Allahabad Court March 1968 Judgments
Mahabir Sugar Mills (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-1968
Reported in: [1969]71ITR87(All)
V. G. OAK C.J. - The question for consideration in this income-tax reference is whether penalty paid under sub-section (5) of section 3 of the U. P. Sugarcane Cess Act, 1956 (hereafter referred to as the 'Cess Act'), is a permissible deduction under section 10(2)(xv) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The Mahabir Sugar Mills (Private) Ltd. is the assessee. It is a private limited company. It used to run a sugar mill. The assessee used to purchase sugarcane. It had to pay cess to the Government under the Cess Act. Cess was assessed against the company in due course. The company did not pay the cess within the prescribed time. The assessee had, therefore, to pay a sum of Rs. 14,664 as penalty under sub-section (5) of section 3 of the Cess Act. The assessee claimed this sum of Rs. 14,664 as a permissible expense and commercial loss. This claim was disallowed by the Income-tax Officer. The assessee appealed and succeeded. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner held that the sum of Rs. 14,66...
Tag this Judgment!Nawab HusaIn Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-27-1968
Reported in: AIR1969All466
K.B. Asthana, J. 1. This is a plaintiffs second appeal in a suit for declaration that the order of his dismissal passed by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Western Range, was ultra vires, illegal and without jurisdiction and he continued to be in police service of Uttar Pradesh. The suit was dismissed by the trial Court and the lower appellate court confirmed en appeal the decree of the trial Court.2. The two main questions which arise for decision in this appeal are; (1) whether the suit of the plaintiff was barred by the principles of constructive res judicata, his writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for similar relief having been dismissed by the High Court and (2) whether the Deputy Inspector General of Police was competent to dismiss the plaintiff from service of the Police Force of Uttar Pradesh, he being an officer below the rank of the Inspector General by whom the plaintiff was appointed as Sub Inspector of Police. Some other questions did arise in the c...
Tag this Judgment!Shanti Sarup Vs. Radhaswami Satsang Sabha, Dayalbagh Agra and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-22-1968
Reported in: AIR1969All248
S.D. Khare, J. 1. An interesting point of law that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether a gift or dedication of movable property (Rs. 23,038 cash) could be made by a Satsangi of the Radha Swami faith (in the present case the Sant Sad Guru himself) to Radha Swami Dayal, the impersonal deity of Radha Swami Satsangis, and, if so, in whom would that property vest. It is also in dispute whether any such gift or dedication had, in fact, been made. 2. The property in dispute is a residential building, known as 'Tej Punj' constructed in the year 1934 inside the Dayal Bagh Colony at Agra. It is the admitted case of the parties that the entire cost of the construction of the building was borne by Sir Anand Swarup (hereinafter described as 'Shri Sahabji Maharaj'. The construction became complete in the year 1935, and Shri Sahabji Maharaj along with other members of his family shifted to that building. Shri Sahabji Maharaj departed from this world on 24-6-1937. Thereafter his widow L...
Tag this Judgment!Raj Kumar Manohar Lal Vs. Union of India (Uoi), Through General Manage ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-21-1968
Reported in: AIR1969All472
ORDERJ.N. Takru, J. 1. Raj Kumar has filed this revision against the judgment and decree of the learned District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad, whereby he set aside, in appeal, the judgment and direction of Sri M. C. Gupta, the Authority under the Payment of Wages Act.2. The brief facts giving rise to this revision are as follows: The applicant was employed as a clock-winder in the Moradabad Division of the Northern Railway. He was discharged from service on the 27th of November 1953 by the Divisional Superintendent, Moradabad, Thereupon the applicant filed a suit seeking a declaration that his discharge was unlawful and that he continued to be in service throughout. The suit was dismissed by the trial court, but was decreed, on appeal on the 13th of November, 1957 in the terms prayed for. When the Railway authorities did not reinstate him the applicant made several representations to them for his reinstatement, and, finally by the order dated the 12th September, 1958 the applicant was...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, U.P. Vs. Beni Prasad Tandon.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-21-1968
Reported in: [1969]71ITR322(All)
V. G. OAK C.J. - The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, has referred the following question of law to this court :'Whether the assessee, who has no male issue, constitutes a Hindu undivided family with his wife and unmarried daughters in respect of the income from property which has fallen to his share on partition ?'Shri Beni Prasad is the assessee. The assessment year is 1958-59. The assessee is the son of Shri Manmohan Das Tandon. At one time the joint family consisted of Shri Manmohan Das Tandon and his five sons including the present assessee. There was a complete partition between the members of the joint family. For several years Shri Beni Prasad was assessed in the status of an individual. He was so assessed for the assessment year 1958-59 also. The income so assessed included the income received from the property allotted to Shri Beni Prasad upon partition. The assessee appealed. He raised the point that, although a sum of Rs. 26,476 was his personal income, the i...
