Allahabad Court September 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.
Sita Ram and anr. Vs. Hukmi Ram and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-29-1970
Reported in: AIR1971All399
M.N. Shukla, J. 1. This is a defendants' second appeal arising out of a suit for possession, damages and mesne profits in respect or a house. The question of law which has been sharply debated before me in the present case is of some importance and may be formulated as under :-- 'What is the effect of the decision in a rent suit about title on a later title suit between the parties?' 2. The material facts of the case are that the plaintiffs claimed themselves to be the owners of the house in dispute and alleged that they had formerly taken the land on lease and at that time a Kachcha house stood thereon, that they built the disputed house in the year 1956, that two kothris in suit were let out at Rs. 5/- per month to the defendants Nos. 1 and 2, that they did not pay rent to the plaintiffs despite notice of demand and also denied the plaintiff's title. The plaintiffs then brought a suit against the defendant No. 1 for ejectment and arrears of rent. It was held in that suit that the pla...
Footer Mal Megh Raj Vs. the Commissioner, Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-29-1970
Reported in: [1971]28STC361(All)
R.L. Gulati, J. 1. This is a statement of the case under Section 11(1) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act which has been submitted by the Additional Judge (Revisions) Sales Tax, Agra.2. The assessee deals in plain and ornamented glass bangles at Firozabad. In respect of the assessment year 1960-61, an assessment was made against the assessee under the Central Sales Tax Act on a turnover of Rs. 2,50,000. It was an assessment under Rule 41(5) of the U.P. Sales Tax Rules read with Section 9(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act and was a best judgment assessment because the assessee's account books were rejected as unreliable. Later on, as a result of a survey made of the business premises of the firm of M/s. Kunji Lal Har Dayal, it was found that the assessee had purchased from that firm hill (liquid gold used in ornamentation of glass bangles) worth Rs. 5,722 which had not been disclosed by the assessee in the course of original assessment proceedings. On the basis of this information, proceedings wer...
Indian Hume Pipe Company Ltd. Vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-29-1970
Reported in: [1972]29STC487(All)
R.L. Gulati, J. 1. M/s. Indian Hume Pipe Company Ltd., Aish Bagh, Lucknow, hereinafter referred to as the petitioner, has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, praying for a. writ of certiorari against the assessment orders passed against the petitioner under the U.P. Sales Tax Act for the assessment years 1962-63 and 1965-66, both dated 22nd January, 1970.2. The petitioner is engaged in the manufacture and supply of pipes which are marketed under the trade name 'hume pipes'. The basic raw material used in the manufacture of pipes is cement and steel fabrication. The bulk of the pipes produced by the petitioner is reinforced cement concrete pipes but it also manufactures high quality and high pressure pipes like prestressed concrete pipes for water supply, R.C.C. pressure pipes, penstock pipes used in hydro-electric projects, etc. The reinforced cement concrete pipes are used mainly for drainage and sewage disposal. The petitioner has stated that bulk of the stock ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Smt. Triveni Devi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-24-1970
Reported in: [1971]81ITR511(All)
V.G. Oak, C.J.1. This is a reference under Section 256 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereafter referred to as 'the Act'). Smt. Triveni Devi is the assessee. The assessment year is 1962-63. She was assessed by the Income-tax Officer in due course. When the assessment came up for consideration before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, he noticed that no action had been taken with respect to the assessee's minor son, Prem Prakash, who had been admitted to the benefits of partnership of a firm. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner, therefore, issued a notice of enhancement proposing the inclusion of the share of the minor in the assessment of Smt. Triveni Devi. The assessee protested, and further submitted that in any case interest amounting to Rs. 5,561 received by the minor from the firm was not includible under Section 64(i) of the Act in the assessee's income. This last submission was accepted by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The sum of Rs. 5,561 received by the minor son as ...
Chhitarmal Ram Dayal Vs. the Commissioner, Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-24-1970
Reported in: [1971]28STC252(All)
R.S. Pathak, J. 1. The Additional Judge (Revisions) Sales Tax has referred the following questions :(1) Whether Rule 20-B of the U.P. Sales Tax Rules published in the Gazette on 6th April, 1957, will apply for an application for exemption made for the year 1957-58, even though the application was made after the rule came into force, or whether the old rule which was in force on 1st April, 1957, would apply ?(2) Whether the circular No. A-1-101(ii)-Vol-2-3675/ST dated 22nd November, 1958, issued by the Commissioner of Sales Tax asking the Sales Tax Officer to give time to the dealers in general to make up the deficiency in payment of the minimum exemption fee had statutory force in view of Rule 82 of the U.P. Sales Tax Rules and was binding upon the Sales Tax Officer 2. The assessee is a dealer carrying on business in foodgrains. It applied for exemption from tax under the U.P. Sales Tax Act for the year 1957-58. The application was purportedly made under Rule 20-B(a) of the U.P. Sales ...
Khurshed Bagh Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. Commissioner, Sale ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-23-1970
Reported in: [1971]27STC362(All)
R.L. Gulati, J.1. This is a reference under Section 11(1) of the U. P. Sales Tax Act at the instance of the assessee.2. The assessee is the Khurshed Bagh Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., Lucknow, which is a society registered under the Co-operative Societies Act (No. 2 of 1912). The assessment year involved is 1957-58. The dispute relates to the sales tax levied upon the turnover of bricks which the assessee is alleged to have sold to its members during the assessment year in question. The case of the assessee throughout has been that a brick-kiln had been set up not with the funds of the assessee-society but with the contributions made by some members, who wanted bricks for the construction of their houses and that the society merely acted in a supervisory capacity and distributed the bricks to its members after they had been prepared without charging any profit or commission. The Sales Tax Officer disregarded the plea of the assessee and passed an assessment order against the asses...
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Brij Nath Rai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-22-1970
Reported in: AIR1971All209
S.K. Verma, J. 1. This is a defendant's first appeal from an order of remand. 2. The plaintiff respondents were employed by the defendant-appellant in various capacities. On September 30, 1967 an order was passed terminating their services. The plaintiff-respondents filed a suit on November 11, 1967, for a permanent injunction restraining the defendant-appellant from giving effect to the order, dated September 30, 1967. They also prayed for a temporary injunction. On December 4, 1967, an objection was filed on behalf of the defendant-appellant. It was said that the plaint ought to be rejected under Order VII. Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, because no notice under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure was sent or served on the defendant-appellant and such a notice was absolutely mandatory. The learned Civil Judge of Gorakhpur upheld the objection and dismissed the suit (he really ought to have rejected the plaint under Order VII, Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure). In ...
Prem Chandra Satish Chandra Vs. Collector of Central Excise and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-22-1970
Reported in: 1980(6)ELT714(All)
ORDERC.D. Paresh, J.1. In this writ petition petitioner has claimed mandamus commanding the respondents not to proceed to sell the properties other than the excisable goods of the petitioner. Further mandamus has been claimed commanding the opposite parties first to sell goods detained by them and there after the other excisable goods still left in the warehouse and only then to proceed against the other properties of the petitioner. The other prayers contained in the writ petition need not be repeated for the reason that I have been addressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner on only two grounds, although various grounds have teen taken in the writ petition.2. The facts of the case may briefly be stated thus :The petitioner firm held a wholesale dealer licence in tobacco and private Bonded warehouse at Sahawar, District Etah, U.P. The claim of the petitioner is that Sarvasri Prem Chander and Satish Chander are the only partners of the firm and Satish Chander carries out transa...
Ganesh Flour Mills Co., Ltd. Vs. Labour Court and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-22-1970
Reported in: (1971)IILLJ122All
Satish Chandra, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution questions the validity of an award, dated 24th March, 1969, rendered by the Labour Court, Allahabad.2. The petitioner company carries on manufacture and sale of vegetable oil products in its factory at Kanpur. The petitioner has provided residential bungalows to its officers, Such officers are also given the facility of domestic servants at the cost of the company. Ram Het, respondent No. 2, was engaged by the petitioner company and was directed to work as a bungalow servant at the house of the Chief Engineer of the company. He used to do the various domestic duties on all the days of the week. With effect from 1st January, 1968, Ram Het, however, absented himself on all Sundays, till 3rd March, 1968, which was also a Sunday. The petitioner company's case is that he also started neglecting his duties and became a slipshod and indisciplined servant. He was charge-sheeted on 4th March, 1968. After a domestic enquiry...
Vijaya Cycle and Rickshaw Co. Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-21-1970
Reported in: [1971]27STC573(All)
R.S. Pathak, J.1. In this reference under Section 11(1) of the U. P. Sales Tax Act the Additional Revising Authority, Sales Tax, Varanasi, has submitted the following questions of law for the opinion of this court:--(1) Whether in the above circumstance the stay was effective for the year 1959-60 or for all the years ?(2) Whether the assessment for 1960-61 was passed within the period of limitation ?(3) Whether assembled cycles can be taxed at the rate of 2 per cent. as an unclassified item or as manufactured cycles taxable at 3 per cent. ?(4) Whether the estimate of sales was justified ignoring the figure of purchase through Form 'C' with the Sales Tax Officer ?2. The assessee deals in cycles, cycle parts, tyres and tubes. It also assembles cycles from, cycle parts and sells them.3. On 17th September, 1964, the Commissioner of Sales Tax issued a direction to the Sales Tax Officers that sales tax should be assessed on the turnover of assembled cycles. Proceedings under Rule 41(5) of th...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »