act.2. The applicant Smt. Shakuntala Devi ia the widow of one Pundri Kaksh who died in 1947. Pundri Kaksh was possessed of Zamindari properties along with his brother Beni Madhav. The applicant was given compensation bonds of the amount of Rs. 10,000/- only in respect of the share of her husband in the aforesaid property but the balance of the compensation amount was withheld on the ground that she had a limited interest in the property. Subsequently she made an application to the Compensation Officer on 30-7-1956 claiming the balance of the amount of compensation on the ground that after the passing of the Hindu Succession Act (XXX of 1956} she had become full owner of the property left by her deceased husband and she was entitled to the balance of the compensation amount that had been wi...
Ram Sanehi and ors. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-05-1962
Reported in: AIR1963All308; 1963CriLJ1
Uniyal, J.1. Cr. A. No. 1654 of 1961 is by Ram Sanehi while Cr. A. No. 1795 of 1961 is by Sheo Rakhan and Ram Nath. The appellants were prosecuted on a charge of dacoity with murder under Section 396 I. P. C. and each of them was sentenced to imprisonment for life.2. The case against the appellants was as follows : On the night between the 28th and 29th of Nov., 1960 some four or five miscreants committed dacoity at the house of Mam Ram in village Kachpura, within Police Circle Jaswantnagar, District Etawah. The presence of the miscreants was noticed by Smt. Laro, mother of Mani Ram. She immediately came out of the room and raised an alarm. The night in question was a moonlit one. Several persons of the locality came on the scene and are said to have recognised the dacoits when they came out of the house of Mani Ram after collecting their booty. One of the dacoits, namely. Ram Nath accused, belonged to a neighbouring village which was at a distance of two or three furlongs from the hou...
Bhagwati Prasad Bajoria and ors. Vs. British India Corporation Ltd. an ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-04-1962
Reported in: AIR1964All75
Oak, J. 1. I agree with my learned brother that the application should be allowed. I would like to add a few words on the question of maintainability of the application.2. Mr. S.N. Kakkar appearing for Sri L.N. Dalmia, objector contended that, the application under Section 151, C. P. C. is not maintainable. Mr. Kakkar advanced two reasons in support of his contention. He argued that the present applicants were not parties in Special Appeal No. 299 of 1961. Secondly, the Court has no power to alter its judgment, dated 14-2-1962.3. Mr. Kakkar relied upon Order XX, Rule 3, C. P. C. Order XX, Rule 3, C. P. C. states :'The judgment shall be dated and signed by the Judge in open Court at the time of pronouncing it and, when once signed, shall not afterwards be altered or added to, save as provided by Section 152, or on review.'4. In Sajjadi Begam v. Dilawar Husain, AIR 1915 All 98 a Court made a decree in plaintiff's favour conditional upon his paying an extra court-fee within a certain time...
Ram Autar Verma Vs. Agarwal Bank Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-04-1962
Reported in: AIR1963All90
Singh, J. 1. This special appeal has been filed against the judgment of our brother Nigam, J. in Civil Misc. Appln. No. 897 of 1952 under Section 45-B of the Banking Companies Act X of 194.9. 2. The respondent, Agarwal Bank Ltd., is in liquidation. An application was moved by the liquidator for recovery of a sum of Rs. 2576/15/3 which amount was due to the Bank from the appellant under a pronote executed by him on the 26th August, 1948, for a sum of Rs. 2,000/- carrying interest at 71/2 per cent. per annum. The appellant filed a written statement in which the execution and consideration of the pronote as well as the rate of interest were admitted. What was alleged by the appellant in reply was that he had deposited a sum of Rs. 2,000/- in fixed deposit with the Bank on 1st January, 1946, for a period of two years and when that fixed deposit matured and he wanted to take back that money the Bank instead of paying it to him placed it in fixed deposit for a further period of two years wit...
State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Debi Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-03-1962
Reported in: AIR1964All248
Mithan Lal, J. 1. This is an application under Order 41 Rule 21, C. P. C. for re-admission of the appeal on the ground that as the name of the respondent's learned counsel had not been printed in the list, the respondent had no notice of hearing of the appeal and the appeal was decided ex parte. The application has been made within 30 days from the date of knowledge though it is some 216 days after the date of the order. Sri H. N. Seth, learned counsel for the state, has contended that under Article 169 of the Indian Limitation Act the application should have been made within 30 days of the date of the decree in appeal and where notice of the appeal was not duly served then within 30 days of the date of the knowledge.2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. The affidavit which has been filed in this case by the respondents' learned counsel goes to show that a vakalatnama of the learned counsel had been filed, but the name of the learned counsel representing the respondent had n...
Goel Brothers Vs. Sales Tax Officer and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-03-1962
Reported in: [1963]14STC193(All)
M.C. Desai, C.J.1. In this application we are concerned with the assessment of the assessee to sales tax under the U. P. Sales Tax Act for the assessment year 1955-56 and in the connected Sales Tax Application No. 350 of 1959 with the assessment for the year 1956-57. The assessee was assessed by the Sales Tax Officer and there were appeals from the two orders to the Judge (Appeals). On the appeals being dismissed the assessee filed two revision applications under Section 10 of the Act in respect of the two orders before the Judge (Revisions) and he disposed of both by a consolidated order and communicated his decision to the assessee on nth September, 1958. Section 11(1) gives the assessee a right to apply in writing to the Judge (Revisions) for referring a question of law arising out of his order passed under Section 10 to this Court for its opinion within 120 days and requires him to deposit a fee of Rs. 100 while making the application. The assessee, in exercise of this right, made ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›