Tag this Judgment!Vaid Mahesh Chandra Shastri Rampuri Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-13-1968
Reported in: [1968]38CompCas767(All)
Dwivedi, J.1. Vaid Mahesh Chandra Shastri is the appellant in this appeal. His wife, who died on May 21, 1959, was called Pushpa Devi. They together obtained two policies of life insurance on their joint lives from the respondent, the Life Insurance Corporation of India. The policies commenced from November 18 and December 28, 1958, respectively. They were for Rs. 10,000 each.2. After the death of his wife, the appellant claimed the amount of the policies from the respondent. He submitted his claim on August 17, 1959. But on July 28, 1961, the respondent repudiated the claim. Hence the suit, out of which this appeal has arisen, was instituted for the recovery of the amount due under the two policies.3. The respondent contested the suit on various grounds. The civil judge dismissed the suit. It is unnecessary to reproduce all his findings. The arguments in appeal have converged on three of his findings. And we shall summarise them here : (1) Section 45 of the Insurance Act applies to th...
Tag this Judgment!Municipal Board, Kanpur Vs. Additional Commissioner, Kanpur and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-12-1968
Reported in: AIR1969All177
Gangeshwar Prasad, J.1. These nine Special Appeals have been filed by the Municipal Board of Kanpur (hereinafter referred to as the Board) against the judgments of a learned Single Judge of this Court in nine writ petitions filed by the Board. All the writ petitions raised identical questions and they were all dismissed by the learned Judge for reasons given in his judgment in writ petition No. 1451 of 1959 which has given rise to Special Appeal No. 407 of 1959. All the Special Appeals are, therefore, being disposed of by a common judgment.2. The Board, which was functioning under an Administrator, assessed respondent No. 2 of each of these appeals to a tax on the annual value of certain buildings and lands. Against the assessment, the said respondents (hereinafter referred to as the assessee) preferred appeals under Section 160 of the U, P. Municipalities Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) before Sri A. P. Misra, Additional Commissioner, Kanpur, who had been appointed as the app...
Tag this Judgment!R.B. Ram Rattan Prem Nath, Dehradun Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, U. ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-11-1968
Reported in: AIR1969All375
Pathak, J. 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following two questions at the instance of the assessee for the opinion of this Court.'1. Whether for the assessment year1946-47 the Income Tax Officer was justified in initiating the proceedings and completing the assessment under Section 34(1)(a) or he should have taken recourse to Section 34(1A) or 34(1)(a)? 2. Whether for the assessment years1947-48 and 1948-49 the Income Tax Officer was justified in initiating action under Section 34(1)(a) or he should have taken recourse to Section 34(1)(b) of the Act?' 2. The assessee is a partnership firm consisting of Rai Bahadur Ram Ratan and his son Prem Nath. It carried on the business of canteen contractors. The statement of the case submitted by the Tribunal mentions that the account books maintained by the assessee were never accepted by the Income Tax Officer and the income was assessed by applying a flat rate over the turnover disclosed by the assessee.3. For the assessme...
Tag this Judgment!Girdhari Lal Laxman Prasad Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-11-1968
Reported in: [1968]70ITR853(All)
R. S. PATHAK J. - The assessee is a partnership firm consisting of three partners, Girdhari Lal, Laxman Prasad and Ram Dulari Devi. For the assessment year 1958-59 the Income-tax Officer took separate assessment proceedings against Girdhari Lal and Ram Dulari Devi in their individual status and included therein the share of each from the profits of the assessee-firm. The share was taken in accordance with the return filed by each partner and a remark was added that the amount would be rectified later under section 35 of the Income-tax Act, 1922, when the correct share was determined in the assessment of the assessee-firm. The share was brought to tax in the assessment of each individual partner. Subsequently, the Income-tax Officer took assessment proceedings against the assessee-firm for the assessment year 1958-59 and made an assessment order against it treating it as an unregistered firm. Before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner the assessee-firm contended that, as the Income-tax...
Tag this Judgment!R. B. Ram Rattan Prem Nath Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-11-1968
Reported in: [1969]71ITR624(All)
R. S. PATHAK J. - The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following two questions at the instance of the assessee for the opinion of this court :'1. Whether, for the assessment year 1946-47, the Income-tax Officer was justified in initiating the proceedings and completing the assessment under section 34(1)(a) or he should have taken recourse to section 34(1A) or section 34(1)(b) 2. Whether, for the assessment years 1947-48 and 1948-49, the Income-tax Officer was justified in initiating action under section 34(1)(a) or he should have taken recourse to section 34(1)(b) of the Act ?'The assessee is a partnership firm consisting of Rai Bahadur Ram Ratan and his son, Prem Nath. It carried on the business of canteen contractors. The statement of the case submitted by the Tribunal mentions that the account books maintained by the assessee were never accepted by the Income-tax Officer and the income was assessed by applying a flat rate over the turnover disclosed by the assessee.For...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »