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.
Smt. Priti Lata Samanta Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-20-1970
Reported in: [1971]79ITR18(All)
H.N. Seth, J. 1. This is a reference under Section 256 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Smt. Priti Lata Samanta, the assessee, is a widow and a partner in a firm known as Messrs. Students Friends. Her two minor sons were admitted to the benefits of the firm in which the assessee herself is a partners. In the assessment year 1962-63, the Income-tax Officer added the share of the income of the two minor sons in the income of the assessee. The assessee went up in appeal and urged that the word 'individual' as used in Section 64 of the Act refers only to the male of the species as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Sodra Devi, [1957] 32 I.T.R. 615; [1958] S.C.R. 1 (S.C.) and therefore the Income-tax Officer was wrong in adding the income of the minor sons, derived in the partnership business, in the income of the assessee. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner rejected the plea. The assessee then filed an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. Before the Tribu...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Motor General Sales (P.) Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-20-1970
Reported in: [1971]79ITR46(All)
V.G. Oak, C.J. 1. This is a reference under Section 66 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereafter referred to as ' the Act '). Messrs. Motor General Sales (P.) Ltd. is the assessee. The proceedings under consideration relate to the assessment year 1957-58. The assessee was provisionally assessed for the year 1956-57 under Section 23B of the Act on August 30, 1956. The assessee-company was assessed under Section 23 of the Act for the first time on July 4, 1957. On September 10, 1959, the Income-tax Officer issued a notice to the assessee for default ^under Section 18A(9)(b) ofthe Act on the ground that the assessee had failed to furnish an estimate as required under Section 18A(3) of the Act. The assessee submitted a reply advancing five different grounds for not imposing penalty. None of the pleas was accepted by the Income-tax Officer. He held that there was a breach of Sub-section (3) of Section 18A of the Act. Consequently, the assessee was liable to a penalty under Clause (b) of...
Rajendra Lal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-20-1970
Reported in: [1970]78ITR803(All)
V.G. Oak C.J. 1. This is a reference under Section 66 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. Rajendra Lal is the assessee. He has been assessed as an individual. He is the son of Sir Shadi Lal. The assessement year is 1961-62. The relevant accounting period ended on March 31, 1961. 2. Certain shares worth Rs. 2,20,000 belonged to the joint Hindu family consisting of Sir Shadi Lal and his sons. There was a partial partition in the family on August 18, 1959. The shares worth Rs. 2,20,000 were divided among the different members of the family as follows : Rs.Sri Rajendra Lal, son of Shadi Lal10,000Smt. Sushila Devi, wife of Rajendra Lal1,00,000Narendra Lal, son of ShadiLal10,000Smt. Kamla Devi, wife of Narendra Lal10,000Km. Rupa Rani (minor)45,000Km. Manjula Rani (daughter)45,0003. At the time of assessment for 1961-62, the Income-tax Officer noticedcertain income received by Smt. Sushila Devi towards interest or dividendon Rs. 1,00,000, The Income-tax Officer included this income in the ass...
J.K. Cotton Spg. and Wgv. Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-ta ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-18-1970
Reported in: [1971]80ITR685(All)
V.G. Oak, C.J.1. This is a reference under the Wealth-tax Act. Messrs. J. K. Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Co. Ltd. is the assessee. The assessment year is 1957-58. The valuation date is December 31, 1956. The assessee claimed various amounts as deductions for different debts. A deduction of a sum of Rs. 12,76,278 was claimed on account of tax liabilities. Deduction of another sum of Rs. 3,78,900 was claimed as. proposed dividend. Thirdly, deduction of a sum of Rs. 20,94,023 was claimedas the balance of the demand as a consequence of findings and orders of the Income-tax Investigation Commission. The Income-tax Officer and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner did not accept these claims. Upon further appeal by the assessee, the Appellate Tribunal accepted the first claim partially to the extent of Rs. 4,29,148, but rejected the balance of the claim to the extent of Rs. 8,47,130, The second and third claims advanced for the assessee were rejected by the Tribunal. Upon an application...
Swami Narsingh Giri Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-18-1970
Reported in: [1971]79ITR544(All)
V.G. Oak, C.J.1. This is a reference under Section 66 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. Swami Narsingh Giri is the assessee. He was assessed to income-tax for the assessment year 1944-45. He submitted a return indicating an income of Rs. 1,152 as income from property. The Income-tax Officer found that there was afdeposit of Rs. 10,200 in the bank account standing in the assessee's name. Another item of Rs. 396 was credited in the bank account on account of interest. The Income-tax Officer treated these amounts of Rs. 10,200 and Rs. 396 as income of the assessee. The Income-tax Officer rejected the assessee's claim that these two items are exempted under Section 4 of the Act. Upon an appeal by the assessee, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner accepted the assessee's claim that those amounts were exempted under Section 4 of the Act. Upon further appeal by the department, the Appellate Tribunal reversed the decision of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and restored the decision of t...
Mahesh Prasad Srivastava Vs. Abdul Khair and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-18-1970
Reported in: AIR1971All205
Dwivedi, J.1. By our order dated July 22, 1970 we dismissed this appeal and stated that reasons will follow shortly. We are now setting forth our reasons.2. The appellant and the respondents are members of the High Court staff. All of them belong to the class of Upper Division Assistants. At present the appellant holds the post of the Assistant Superintendent, Administrative Department (Records). He was recently promoted to this post by an order of Hon'ble the Chief Justice.3. The respondents filed a writ petition praying for the quashing of this order.4. Promotion to the post of the Assistant Superintendent. Administrative Department, is regulated by Rule 9 of the Allahabad High Court (Conditions of Service of Staff) Rules, 1946. Rule 9 provides that promotion shall be made 'by selection, irrespective of seniority.'5. The respondents allege that the appellant was promoted merely by virtue of his being senior in the class of Upper Division Assistants. According to them his promotion is...
City Board, Mussoorie Vs. State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-13-1970
Reported in: AIR1971All219
1. This is a Special Appeal by the City Board, Mussoorie, against the order of the learned Single Judge dismissing with costs its petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Writ Petition is against the State Electricity Board, Lucknow (to be referred hereinafter as the Board), the State of Uttar Pradesh and the Central Electricity Authority, New Delhi (to be referred hereinafter as the Authority), with the prayers that a writ of certiorari be issued to quash the two Notifications dated 24-4-1962 and 30-9-1967. Annexures 'A' and 'B' to the Writ Petition, and also for a writ of mandamus to direct respondents Nos. 1 and 2 not to enforce the said Notifications against the petitioner and further to direct respondent No. 1 not to realize 7 1/2% for supply of electric energy at a lower voltage of 6,600 volts, and 20% surcharge imposed under the second Notification, and also the coal charges from the petitioner. A prayer was also made for the issue of a writ of mandamus to di...
Shyam Lal Paharia and Anr. Vs. Gaya Prasad Gupta 'Rasal'
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-10-1970
Reported in: AIR1971All192
S.N. Katju, J.1. The suit in appeal was brought by the plaintiffs for injunction, accounting and for delivery of the copies of a rival publication called 'Hisabi Darpan' which had been published in 1954 by the defendant together with its manuscript, plates and blocks that may be found in possession, custody or control of the defendant, his agents and servants.2. It was alleged that the first plaintiff Shyam Lal Paharia was the author and plaintiff No. 2 Madbai Ram Paharia the publisher of a book 'Hisabi Machine.' It was a ready reckoner giving tables of rates. It was published in 1941 and its second edition was brought out in 1944. According to the plaintiffs, it was thought to bring cut a cheaper edition of the book with the title 'Hisabi Darpan', but meanwhile the defendant came to know of the plaintiffs' intention and he published the impugned book 'Hisabi Darpan' in 1954. According to the plaintiffs, the defendant's book was a 'colourable imitation and slavish copy of the various c...
Chanan Singh Vs. Hari Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-07-1970
Reported in: 1971CriLJ989
ORDERD.D. Seth, J.1. This application in revision is directed against an order passed by the learned Sessions Judge of Kumaun, dated 5th October, 1968, and arises out of the following circumstances:There had been on two previous occasions proceedings Under Section 145, Criminal P.C. between the parties in the court of the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tarai, Kumaun. The first proceedings Under Section 145, Criminal P.C. were in respect of the same land which is in dispute in the present revision and the number of that criminal case was 11/2 of 1962. In those proceedings, Chanan Singh was given possession over plot Nos. 2 (30 Bighas 10 Biswas), 4 (37 Bighas) and plot No. 15/1 (5 Bighas). The total area of the three plots of which possession was given to Chanan Singh by the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate comes to 72 Bighas 10 Biswas land of the three plots on 30th April, 1964. Thereafter, another proceeding Under Section 145, Cr.PC took place between the parties and by an order p...
Abhai Ram Gopi Nath Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-1970
Reported in: [1971]79ITR339(All)
V.G. Oak, C.J. 1. This reference raises the question of the true scope of a remand order under Section 31 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The assessee is a registered firm constituted by four partners, who are brothers. The assessment year is 1954-55. The Income-tax Officer noticed that in the account books of the firm for the corresponding previous year there were five credit entries. The first credit entry was for a sum of Rs. 8,502 in favour of the mother of the four partners. There were similar entries in the names of the wives of the four brothers. The total of the five amounts came to Rs. 42,117. The assessee's case was that capital was introduced by selling ornaments belonging to the five ladies. This explanation was not accepted by the Income-tax Officer. It was held that the alleged sale proceeds represented concealed income of the firm. However, the Income-tax Officer included in the assessment only one deposit, namely, that ofRs. 8,502 recorded in the name of Smt. Sarasw...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »