Allahabad Court March 1971 Judgments
Matrumal Dhanna Lal Vs. Income-tax Officer, a Ward
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-1971
Reported in: [1972]86ITR497(All)
H.N. Seth, J.1. This is a combined reference in respect of assessment years 1954-55, 1955-56, 1956-57 and 1957-58, made at the instance of the assessee, Matrumal Dhanna Lal, under Section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922.2. The assessee is a Hindu undivided family doing business under the name and style of Matrumal Dhanna Lal of Hathras. There is an oil mill situated at Chemar Gate, Hathras. This mill along with another oil mill situated at Aligarh originally belonged to the partnership firm, Messrs. Kishan Lal Matrumal, formed on August 13, 1935, by five partners including Rai Sahib L. Dhanna Lal as representing the assessee-Hindu undivided family and L, Chiranji Lal representing his own Hindu undivided family. Duo to certain differences the partnership business was discontinued after the year 1941. The partners referred their dispute in respect of the dissolution of the firm and settlement of accounts to arbitration. The arbitrators gave their award on June 30, 1947, which was later...
Tag this Judgment!Swadesh Leather Store Vs. Sales Tax Officer, Sector Iv and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-1971
Reported in: [1972]29STC308(All)
S.N. Dwivedi, J. 1. The petitioner seeks to challenge the assessment orders for the years 1958-59, 1959-60 and 1960-61 made under the U.P. Sales Tax Act on 30th March, 1970. The orders were passed by the Sales Tax Officer, Agra.2. The petitioner is a dealer in dressed hides and skins. Tax has been assessed in accordance with the Notification No. ST 2934/X-902(7)-56 dated 1st August, 1958. This notification was issued by the State Government under Section 3-AA of the U.P. Sales Tax Act (hereinafter called 'the Act'). The argument of learned counsel for the petitioner is that as the notification was made operative from a back date it is invalid in toto. Before we examine the argument on merits we shall give a short history of the genesis of the notification.3. Section 3 of the Act, at the relevant time, provided that every dealer shall, for each assessment year, pay a tax at the specified rate on his turnover of such year. The U.P. Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1956, inserted Section 3-AA i...
Tag this Judgment!M.C. Goel Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-30-1971
Reported in: AIR1971All512
ORDERH. Swarup, J. 1. Sri M. C. Goel has filed this petition against the notified order dated 8th January, 1971 issued under the hand of the Registrar by order of the High Court which runs as follows: 'Sri M. C. Goel. Civil and Sessions Judge. Orai to be Civil Judge, Hardoi, vice Fri S. D. M. Shahi.'According to the petitioner this order amounts to an order of reduction in rank within the meaning of Article 311 of the Constitution and since it was passed without giving him an opportunity to show cause the order was illegal and void. 2. The petitioner was working on the substantive post of Civil Judge in the U. P. Civil Service (Judicial Branch). In December, 1961 he was appointed on an officiating post of temporary Civil and Sessions Judge. Subsequently the names of certain persons working as Civil and Sessions Judges were recommended by the High Court for promotion to the post of Additional District Judges/District Judges. The name of the petitioner was not included. The State Governm...
Tag this Judgment!Mahadeo Pandey Vs. Mt. Bensraji
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-30-1971
Reported in: AIR1971All515
K.N. Srivastava, J. 1. This is an appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the I Additional Civil Judge, Basti, dismissing the appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the Munsif, Basti.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal are as follows:3. The respondent filed this suit with the allegation that she was the owner of the plots and trees and she had a right to construct a house and to cut the trees which she inherited from her husband as his widow and she became the sole owner of the same after the enforcement of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The suit was contested by the defendant appellant and inter alia it was pleaded that there was a compromise whereby the plaintiff accepted the widow's rights and agreed not to cut the trees and therefore the effect of the earlier compromise would not be undone by the enforcement of the Hindu Succession Act. The plaintiff's contention found favour with the trial court and the lower appellate court with the result that the plainti...
Tag this Judgment!Bishan Swarup Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-30-1971
Reported in: [1972]85ITR635(All)
Pathak, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal rightly imposed a penalty of Rs. 3,000 under Section 28(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 ?' 2. The reference relates to the assessment year 1947-48, the relevantprevious year ending on March 31, 1947. The Income-tax Officer noticeda number of cash deposits in the assessee's bank pass book and the accountbooks totalling Rs. 47,050. The assessee explained that these depositsproceeded out of past withdrawals, but that explanation did not entirelysatisfy the Income-tax Officer who treated an aggregate sum of Rs. 22,050as the assessee's income of the previous year from undisclosed sources. An appeal by the assessee to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax proved without result, and, thereafter, a second appeal to the Tribunalwas partially successful inasmuch ...
Tag this Judgment!Saharanpur Electric Supply Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-30-1971
Reported in: [1971]82ITR405(All)
Gulati, J.1. This statement of the case has been submitted by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi, under Section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, for the opinion of this court on the following question of law :'Whether, on the facts and the circumstances of the case, the expenses of Rs. 6,200 incurred in litigation are of revenue nature and entitled to deduction under Section 10 of the Income-tax Act?'2. The assessee is a limited company engaged in the business of generation and supply of electricity. It had some surplus funds. Out of the surplus funds, a sum of Rs. 45,000 was invested in fixed deposit with a non-scheduled banking concern of the name and style of M/s. Mansa Ram & Sons. Besides, it had another account with that bank called as 'war costs surcharge account', in which there was a credit balance of Rs. 897. The company came to know that the bank was not doing welt and Insolvency petition had been filed against it by some of its creditors. The assessee grew apprehensi...
Tag this Judgment!Dev Vidyalaya Inter College, Taruli Vs. Dr. C.M. Bhatia and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-1971
Reported in: AIR1971All567
ORDERHari Swarup, J.1. Dev Vidyalaya Inter College, Taruli, district Faizabad, is an educational institution recognised under the Intermediate Education Act, 1921 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). By a letter dated 18th January, 1971, the petitioner institution was informed that it had been selected as a centre for High School Examination, 1971, of the Board of High School and Intermediate Education. Subsequently, by a letter dated 27-1-71 the petitioner was informed that the examination will be held at another institution, the Baldeo Vidyapith Inter College, opposite party No. 4. The petitioner has challenged this order on various grounds, viz., that the order is without jurisdiction as it had not been passed by the Board, that if the order be deemed to be passed under Section 11 (3) of the Act it would be bad as it had not been actually passed by the Chairman, that before passing of the order the petitioner was not granted an opportunity of showing cause and that the order was pa...
Tag this Judgment!Gopi Nath Hari Kishan Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-1971
Reported in: [1973]88ITR221(All)
H.N. Seth, J.1. This is a reference under Section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, in pursuance of an Older made by this court on 6th August, 1964. The Tribunal was required to submit a statement of case in respect of the following question :' Whether it was legal for the Tribunal to work out unaccounted-for stocks pledged with the bank as on 8th April, 1957, with the assessee's stocks as obtaining on 8th April, 1957 '2. The assessee in this case is Messrs. Gopi Nath Hari Kishan and the assessment year in question is the year 1958-59. The income-tax authorities have proceeded on the basis that the relevant accounting year is from 19th April, 1956, to 7th April, 1957. The assessee carried on business of rice milling, oil crushing and purchase and sale of grain at its head office at Achalda and branch office at Bharthana. In order to carry on the milling operation it maintained stocks of paddy and rice at both the places, which were pledged with the State Bank of India for secur...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner, Sales Tax Vs. Ram Niwas Puskar Dutt
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-1971
Reported in: [1971]28STC736(All)
R.S. Pathak, J. 1. The Additional Revising Authority, Sales Tax, Allahabad, has referred the following two questions for the opinion of this Court:--(1) Whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case, the weights and measures made of iron and sold by the assessee were covered by the expression 'mill-stores and hardware' under the Notification No. ST-1367/X-1045(19)-1960 dated 5th April, 1961 ?(2) Whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case, the turnover of the sales of the iron weights and measures from 1st April, 1963, to 31st May, 1963, was taxable at the rate of 3 per cent, or at the rate of 2 per cent, only 2. The assessee was assessed to sales tax under the U.P. Sales Tax Act on a turnover which included weights and measures. The Sales Tax Officer treated the weights and measures as liable to tax at 3 per cent. and determined the tax liability accordingly. On appeal by the assessee, the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) Sales Tax did not agree with the view take...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Manohar Lal and Co.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-27-1971
Reported in: [1971]82ITR711(All)
Pathak, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the penalties could not be imposed under Section 271(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The assessee is a partnership firm. It filed voluntary returns of its income for the assessment years 1960-61 and 1961-62 on April 5, 1962. Thereturns should have been filed under Section 22(1), Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, on or before July 31, 1960, and July 31, 1961, respectively. The assessee explained that the delay in filing the returns were due to the strained relations between the parties. The explanation was not accepted by the Income-tax Officer. He held that the assessee had failed to furnish the returns of his income within the prescribed time as required under Section 22(1) of the Act of 1922 and, therefore, imposed a penalty under Section 271(1)(a), Income-tax 'Act, 1961, in the sum of Rs. 4,486 and Rs....
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »