Allahabad Court April 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.
Commissioner, Sales Tax Vs. SarIn Textile Mills
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-30-1970
Reported in: [1971]27STC228(All)
R.L. Gulati, J. 1. In these three connected cases the common question of law that arises is as to whether the turnover of woolen yarn manufactured by the assessed should be taxed under Section 3 at the rate of 2 per cent. or should be assessed as 'yarn' or 'woolen goods' under the notifications issued under Section 3-A. It is assessable as yarn, its turnover would be assessable at the rate of six pies per rupee for the assessment year 1959-60 and at the rate of 3 per cent, for the year 1961-62 and if it is covered by the term 'woolen goods' then it would be assessable at the rate of one anna per rupee. The notification with which we are concerned are:(i) Notification No. ST. 907/X dated 31st March, 1956. This is a notification under Section 3-A of the Act and declares that the turnover of certain commodities mentioned therein should be taxed at a single point, at the point of sale by the manufacturer or the importer, at the rate of six pies per rupee. The relevant entry of that notific...
Jhandoo and anr. Vs. Ramesh Chandra and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-29-1970
Reported in: AIR1971All189
M.H. Beg, J.1. This is a defendants' second appeal arising out of a suit for specific performance of a contract dated 29-6-1956 to sell some plots of land and a house for a sum of Rs. 5000/- to the plaintiffs by their owner Deo Karan, thefather of defendant-respondent No. 3, Smt. Sukhdei. An amount of Rs. 4000/-was paid at the time of the execution of the agreement for sale. Subsequently, this very property was sold to the defendants-appellants on 2-7-1956. In the suit for specific performance, filed on 26th of May, 1959, the plaintiffs impleaded the vendor, Deo Karan, with whom they had entered into the contract of sale and to whom they had paid Rs. 4000/- and also the subsequent transferees, the defendants-appellants, Jhandoo and Chhittar, who claimed to be bona fide purchasers for value without notice of the prior agreement for sale. Both the courts below have hold that the defendants-appellants had notice of the agreement to sell between the plaintiffs-respondents and Deo Karan. no...
Smt. Kanchan Devi and ors. Vs. Official Liquidator
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-29-1970
Reported in: [1970]40CompCas670(All)
W. Broome, J. 1. This is an appeal against an order of the official liquidator dated July 31, 1967, rejecting two claims of Gyan Chand Raidani for arrears of rent (and interest thereon) against the Jwala Bank Limited (in liquidation). One claim, relating to the period from October, 1942, to September, 1947, had already been decreed by the Munsif of Mirzapur on March 28, 1949, in Suit No. 457 of 1947 ; while the other, relating to the period from October, 1947, to June, 1949, was afresh claim that had not been the subject of any judicial decision.2. The Jwala Bank Limited had taken a certain house on rent from Misri Lal Raidani and his sons in the year 1934: but subsequently in 1935 Misri Lal Raidani and his sons executed a usufructuary mortgage in favour of the Jwala Bank Limited in respect of various properties including this same house. As already noted, a decree was obtained against the bank for the rent from October, 1942, to September, 1947, from the court of the Munsif of Mirzapu...
Swadeshi Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-29-1970
Reported in: [1971]81ITR482(All)
Pathak, J.1. Three questions have been referred by the Appellate Tribunal in this wealth-tax reference :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the enhancement in the value of the assets, according to the revaluation made in 1948, could be taken into account in ascertaining the net wealth for the assessment year 1957-58 ? (2) If the answer to question No. 1 is in the affirmative, whether the value to be included in the net wealth is the value as fixed in 1948 or such value as reduced by depreciation in the intervening years ? (3) Whether in computing the net wealth, the assessee-company is entitled to deduction of provision made for tax liability relating to periods ending on or before the valuation date, although the relevant assessments had not been completed and the demand notices served till that date ?' 2. The assesssee is a limited company and owns a textile mill. Its fixed assets were revalued in 1948 and, consequently, the value of the assets was enhanc...
J.K. Cotton Manufacturers Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-29-1970
Reported in: [1971]80ITR34(All)
T.P. Mukerjee, J.1. The statement of the case in this reference raises the following three questions for our opinion :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amount of Rs. 1,01,994, being provision for payment of income-tax and super-tax in respect of assessments not contemplated on the valuation date, was deductible in computing the net wealth of the assessee ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the provision for proposed dividend of Rs. 1,53,400 was deductible in computing the net wealth of the assessee ?3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 5,49,041 being the balance of the demand payable as a result of the findings and orders of the Income-tax Investigation Commissioner was deductible in determining the net wealth of the company?'2. The first two questions may be disposed of at once in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Kesoram Industries and Cotton Mills Ltd. v. Com...
J. K. Jute Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-29-1970
Reported in: [1971]82ITR474(All)
PATHAK J. - The Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question under section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act :'1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amount of Rs. 13,54,243 being provision for payment of income-tax and super-tax was deductible in computing the net wealth of the assess ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the provision for proposed dividend of Rs. 22,000 was deductible in computing the net wealth of the assessee ?3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 21,61,788 being the balance of the demand payable as a result of the findings and orders of the Income-tax Investigation Commission is deductible in determining the net wealth of the company ?'As regards the first question, the facts are these : An amount of Rs. 13,54,243 had been provided for payment of income-tax and super-tax by the assessee and the assessee claimed that this amount was a debt owed by it on the valuation da...
The Notified Area Committee and anr. Vs. Sri Ram Singhasan Prasad Kalw ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-28-1970
Reported in: AIR1970All561
Dwivedi, J.1. This appeal is filed against the judgment of a learned Single Judge allowing the writ petition of the respondent. The Bench of two Judges, by whom the appeal was at first heard, referred it to a larger Bench on account of a conflict between two Full Bench decisions. Hence the appeal is listed before us.2. The Notified Area Committee of Mohammadabad, the first appellant, assessed the respondent with a tax of Rupees 281.25 on his circumstances and property. Rs. 250/- was the amount of tax on circumstances, and Rs. 31.25 on property. Annexure B to the writ petition suggests that he was carrying on some business and had a house. The tax was assessed on March 18, 1908. This assessment was quashed by the learned Single Judge.3. Far back in 1872, Mohammadabad became a town area. Town areas are now governed by the Town Areas Act, 1914.Section 14 of this 'Act provided for the imposition of certain taxes including a tax on a man's circumstances till a part of the year 1948. In that...
Sunder Lal Janeshwar Dass Vs. the Commissioner, Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-28-1970
Reported in: [1971]27STC282(All)
Satish Chandra, J.1. The Additional judge (Revisions) Sales Tax, Meerut, has submitted the statement of the case for the opinion of this court on the following question of law:Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the revision is time-barred.2. The appeal was decided on 16th August, 1966. The appellate order was served on the counsel appearing for the assessee in the appeal on the 30th August, 1966. The memorandum of appeal despatched by the assessee by post was received in the Judge (Revisions) office on 1st March, 1968. The revision was accompanied by an application for the condonation of delay. The Judge (Revisions) dismissed the revision on the ground that it was barred by limitation. He held that service of the appellate order on the counsel was service on the assessee. The revision should have been filed within one year of 30th August, 1966. The application for condonation of delay was dismissed on the ground that it was not accompanied by an affidavit. The mere alle...
R.S. Raizada Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-1970
Reported in: AIR1971All271
ORDERSatish Chandra, J.1. On 10th June, 1968, the State Government passed the following order:--'In exercise of the powers, mentioned in Note 1 to Article 465 of the Civil Send-vice Regulations and all other powers in this behalf, the Governor of Uttar Pradesh on being satisfied that it is in the public interest to dispense with the further services of Sri R. S. Raizada Sub-Registrar, is pleased to require the said official to retire from service with effect from the date of relief.'The petitioner challenges the validity of this order of compulsory retirement on the grounds:--(a) That the order was passed mala fide;(b) That it violates Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution;(c) That the petitioner had a right to continue in service upto the age of superannuation, namely 58 years, and could not be retired at the age of 55 years. In my opinion, none of the points has any merit.2. The petitioner alleges that in 1967, the Inspector General of Registration transferred the petitioner from Ka...
B.P. Misra Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) Through the General Manager, N ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-1970
Reported in: AIR1971All104; (1971)ILLJ115All
ORDERG.S. Lal, J.1. This writ petition relates to a service matter. The petitioner V. P. Misra of the Ex-War personnel was ab sorbed in the Watch and Ward on a post of clerk on 23-7-1947 by the then Superintendent, Watch and Ward, Eastern Railway. He was later confirmed with effect from 1-4-1956. His date of birth is July 12, 1910. He received an order, which is annexure 5 to the writ petition and is dated 1-3-1967, to the effect that in terms of Chief Security Officer letter dated 9-12-1967 he would retire with effect from 11-7-3968, afternoon. In other words he was to retire on the attainment of the age of 58 years, The said communication purported to be from the Assistant Security Officer. Lucknow, though it was signed by the Head Clerk of the office for the Assistant Security Officer. The petitioner made a representation dated 4-3-1967 and also sent reminders on several subsequent dates, the 1st one being dated 15-12-1967, of which copy is annexure 6 to the writ petition. He got a ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »