Allahabad Court February 1967 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 Niranjan SatyanaraIn Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-07-1967
Reported in: [1967]66ITR94(All)
JAGDISH SAHAI J. - The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal), has submitted a statement of case and has referred, in accordance with the directions of this court under section 66(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the following question of law for the opinion of this court :'Whether, in the circumstances, the assessment completed against the firm on February 24, 1955, was a valid assessment or it could have been made only against the partners of the dissolved firm after its dissolution ?'The assessment year to which this case relates is 1950-51, the previous year being October 17, 1948 to October 10, 1949. Sri Ram Niranjan Satya Narain (hereinafter referred to as the assessee) was assessed in the status of a registered firm which was styled Ram Niranjan Satya Narain. It was carrying on cloth business on commission basis in the name and style of Nand Kishore Jugal Kishore and sarrafa business on a small...
Commissioner, Sales Tax Vs. Ujjal Singh Autar Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-01-1967
Reported in: [1968]22STC26(All)
Jagdish Sahai, J.1. The Additional Judge (Revisions) Sales Tax, Meerut [hereinafter referred to as the Judge (Revisions)] has submitted a statement of the case and the following questions of law under Section 11 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for the opinion of this Court:(a) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the additional evidence collected by the department after the completion of assessment and appellate order can be treated as part of the record of such order for the purpose of Section 10(3) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act ?(b) Whether evidence collected after the expiry of four years' period of limitation under Section 21 of the U.P. Sales Tax-Act could be admitted in revision even if it is held as a part of the record ?2. M/s. Ujjal Singh Autar Singh (hereinafter referred to as the dealers) had a cloth business at Delhi and a branch at Bulandshahr. The Sales Tax Officer, Bulandshahr, started proceedings under Section 21 of the Act, agai...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›