Allahabad Court September 1968 Judgments
Agarwala Brothers Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-05-1968
Reported in: [1969]23STC306(All)
R.S. Pathak, J.1. The petitioner deals in motor vehicles, motor parts, motor oils, diesel engines and other goods at Kanpur. In the assessment proceedings under the U.P. Sales Tax Act for the assessment year 1955-56, the petitioner claimed that diesel engines sold by him were liable to be taxed at three pies per rupee under Section 3 of the Act. The Sales Tax Officer, however, held that the diesel engines were used for driving motor vehicles and were, therefore, motor parts taxable at the rate of six pies per rupee under Notification No. ST-369/X-923-48, dated 1st July, 1948. Item No. 1 of that notification mentions :-Motor vehicles, including motor-cars, motor taxi-cabs, motor cycles and cycle combinations, motor scooters, motorettes, motor omnibuses, motor vans and motor lorries.Chassis of motor vehicles.Component parts of motor vehicles.Articles (including rubber and other tyres and tubes and batteries) adapted for use as parts and accessories of motor vehicles, not being such artic...
Tag this Judgment!Sheo NaraIn Duli Chand Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-03-1968
Reported in: [1969]72ITR766(All)
V.G. Oak, C.J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following question to this court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that there was no partial partition in the assessee's family, and the income earned from the business previously carried on by the assessee Hindu undivided family continued to be the income of the Hindu undivided family after 17th of August, 1955 '2. Messrs. Sheo Narain Dalichand is the assessee. This is a Hindu undivided family. The year of assessment is 1956-57. The accounting period was the financial year ending on 31st March, 1956. The assessee submitted a return on the footing that there had been a partial partition in the family on 17th August, 1955. Under the partial partition, retail business and halwai business were taken over by two branches of the family. The wholesale businees of the family was taken over by a firm consisting of four partners, Sheo Narain, Jagram, Hargo...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Ram Gopal and anr. Vs. Surendra Kumar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-02-1968
Reported in: AIR1970All221
Mahesh Chandra, J.1. This second appeal arises out of a suit filed by Ham Gopal and Kishan Chand, appellants Nos. 1 and 2 against Jamuna Prasad, Chanda Devi, Ram Kali, Munni, Mithlesh Kumar, Surendra Kumar, Virendra Kumar and Kamendra Kumar respondents, who are the heirs of Jagannath Prasad. Jamuna Prasad is now dead and is represented by Smt. Eataso, Mahesh Chandra, Dinesh Chandra, Ramesh Chandra, Suresh Chandra, Kumari Asha Devi and Kumari Usha Devi respondents 2/2 to 2/7. Smt. Ram Kali is also now dead and her legal representatives are already on the record.2. On 11-12-1957, an agreement was executed by the appellants on the one hand and Jamuna Prasad and Jagannath Prasad on the other in respect of a Sahan land in district Farrukhabad. It was presented for registration by Jamuna Prasad on 8-1-1958. Jamuna Prasad and Ram Gopal, appellant No. 1 admitted execution, but Jagannath Prasad did not appear before the Sub-Registrar. Registration was thereupon postponed. On 10-1-1958 registrat...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›