Allahabad Court March 1970 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.
Smt. Roori Devi Vs. Asst. Custodian General and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-1970
Reported in: AIR1970All583
S.N. Singh, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is directed against an order of the Assistant Custodian General, U. P. dated 7-11-1963 with the prayer that the said order Annexure '6' to the writ petition be quashed.2. Brief facts giving rise to the present petition are that one Tafazzul Hussain executed a mortgage on 15th December 1947, in respect of house No. 474 situate in mohalla Keraiganj Rajvan Bazar, Meerut City in favour of the petitioner for a consideration of Rs. 1,000. This Tafazzul Husain migrated to Pakistan in July 1949. The petitioner thereafter moved an application on 17th December 1949 under Section 38 of Ordinance No. 27 of 1949 before the Deputy Custodian, Evacuee Property, Meerut, for the confirmation of the aforesaid mortgage. The Deputy Custodian by his order dated 5th March 1951 allowed the application of the petitioner and confirmed the mortgage deed.3. It appears that later on it was brought to the notice of the Evacuee Department that Tafa...
District Co-operative Development Federation Ltd. Vs. Commissioner, Sa ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-27-1970
Reported in: [1970]26STC464(All)
Satish Chandra, J.1. The Additional Revising Authority, Sales Tax, Varanasi, has referred the following question of law for the opinion of this court:-Whether 'coal dust' in which the assessee deals, comes within the description 'coal' mentioned in Notification No. St-911/X dated 31st March, 1956, or is a commodity distinct from 'coal' ?2. For the assessment year 1959-60, the assessee returned a turnover of Rs. 1,30,472.83 in respect of coal dust, as apart from its turnover of foodgrains, cement, fertilizers etc. The disclosed turnover was accepted. But, the assessing authority felt that coal dust was not 'coal' within the meaning of the notification dated 31st March, 1956 and assessed it at 2 per cent, as an unclassified item. The assessee felt dissatisfied. It filed an appeal, but failed. It then went up in revision. The Judge (Revisions) affirmed the finding. He held that the coal dust was a different commercial article than coal and could not be included within the word 'coal' appe...
Amrish Chandra Surendra Kumar Vs. Commissioner, Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-20-1970
Reported in: [1971]27STC566(All)
R.L. Gulati, J.1. These are two references submitted by the Additional Judge (Revisions) Sales Tax, Agra, one arising out of proceedings under the U.P. Sales Tax Act and the other arising out of proceedings under the Central Sales Tax Act in.respect of the same assessee, namely, M/s. Amrish Chandra Surendra Kumar of Agra.2. In respect of the assessment year 1957-58 two ex parte assessment orders were passed against the assessee, one under the U.P. Sales Tax Act and the other under the Central Sales Tax Act, because of the failure of the assessee to be present on the date of the hearing. The Sales Tax Officer rejected the account books of the assessee and made a best judgment assessment fixing the turnover at Rs. 3,60,000 under the U.P. Act and Rs. 30,000 under the Central Act. The assessee in due course filed appeals against the assessment orders which were dismissed as time-barred. The assessee had also moved an application under Section 30 for setting aside the ex parte order, but th...
Chandrabhan Singh and ors. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-20-1970
Reported in: 1971CriLJ94
M.H. Beg, J.1. The appellant, Chandra Bhan Singh, has been convicted Under Section 326, Penal Code and sentenced to ten years' ft. I. whereas the remaining appellants, Mulaim Singh, Bhumiraj Singh, and Jodh Singh were convicted Under Section 326 read with Section 34. Penal Code and also sentenced to ten years' R. I. by & Civil and Sessions Judge, Etah.2. According to the prosecution case, Shaitan Singh, deceased, who had been residing in another village in the house of his married sister, had shifted to village Datauli, his home, a year before the occurrence on 23-2.1966 for which the appellants were prosecuted. It is alleged that, although Shaitan Singh had hia own bouse in village Datauli, he had arranged to take his meals at the house of the appellant Mulaim Singh. It is said that be was able to do so because he bad arranged to get Chandra Bhan Singh appellant, the son of the appellant Mulaim Sing, married. On 21st of February, 1966, Km. Vimla, the daughter of the appellant Mulaira ...
RoopnaraIn Ramchandra Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-18-1970
Reported in: [1970]78ITR171(All)
T.P. Mukerjee, J.1. The question submitted by the Appellate Tribunal for the opinion of this court under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', is as follows :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, in the appeal under Section 30 to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner against the orders under Section 26A and Section 23(3) the point of the jurisdiction of the Income-tax Officer could be validly raised ?'2. The statement of the case relates to the assessment year 1956-57 and the material facts are as follows:The assessee, M/s. Roop Narain Ram Chandra, Kanpur, was constituted as a firm under a deed of partnership dated the 17th of November, 1952. It was accorded registration under Section 26A of the Act for the two immediately preceding years 1955-56 and 1954-55. For the assessment year under reference, 1956-57, the assessee filed an application for renewal of registration before the Income-tax Officer, District III(ii...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shiv Nath Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-18-1970
Reported in: [1970]77ITR378(All)
T.P. Mukerjee, J.1. The statement of the case submitted by the Appellate Tribunal raises the following question of law:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 1,17,571 represenled taxable income of the assessee ?'2. The statement of the case relates to the assessment year 1959-60. The assessee is a firm which was accorded registration under the Income-tax Act, 1922, hereinafter referred to as the Act, and it carries on wholesale business in cloth. The aasessee was also a registered dealer under the U.P. Sales Tax Act and as such it collected sales tax from its customers and also paid out its liability on account of sales tax to the Government. The assessee used to maintain a separate account denominated as the 'sales tax account' in which all receipts paid by the assessee's customers on account of sales tax were credited and all payments made by it to the Government debited. Up to the end of the assessment year 1957-58 there was a debit balance in th...
Shadi Cycle Industries Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-17-1970
Reported in: [1971]27STC56(All)
R.L. Gulati, J. 1. At the instance of M/s. Shadi Cycle Industries, Agra, hereinafter referred to as the assessee, the Additional Judge (Revisions) Sales Tax, Agra, has submitted this statement of the case and has invited the opinion of this court on the following two questions:(1) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the seat covers made of thick tanned leather could be treated to be commodity different from tanned leather?(2) If the answer to question No. (1) is in the affirmative, whether such leather covers were taxable as unclassified goods or leather goods or as accessories of cycle or as cycle parts?2. The dispute between the assessee and the revenue relates to assessment year 1961-62 and concerns the turnover of cycle seat covers. The seat covers are made of hard tanned leather which are component parts of a cycle seat or saddle. The department has assessed the turnover of these covers at 5 per cent. as falling in entry No. 34 of Notification No. ST.-1363/ X-1045 (...
Vidhydhar Dube and ors. Vs. Har Charan and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-16-1970
Reported in: AIR1971All41
H. Swarup, J. 1. This revision was referred to a larger Bench by the learned Single Judge at the time of the admission of the revision. The plaintiffs had filed a suit claiming one-third share in the crop grown on the disputed plot in 1371 Fasli and in the alternative a certain sum of money by way of mesne profits. The plaintiffs claimed to be the heirs of one Jhammanlal, who was a co-tenant with the contesting defendants. The defendants contested the suit on the ground, inter alia, that the plaintiffs were not the heirs of Jhammanlal andthat the crop had not been raised by Jhammanlal. They denied the plaintiffs right to claim any share in the crop or to get mesne profits. The trial court dismissed the suit. The plaintiffs filed an appeal and in the appeal filed an application under Order 23, Rule 1(2), Civil P. C. with a prayer for withdrawal of the suit with liberty to bring a fresh suit. In the alternative the plaintiffs also prayed for withdrawal of the suit under Order 23, Rule 1(...
Ganga Saran and ors. Vs. Naryan Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-16-1970
Reported in: AIR1971All43
Gangeshwar Prasad, J. 1. This is a defendants' second appeal arising out of a suit brought against them for the recovery of a sum of money. 2. The plaintiff and the defendants are co-owners of a shop, the share of the plaintiff being one half. The shop needed some urgent repairs. The plaintiff called upon the defendants to make the repairs and take from him half of the cost. In the alternative he asked the defendants to allow him to have the repairs effected and pay him half of the cost. The defendants did not carry out the repairs, and the plaintiff was compelled to have the repairs done entirely at his own cost incurring an expenditure of Rs. 506/7/9. These facts are no longer in dispute. The plaintiff claimed in the suit a sum of Rs. 249.98 Np. from the defendants, i.e. one half of the cost of repairs. The claim of the plaintiff has been decreed. 3. The only contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellants is that the plaintiff, being a co-owner of the house, is not entit...
State of U.P. and ors. Vs. Vishweshwar Dayal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-16-1970
Reported in: AIR1971All129
Oak, C.J. 1. The question for consideration in this special appeal is whether appellant No. 1 was entitled to retire the respondent from service compulsorily. Vishweshwar Dayal respondent joined as a temporary Overseer in the year 1937. In 1963 he was promoted as a temporary Assistant Engineer. He held that post till December 1967. On 11-12-1967 the State Government passed an order compulsorily retiring him from service under Note 1 to Article 465 of Civil Service Regulations. The order was challenged by Vishweshwar Dayal by filing a writ petition. The writ petition has been allowed by a single Judge of this Court. He has quashed the State Government's order dated 11-12-1967. The State of U. P., and two others have therefore filed the present special appeal. 2. Appellant No. 1 took action under Note 1 to Paragraph 465 of Civil Service Regulations. Note 1 is in these terms: 'Government retains the right to retire any government servant after he has completed 25 years' qualifying service...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »