Allahabad Court August 1969 Judgments
L. Satish Chand Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-29-1969
Reported in: [1970]75ITR623(All)
V.G. Oak, C.J.1. These are two connected references under Section 66 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereafter referred to as the Act). Satish Chand and Kishan Chand are two partners of a registered firm, Messrs. Satish Chand Kishan Chand. The Income-tax Officer Kanpur, passed two separate assessment orders against Satish Chand and Kishan Chand on their shares of income from the firm. These assessment orders were confirmed in appeal by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad. The two assessees applied to the Tribunal under Section 66 of the Act for reference to the court on the ground that a partner of a firm could not be assessed to income-tax without prior assessment of the firm itself. In each case the Tribunal has referred the following question of law to this court :'Whether it was legal to assess the applicant's share income from the firm, Messrs. Satish Chand Kishan Chand, prior to raising a separate assessment on the firm '2. Th...
Tag this Judgment!India Army and Police Equipment Factory Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-29-1969
Reported in: [1970]75ITR693(All)
T.P. Mukerjee, J.1. This is a case stated under Section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', for the opinion of this court on the following question of law :' Whether it is legal to assess an unregistered firm after assessing the share income from the firm in the hands of one of the partners ?'2. The facts lie with a short compass. The assessee, the applicant before us, is an unregistered firm carrying on business, in the supply of stores to the military department on contract. There were two partners, Kallu Mal and J.P. Srivastava, whose shares where equal. The assessment of the firm for the assessment year 1959-60 was completed on September 17, I960, but before that one of the partners, namely, Kallu Mal, had already been assessed on his share income from the firm. The assessee appealed to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner against the assessment made by the Income-tax Officer on September 17, 1960, and one of the grounds raised in the appeal was...
Tag this Judgment!Samharu Vs. Dharamraj Pandey and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-25-1969
Reported in: AIR1970All350
Jagdish Sahai, J. 1. This defendant's appeal has come to us on a reference made by our brothers W. Broome and G. C. Mathur.2. The suit giving rise to this appeal was filed by the plaintiffs-respondents for the ejectment of the defendants from certain plots of agricultural land on the allegation that they (the plaintiffs-respondents) were the Sirdars of the plots In suit. It was alleged that about thirty years next preceding the date of the filing of the suit the ancestors of the plaintiffs-respondents had borrowed a sum of Rs. 200/- from the ancestors of the defendants and had executed an unregistered mortgage deed for the same and on the basis of that transaction the defendants' ancestors were put in possession over the land in suit. It has been pleaded that the entire mortgage debt has been satisfied through the receipt of profits of the disputed land by the ancestors of the defendants and thereafter the defendants themselves. Relief of rendition of account and delivery of possession...
Tag this Judgment!Krishna Gopal Vs. Gokul Prasad and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-1969
Reported in: AIR1970All261
Hari Swarup, J. 1. This appeal has been filed against the order of the Civil Judge, Farrukhabad, by which he allowed the objections under Sections 47 and 151. Civil P. C. and set aside the sale and directed that the money deposited be returned to the auction purchaser.2. The facts giving rise to the present' appeal in short are that one Ambalal Patel obtained a decree against Rarn Rakshpal and Shanta Prasad in suit No. 36 of 1957. The decree was put in execution and the execution case was numbered as 44 of 1960. In execution of the decree on 27-8-1960 a stock of foodgrains was attached by the Amin and given in the securiy of Gokul Prasad and Markandi on their executing a bond for the return of the property whenever required by the Court and to pay a sum of Rs. 3333 in case of default. Kishan Gopal filed objections in execution and contended that the property attached belonged to him and not to the judgment-debtor and was not liable to attachment. These objections of Krishan Gopal under...
Tag this Judgment!Badri Prasad Ayodhya Prasad Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P., Luckn ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-20-1969
Reported in: AIR1970All266; [1970]25STC282(All)
Jagdish Sahai, J. 1. The questionreferred to this Full Bench by a Division Bench of this Court is:--'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the question whether a revision application under Section 10 (3) of the U. P. Sale Tax Act was rightly dismissed as barred by limitation can be referred to this Court under Section 11 of that Act?'2. M/s. Badri Prasad Ayodhya Prasad were assessed to sales tax. They filed two appeals; one against the exemption order and the other against the assessment order. Their prayer was that they were entitled to get exemption on the turnover of food-grains for the entire year or at least from. 30-7-1958. They challenged the assessment order on the ground that the tax determined was excessive. The two appeals were disposed of on 30th of April, 1961. M/s. Badri Prasad Ayodhya Prasad filed two revision applications before the Additional Judge (Revisions) on 23-6-1984 challenging the appellate orders passed by the appellate authority on 30th of...
Tag this Judgment!Kanpur Dyeing and Printing Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1969
Reported in: [1970]75ITR686(All)
Mukerjee, J.1. This is a case stated under Section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, hereinafter referred to as the Act.2. The applicant is a private limited company carrying on business in the manufacture of tents, daris and other like materials. For the purpose ofits business it requires to maintain godowns, ware-houses, dye-houses, etc. The applicant entered into an agreement of lease effective from the 1st of January, 1958, for a period of ten years taking certain premises on lease for the purpose of its business. Under the terms of the lease the lessors were not bound to carry out any repairs of the leased premises. The deed of lease, dated February 28, 1958, provided that if any structural or other repairs of a substanial character were required, the lessees would have the right to vacate the leased premises in which case they would not be liable to rent thereafter. The relevant clause in the deed of lease is Clause (4) which runs as follows :' That the lessee company will at al...
Tag this Judgment!Madhava Prasad and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-14-1969
Reported in: [1970]75ITR599(All)
V.G. Oak, C.J.1. This is a reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The assessee is a Hindu undivided family, which consisted of Sahu Jagdish Prasad and his sons. Books of account of the assessee were maintained by the Dasehrayear. In the business books maintained for the period Dasehra S. 1999-2000, which was the previous year relevant for the assessment year 1944-45, the Income-tax Officer noted two cash-credits of Rs. 20,000 and Rs. 50,000 on October 28, 1942, and November 16, 1942. These two items were treated by the Income-tax Officer as the assessee's income from undisclosed sources. The items were included in the assessment for the year 1944-45. When the matter went before the Appellate Tribunal, the Tribunal pointed out that the two items in question were within the financial year 1942-43. Consequently, they were really relevant to the assessment year 1943-44, and not to the assessment year 1944-45. Those items wer...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Hari Kishan Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-11-1969
Reported in: [1970]26STC511(All)
R.S. Pathak, J.1. The petitioner is a partner of the firm M/s. Gopinath Hari Krishna which carried on business during the years 1957-58 and 1958-59 and has since been dissolved. The firm dealt in foodgrains and oil-seeds. On 15th April, 1957, it applied to the Sales Tax Officer, Etawah, for exemption of its turnover of foodgrains from sales tax for the assessment year 1957-58 under the U.P. Sales Tax Act, the application being made pursuant to Rule 20-B of the U.P. Sales Tax Rules. A sum of Rs. 150 was deposited with the application towards the first instalment of the exemption fee. Subsequently, on 10th September, 1957, the firm made another application for exemption and deposited two further amounts towards the exemption fee. The Sales Tax Officer held that the firm had not complied with the requirements of Rule 20-B and was, therefore, not entitled to an exemption certificate. Acting under Rule 20(3) he assessed the turnover of foodgrains to sales tax for the assessment year 1957-58...
Tag this Judgment!Gopal Das Uttam Chand Vs. Sales Tax Officer
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-1969
Reported in: [1970]25STC229(All)
R.L. Gulati, J.1. The Judge (Revisions) Sales Tax, Meerut, has submitted this reference under Section 11 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') for the opinion of this court on the following two questions of law :(1) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the affixation of notice was proper and valid under Clause (d) of Rule 77 of the U.P. Sales Tax Rules without having recourse to the modes prescribed in Sub-clause (a), (b) or (c) ?(2) If the answer to the above is in the negative, whether the service of notice could be treated as falling under Clause (b) of Rule 77 of the U.P. Sales Tax Rules ?2. The assessee is a dealer in cloth at Tehri Garhwal. The assessment year involved is 1955-56, The assessee was assessed to sales tax for that year on 31st January, 1957. Later on, however, information was received by the Sales Tax Officer that the assessee had imported cloth worth much more than what he had shown in the course of the original assessment p...
Tag this Judgment!income-tax Officer Vs. S.B. Singar Singh and Sons and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-05-1969
Reported in: [1970]75ITR646(All)
Jagdish Sahai, J.1. This special appeal is directed against the judgment of S. C. Manchanda-J. dated August 21, 1964, [1965] 58 I.T.R. 626.2. M/s. S. B. Singar Singh and Sons (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee') were assessed to income-tax and excess profits tax for the accounting periods ending with March 31, 1945, and March 31, 1946, by means of the orders dated 26th August, 1949. The assessments were both under the Indian Income-tax Act and the Excess Profits Tax Act. In the excess profits tax appeals, the assessee took a specific ground before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner regarding adjustment of standard profits. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner dismissed the appeals by one judgment. Thereupon the assessee filed second appeals before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and, inter alia, took a definite plea with regard to the adjustment of standard profits. The two appeals in respect of the excess profits tax assessment and the other two in respect of income-tax rel...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »