Allahabad Court October 1966 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.
Ram Samujh and ors. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-12-1966
Reported in: AIR1967All579; 1967CriLJ1586
ORDERD.P. Uniyal, J.1. The applicants have been convicted under Sections 454 and 188 I. P. C. and have been sentenced to various terms of imprisonment.2. It appears that there was dispute between one, Jagdeni and the accused persons over the possession of a house. It resulted in proceedings under Section 145 in the court of Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Shahganj. On 14thMarch, 1964 the Magistrate passed a preliminary order and directed the attachment of the property, which was given in the possession of Ramraj Supurdar The police locked the house and handed over the key to the Supurdar. On 19th July, 1964 the accused approached the Supurdar and demanded the key from him, On his refusal to hand over the key the accused broke open the lock and took forcible possession of the house.On the following day the Supurdar moved an application in the court of Sub-Divisional Magistrate complaining of the forcible occupation of the house by the applicants. Thereupon the Magistrate filed a complaint ...
Bhikharipur Co-operative Society Ltd. Vs. the Assistant Registrar, Co- ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-12-1966
Reported in: 1967CriLJ1225
ORDERGyanendra Kumar, J.1. This is an application by Bhikharipur Co-operative Society Ltd., district Fatehpur, through one of its directors, Radha Krishna Dubey, for proceedings for contempt of court against Surendra Singh, Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Fatehpur in the following circumstances:2. The petitioner-society mainly carries on the business of giving loans to its members and charges interest from them. The members of the society also deposit their monies and earn interest thereon. In 1965 one Sheo Sagar Sharma was the President of the society, while Subedar Tripathi was its Manager cum Secretary. The allegation of the petitioner is that on 16.7.1965, Lakshmi Narain, the then President of Meoli Co-operative Society Ltd., district Fatehpur approached the petitioner-society for a loan of Rs. 4,000/- on behalf of Meoli Co-operative Society Ltd.. It is again the case of the petitioner that on that date (16.7.1965) a loan of Rs. 4,000/- was advanced by the petitioner s...
Dharam Chand Kedar Nath Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-12-1966
Reported in: [1967]65ITR168(All)
MANCHANDA J. - This is a case stated under section 66(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1922. The question referred is :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee-firm was entitled to registration under section 26 ?'The material facts are these : The assessee is a firm. It consisted of four adult and one minor. The relevant year of assessment is 1956-57. The fourth partner was one Chandrika Prasad and it was his son, Jhabboo Lal, a miner, who was said to have been admitted to the benefits of partnership. The firm was constituted under a deed of partnership dated 22nd October, 1949. The preamble to the partnership deed reads :'Whereas the first, second, third, fourth and fifth parties formed a joint Hindu family and have divided their movable property by means of the award of an arbitrator dated 21st October, 1949.And whereas the first, second, third and fourth parties have expressed a desire to carry on two business at Mirzapur and one at Unchhora in partnership....
J. K. Woollen Manufacturers Private Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-ta ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-11-1966
Reported in: [1967]65ITR237(All)
MANCHANDA J. - This is a case stated under section 66(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The question referred is :'Whether the amount of Rs. 6,975, awarded by the Labour Appellate Tribunal in a subsequent year was allowable as a deduction in the assessment year in questio ?'The material facts are these : The assessee is a Private limited company. In the relevant previous year for 1952-53 assessment year, the assessee carried on the business of manufacturing woollen rugs, blankets and cloth. The accounting year of the company relevant for 1952-53 assessment year was the year ending on 30th June, 1961. In the return filed for 1952-53, the assessee claimed a deduction of bonus amounting to Rs. 16,275 which represented the bonus for the accounting year ended on 30th June, 1949. Even though the assessees accounting year closed on 30th June each year, bonus was declared on the basis of the calendar year. In the course of the accounting year ending on 30th J...
Swami Nath Singh and ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-10-1966
Reported in: AIR1967All472
ORDERK.B. Asthana, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners have challenged the validity of proceedings taken under the provisions of Chapter II of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 (Act No. 16 of 1927)2. By a notification dated 19th May, 1964 published in the official gazette dated 5th June 1954 the State Government in exercise of its powers under Section 4 of the Forest Act proposed to constitute certain land as reserved forest. Eight plots on which the petitioners claimed sirdari rights, lying in village Grainahi, were also included in the land mentioned in the schedule of the said notification. Thereupon the petitioners filed claims before the Forest Settlement Officer objecting to the inclusion of their sirdari plots in the reserved forest. The case of the petitioners was that they had taken the plots in dispute on lease from the former zamindars and had executed a patta and Iqrarnama for the purpose.They also alleged that they had given a large sum o...
H.H. Maharaja Vibhuti NaraIn Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-10-1966
Reported in: [1967]65ITR364(All)
The assessee, Maharaja Vibhuti Narain Singh of Varanasi, was assessed under section 5 and 6 of the U.P. Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), on an income of Rs. 34,437-12-9 for 1362 Fasli and of Rs. 37,794-13-4 for 1363 Fasli by the assessing authority. He appealed on the ground that he had been assessed on a wrong basis, that the whole of the rental amount due to him as rent had been realized by him from the cultivators, whereas section 5 of the Act only provided that 'the Agricultural income mentioned in clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 2 shall be deemed to be the sum realized in the previous year on account of agricultural income'. The Additional Commissioner, who heard the appeal from the assessment order dated February 29, 1956, relating to the year 1362 Fasli did not consider the question of law raised, but he held that, in view of the practice of assessing agricultural income-tax on the basis of rental demand instead of actual realisati...
Hazari Lal Roop Chand Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-10-1966
Reported in: [1967]65ITR488(All)
MANCHANDA J. - This is a case stated under section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Two questions have been referred as directed by this court. They are :'1. Whether there was any material on the basis of which the Tribunal could come to the conclusion that with Rs. 28,200 the assessee was carrying on any business for his own benefit, and the sum of Rs. 28,200 was not merely an advance to Panna Lal ?2. If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, then, whether there was any material to hold that that business resulted in a profit of Rs. 5,000 ?'The material facts are these : The relevant year of assessment is 1945-46, the previous year being the year ending Dewali 2001. The assessee was carrying on business in cloth. The kartas sister was married to one Panna Lal of Rewa. The Income tax Officer on examining the books of accounts of the assessee found that here was a squared-up account in the name of the said Panna Lal with deb...
Sri Ram Sahney Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-07-1966
Reported in: [1967]20STC269(All)
S.C. Manchanda, J.1. This is a case stated under Section 11(1) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act).2. The question referred is as follows :Whether for assessment under Section 21 for 1954-55 for which four years limitation expired on 31st March, 1959, respecting which Section 21 proceedings started on an information of suppression of bales imported to the tune of 36 in number respecting which service had been effected within four years, can in this assessment proceeding under Section 21 additional information received after 31st March, 1959, be utilised so as to pass the assessment under Section 21 not only based on the initial information of suppression of 36 bales imported but taking into consideration the subsequent information of 350 bales as well which information was received after the expiry of four years?3. The material facts are these : The assessee is a cloth dealer carrying on business at Bareilly. The relevant year of assessment is 1954-55. Assess...
Ram Dass Vs. Board of Revenue and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-06-1966
Reported in: AIR1967All481
ORDERS.N. Singh, J. 1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution arises out of a suit instituted by the plaintiff petitioner under Section 176 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act.2. The facts giving rise to this petition are that Mohammad Hanif and Abdul Majid were two co-bhumidhars of the land in suit in equal shares. Mohammad Hanif sold his half share to the defendants opposite parties Mir Ahmad, Shaukat, Nizamuddin and Mohammad Ali. It appears that the other co-tenure-holder Abdul Majid executed an agreement to sell his half share of the property in favour of the plaintiff petitioner. Thereafter he did not execute the sale deed with the result that the plaintiff petitioner had to institute a suit for specific performance of the contract. Thai suit was finally decreed by the civil court and in pursuance of that decree on failure of Abdul Majid a sate deed was executed by the court on 25th September 1958. It is after the execution of this sale deed by the co...
J.K. Jute Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Sales Tax Officer and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-06-1966
Reported in: [1967]19STC339(All)
R.S. Pathak, J.1. The petitioner, a public limited company carrying on the business of manufacture and sale of jute goods, was assessed to sales tax under the U.P. Sales Tax Act in the sum of Rs. 4,93,747-2-0 for the assessment year 1948-49 and in the sum of Rs. 2,42,578-5-3 for the assessment year 1949-50. The turnover assessed included sales outside the State of Uttar Pradesh made under railway receipts and on consignment basis. The petitioner appealed against the assessment orders. The appeal for the assessment year 1949-50 was decided first. The Judge (Appeals), by his order of 6th April, 1956, held that the petitioner was not liable to sales tax on sales conducted outside Uttar Pradesh where the goods were despatched under railway receipts or on consignment basis. He directed that the petitioner be given credit for the amount already deposited on. the sales. Accordingly, the petitioner claims a sum of Rs. 37,318-11-6 became refundable to the petitioner. In the appeal for the asses...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »