Allahabad Court April 1971 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.
Moti Lal Shyam Sunder Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-22-1971
Reported in: [1972]84ITR186(All)
Pathak, J.1. The assessee is a Hindu undivided family of which Shyam Sunder is the karta. The other members included the karta's wife, Smt. Shanti Devi, and six minor sons and one unmarried daughter.2. In proceedings for the assessment year 1962-63 an application dated September 25, 1962, was made claiming that a partial partition had taken place in the Hindu undivided family on July 31, 1961. The Income-tax Officer recorded the statement of Shyam Sunder. The statement was to the effect that there was a partnership firm, M/s. Moti Lal Shyam Sunder consisting of two partners, Shyam Sunder and Moti Lal, with equal shares. Shyam Sunder represented his Hindu undivided family in that firm. On July 31, 1961, the credit balance in the' accounts of the Hindu undivided family maintained in the books of the firm amounted to Rs. 3,45,769 and this amount was divided in eight equal parts in consequence of which a sum of Rs. 43,221 was transferred to the credit of Smt. Shanta Devi and also to the cr...
Raja Vishwanath Pratap Singh Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-22-1971
Reported in: [1972]84ITR135(All)
Dwivedi, J.1. This is a reference under Section 27 of the Wealth-tax Act. At the instance of the asses see, Raja Vishwanath Pratap Singh, the Appellate Tribunal has submitted a statement of the case and has referred for the court's opinion these questions :' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the debts amounting to Rs. 30 lakhs and odd, more or less for each of the assessment years under appeal, were rightly not allowed as a deduction in calculating the net wealth of the assessee ? 2. Whether, on the facts and under the circumstances of the case, the provisions of Section 17 of the Wealth-tax Act were applicable so far as the assessment years 1957-58, 1958-59 and 1959-60 are concerned ?' 2. The assessee is the son of the late Captain Raja Bahadur Ram Gopal Singh. The father was the owner of extensive zamindari and other properties. He was in huge debts. He applied under Section 4 of the U. P. Encumbered Estates Act for the liquidation of his debts. While the...
Puttan Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-22-1971
Reported in: 1972CriLJ270
R.L. Gulati, J.1. Puttan alias Ram Bahadur Singh has filed this appeal against the judgment and order of the First Civil and Sessions Judge, Fatehpur, convicting him under Section 376. I. P. C. and awarding him a sentence of live years' rigorous imprisonment.2. The prosecution story 13 that oh September, 25, 1966 Sukhhandaii Prasad, the complainant, had gone to Sheorajpur to take bath in river Ganga in the early morning at 6 a. m. During his absence his minor daughter. Km. Meena, who is said to be thirteen or fourteen .years of age went to ease herself in a field towards the railway line at about 7 in the morning. When she was returning, she was forcibly dragged by the appellant in a field having Jwar, arhar, till and mung crops belonging to one Chheda Singh. There the appellant committed rape on Meena. Attracted by the shrieks of the girl, Ram Manohar Singh (P. W. 2). Sheo Baran Singh (P. W. 8) and one Ram Autar Singh appeared on the scene and saw the appellant actually committing sex...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Brij Transport Company Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-21-1971
Reported in: [1973]87ITR52(All)
H.N. Seth, J.1. This is a reference under Section 66(1) of the Income-taxAct, 1922, at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax. The assesseein this case is M/s. Brij Transport Company Ltd., Saharanpur, and theassessment year involved is 1956-57.2. The company was assessed to income-tax for the assessment year 1956-57, by an order dated 16th July, 1957. 'The total income of the company was computed at Rs. 30,274 and the tax payable was determined as Rs. 13,150. The distributable surplus amounted to Rs. 17,127. The company was required to distribute 60% of the distributable surplus as dividend within the twelve months immediately following the expiry of the previous year, under Section 23A of the Act, This was not done. Hence, the Income-tax Officer invoked the provisions of Section 23A(1) of the Act and levied super-tax at the rate of 37% on the undistributed balance of Rs. 17,127 amounting to Rs. 6,337 by his order dated 29th March, 1963.3. The assessee went up in appeal before ...
isherdas Sahni and Brothers Vs. the District Magistrate, Lucknow and a ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-20-1971
Reported in: AIR1972All83
Gur Sharan Lal, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioner firm, namely, Isherdas Sahni and Brothers, seeks to get quashed by a writ in the nature of certiorari or like writ, order or direction, three orders contained in Annexures 13, 14 and 18 to the Writ Petition, the first and the third having been passed by the Government of Uttar Pradesh impleaded as opposite party No. 2 and the second one by the District Magistrate of Lucknow (Opposite party No. 1) acting as the licensing authority under Section 4 of the U. P. Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1955. It also seeks the issue of a writ in thenature of mandamus to opposite party No. 1 aforesaid to grant to the petitioner firm cinematograph licence for the Basant Cinema at Lucknow so long as it continues to enjoy the possession of the said cinema premises and complies with all the formalities of Cinematograph Act and the rules. An interim relief in the form of grant of cinematograph licence was also prayed for but the same was not allowed and ...
Dr. S.M. Gupta Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-20-1971
Reported in: [1972]86ITR406(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, levy of Rs. 2,500 and Rs. 12,500 by way of penalty by the Tribunal amounted to an enhancement of the penalty levied by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner ?'2. The assessee, an individual, was assessed for the assessment year 1961-62 on a total income of Rs. 9,491 under Section 23(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1922. Subsequently, proceedings were taken under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the assessee returned a total income of Rs. 17,684. On reassessment, the total income was computed at Rs. 33,241. In appeal, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal reduced the total income to Rs. 21,902.3. The Income-tax Officer initiated penalty proceedings against the assessee and the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner levied a penalty of Rs. 5,000.4. In similar proceedings for the assessment year 1962-63, the assessee filed a return showing his incom...
Smt. Kusum Kumari Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-20-1971
Reported in: [1972]85ITR19(All)
Pathak, J.1. The petitioner challenges the imposition and collection of penalties for the omission to pay advance tax demanded for the financial year 1968-69.2. The petitioner is a proprietor of the Naaz Cinema, Jawahar Square, Allahabad. She had been previously assessed to income-tax by the Income-tax Officer, B-Ward, Allahabad. On August 6, 1968, the Income-tax Officer served a notice of demand under Section 156 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, requiring the petitioner to pay Rs. 11,292 in instalments during the financial year 1968-69 as advance tax under Section 210 of the Act. It appears that the petitioner omitted to pay the advance tax. She says that she was preoccupied with the marriage of her daughter. She also claimed that she would have filed a revised estimate inasmuch as the income during the financial year 1968-69 was low, and this was evidenced subsequently by the assessment order for the assessment year 1969-70 whereby the total income was computed at Rs. 18,444 on which the...
Commissioner of Income-tax, U.P. Vs. Jhagru Ram Kunda Nand.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-20-1971
Reported in: [1972]86ITR823(All)
PATHAK J. - The Income-tax Officer made an assessment order for the assessment year 1945-46 including within the total income of the assessee an amount of Rs. 65,000 as the income of the assessee from undisclosed sources. On appeal by the assessee, the addition was maintained by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and, thereafter, by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The Income-tax Officer initiated penalty proceedings against the assessee and made an order under section 28(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, levying a penalty of Rs. 20,000. The assessee appealed. The appeal was, however, dismissed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. Thereafter, on second appeal by the assessee, the set aside the penalty observing :'Coming to the facts of the present case, we may at once say that the material on record is insufficient to prove that the assessee either concealed the particulars of its income or deliberately furnished inaccurate particulars thereof so as to make it liable under sec...
Laxmi Devi Vs. Chandramani Devi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-13-1971
Reported in: AIR1971All506
K.B. Asthana, J. 1. This is a defendant tenant's appeal from a decree of her eviction from a house, for recovery of arrears and damages. 2. It appears that the father of the defendant appellant in 1938 took on lease the premises in suit, commonly described as Garden House, situate in a decent locality of Varanasi City, from the father of the plaintiff respondent at a monthly rent of Rs. 75/- for residential purposes. In course of time the father of the plaintiff as well as of the defendant died. The plaintiff as the heir became the owner of the premises in suit and the defendant as heir of her father succeeded to the tenancy. In due course the rent was increased to Rs. 125/- per month. The plaintiff was married to a gentleman who was residing outside Varanasi with the family being in service. When the plaintiff's husband retired from service the family came back to Varanasi and the plaintiff was desirous of securing residence in her own property, that is, the Garden House, the premises...
Cawnpore Sugar Works Ltd. Vs. Dr. B.P. Mohindra and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-13-1971
Reported in: (1971)IILLJ169All
V.G. Oak, C.J.1. These two connected special appeals arise out of two references made by the State Government to the Industrial Tribunal, Lucknow. The Kanpur Sugar Works Limited carries on business of manufacture and sale of sugar. The Company employed Dr. Mohindra as a Medical Officer. He was dismissed from service on 12-1-1968. He complained that his dismissal from service was unjustified. Upon that complaint, the State Government made a reference to the Industrial Tribunal, Lucknow. This is reference No. 28 of 1969.2. Since there was some doubt about the validity of the order of dismissal, the Company decided to regularise the position. On 25-11-1968 the Company served upon Dr. Mohindra a notice terminating the contract of service. This order of termination of service was also challenged by Dr. Mohindra and a union of workmen. The dispute was again referred by the State Government to the Industrial Tribunal, Lucknow. This is reference No. 48 of 1969.3. In each of the two references ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »