Allahabad Court August 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.
Bishambhar Nath and anr. Vs. Raghunath Prasad Sharma and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-31-1970
Reported in: AIR1971All207
Oak, C.J. 1. This is an application for substitution under Order 22, Rule 4, Civil P. C. Bishambhar Nath and Mool Chand have filed a first appeal against Raghunath Prasad and others. The first appeal arises out of a suit under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The suit had been decreed by the trial court. Bishambar Nath and Mool Chand defendants have therefore filed the first appeal. 2. Raghunath Prasad, respondent No. 1, died during the pendency of the appeal. The appellants have therefore filed the present application for bringing on record sons and other heirs of Raghunath Prasad respondent as his legal representatives. The application is opposed on behalf of the respondents. According to the respondents, there is no need to bring on the record the heirs of Raghurnath Prasad deceased, because the matter has arisen out of a suit under Section 92, Civil P. C. 3. In Anand Rao v. Ram Das Dadu Ram, AIR 1921 PC 123 it was held by the Judicial Committee that where persons initiall...
Hindustan Metal Works Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-31-1970
Reported in: [1971]27STC555(All)
R.L. Gulati, J. 1. This is a reference under Section 11(1) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act which has been submitted by the Additional Judge (Revisions) Sales Tax, Agra, inviting the opinion of this court on the following three questions of law:(1) Whether in the circumstances of this case as found in revision the accounts of the dealer for the year 1964-65 could be legally rejected ?(2) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case as pointed out in revision the alleged transfer of stock amounting to Rs. 2,85,773 to Jullundur branch of the dealer could be legally regarded as inter-State sale ?(3) Whether the material found on record supports the fixation of the turnover in the case of U.P. sales at Rs. 12,60,000.2. In respect of the assessment year 1964-65 which is the assessment year in dispute, the assessee disclosed a turnover of Rs. 11,10,017 in its returns filed under the U.P. Sales Tax Act. Likewise it disclosed a turnover of Rs. 26,10,990 of inter-State sales in its returns filed...
Rampur Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-28-1970
Reported in: [1971]82ITR23(All)
Oak, C.J. 1. This is a reference under Section 66 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. Messrs. Rampur Industries Ltd. is the assessee. The assessment year is 1960-61. The assessee is a limited company incorporated in the year 1939. Formerly, its business consisted of running an oil mill and manufacturing soap. The company had its godowns, plant and machinery for those purposes. In the year 1948-49, the oil mill business was stopped. In the year 1951-52, soap manufacturing business was also stopped; but the assessee started rice-milling business. Rice milling business is still continuing. The assessee found that after stoppage of the oil mill and soap business, certain godowns belonging to the assessee had fallen vacant. Those godowns were let out to the U. P. Government and the Central Government for storing grain during the accounting year. The assessee received a sum of Rs. 9,906 towards rent for those godowns. This receipt was assessable as income during the assessment year. The asse...
Commissioner, Sales Tax Vs. Brij Kishore Satish Chandra
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-28-1970
Reported in: [1971]27STC324(All)
1. The Additional Judge (Revisions) Sales Tax, Agra, has submitted the following question for our opinion:Whether service by registered post under the endorsement 'refused' made by the postal department merely raised a rebuttable presumption or a conclusive one and whether in the circumstances of this case that presumption had been sufficiently rebutted. 2. For the year 1962-63 an ex parte assessment order was passed against the assessee on 15th March, 1967. An appeal against the assessment order was filed on 7th July, 1967, nearly four months after the date of the assessment order. The appeal was prima facie time-barred as the limitation for filing an appeal under Section 9 is thirty days from the date of the service of the assessment order and the notice of demand. The assessee alleged that he had no knowledge of the assessment order prior to 1st July, 1967, on which date the kurk-amin approached him for the realisation of the tax assessed under that order. Before the appellate autho...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Agrawal Trading Company
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-1970
Reported in: [1971]27STC390(All)
1. The Additional Judge (Revisions) Sales Tax has referred the following question:--Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the assessee was liable to pay interest or not? 2. The assessee was assessed to tax under the U.P. Sales Tax Act by an assessment order dated 20th November, 1964, for the assessment year 1958-59 and a notice of demand was served, along with the copy of the assessment order, on the assessee prescribing a period of 30 days for the payment of the tax assessed. The assessee did not file any appeal or revision application. The order became final. As the petitioner did not pay the tax assessed within the period provided in the notice of demand proceedings for the recovery of the tax were taken and the Collector proceeded to recover the tax as an arrear of land revenue. As the tax had not been paid for more than six months after the expiry of the period mentioned in the notice of demand a direction was also sent to the Collector that the assessee should...
Nemi Chand Vimal Chand and Company Vs. Commissioner, Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-1970
Reported in: [1971]27STC432(All)
R.S. Pathak, J. 1. In this and the connected references the statement of the case has been placed before us. It is a disappointing document. All that the Additional Judge (Revisions) Sales Tax has done is to set out the sequence of the proceedings taken before the assessing authority, the appellate authority and, thereafter, the revising authority. Finally, the two questions of law framed by this court in its order under Section 11(4) of the U. P. Sales Tax Act have been set out. Nowhere do we find any statement of the facts relevant for the decision of those questions.2. A statement of the case contemplated by Section 11 of the Act is submitted upon a reference made in respect of a question of law arising out of an order under Section 10(3). That is an order made by the revising authority disposing of a revision application under Section 10(1). If a question of law arises out of such order and a reference is made to this court, the revising authority must submit a statement of the cas...
Commissioner, Sales Tax Vs. Bhola Nath Laxmi Narain
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-1970
Reported in: [1972]29STC347(All)
R.S. Pathak, J. 1. I agree that the question should be answered in the affirmative.2. The assessee alleges that he had made a mistake in setting out the figure of admitted turnover in the application under Section 30 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act. If it is found that it was a bona fide mistake, the sales tax authorities are bound to allow its rectification. It is nothing more than an amendment sought for, and to be granted, in the interests of justice. Such rectification must be considered as reinstating the figure of admitted turnover to its correct position as on the date of making the application under Section 30. The view taken by the Sales Tax Officer and the appellate authority is clearly wrong arid I would agree with the order made by the Additional Judge (Revisions). It is not necessary, it seems to me, to decide whether an assessee is entitled, at the time of applying under Section 30, to admit a tax liability different, from that admitted when filing his return.3. I would answer ...
Shyam Lal Om Prakash Vs. Commissioner, Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-26-1970
Reported in: [1972]29STC385(All)
R.L. Gulati, J. 1. This is a reference under Section 11(1) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act submitted by the Additional Judge (Revisions), Sales Tax, Agra, at the instance of the assessee and relates to the assessment year 1964-65. The connected reference relates to the assessment year 1965-66.2. The assessee carries on business in oil-seeds, foodgrains and gur in the trade name of M/s. Shyam Lal Om Prakash. It has two shops one at Dankaur, which is the head office, and the other at Gulaothi, which is the branch. On 7th December, 1965, a survey of the assessee's business premises at Gulaothi was carried out by the Sales Tax Officer, SIB (Special Investigation Branch). As a result of the survey 27 loose sheets of paper and one exercise book containing some transactions were discovered. The entries recorded on the loose sheets were found to have been entered in the account books. The exercise book contained entries from 18th November, 1965, to 6th December, 1965, i.e. for a period of one month ...
United Commercial Corporation Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-1970
Reported in: [1970]78ITR800(All)
1. This is a reference under Section 66 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. Messrs. United Commercial Corporation is the assessee. The assessmentyear is 1958-59. The .assessee is a firm carrying on the business of manufacturing bricks and certain other business. In connection with the brick-kiln business, it acquired a piece of land on a lease for seven years for digging earth for manufacturing bricks. The assessee incurred an expenditure of Rs. 13,205 in obtaining the lease. Again, the assessee spent a sum of Rs. 1,729 for erecting a chimney for the brick-kiln. The assessee claimed deduction for these two sums as revenue expenditure. This claim was disallowed by the income-tax -authorities and by the Appellate Tribunal. At the request of the assessee, the Appellate Tribunal referred the following questions of law to this court: '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled to the deduction of Rs. 13,205 being the lease amount (including sta...
Mritunjai Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-20-1970
Reported in: AIR1971All214; (1971)ILLJ597All
G.D. Sahgal, J. 1. The petitioner is an overseer in the Irrigation Department of the Government of Uttar Pradesh. He was posted at Kalagarh Division in the District of Bijnor and was suspended on 22-3-1969. The suspension order is contained in annexure 1 to the writ petition. It purports to be signed by the Additional Chief Engineer. This writ petition has been filed for the quashing of that order. 2. After the suspension of the petitioner which order of suspension was served on him on 24-3-1969, it was only on 29-10-1969 that a charge-sheet was framed against him and his contention is that the suspension order was issued without there being any basis for the passing of the same. He also challenges the order of suspension passed against him on the ground that it was passed by an authority which was not the appointing authority and it could be passed only by such an authority which is the Chief Engineer and not the Additional Chief Engineer. The suspension order also mentions that the p...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »