Allahabad Court May 1971 Judgments
Gur Prasad Srivastava Vs. State and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-28-1971
Reported in: 1971CriLJ1823
ORDERJagmohan Lal, J.1. I heard Sri H. D. Srivastava in support of this reference and Sri D. N. Jha who opposed the reference. It appears that on a police report that there was a dispute between the parties regarding possession over a house and there was an apprehension of breach of peace the Sub-Divisional Magistrate Gonda passed a preliminary order under Sub-section (1) of Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure directing the disputed property to be attached and requiring the contesting parties to file written statements of their claims. The parties filed their written statements and: adduced evidence in support of their respective claims. The learned Magistrate did not drop the proceedings under Sub-section (5) of .Section 145 on a finding that there no longer existed any apprehension of breach of peace nor did he-pass any final order as required by Sub-section (6) of the said section. On the other hand he dropped the proceedings by his order dated 4-3-1970 on the ground that ...
Tag this Judgment!Hindustan Sugar Mills Ltd. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-21-1971
Reported in: AIR1972All8
H.N. Seth, J. 1. Board of Revenue has made this reference under Section 57(1) of the Stamp Act. Originally following two questions were referred by the Board for the opinion of this Court:--(1) Whether the document as a whole is a security cum indemnity bond falling under Articles 34 and 57 Schedule I-B of the U. P. Stamp Amendment Act, 1958 and is liable to duty of Rs. 18 only as contended by the Mills, or (2) Whether the document executed by Sri. Gangadhar Adukiya constituted a bond for Rs. 10,80,260/- chargeable with duty of Rs. 16,057.50 under Article 15 Schedule I-B of the U. P. Stamp (Amendment Act, 1958) and the document executed by Sarvasri Kunj and executed by Sarvasri Kunj Behari Lal and others amounts to security bond chargeable with a separate duty of Rs. 18 under Article 57 of Schedule I-B. Subsequently, by its order dated May 22, 1970 this Court required the Board of Revenue to make such additions or alterations in the statement of the case prepared by it as were necessa...
Tag this Judgment!State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. the Inter-state Transport and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-21-1971
Reported in: AIR1971All488
Pathak, J. 1. The State of Uttar Pradesh filed these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution against the order dated January 17, 1966 of the Inter-State Transport Commissioner, New Delhi and the order dated August 26, 1967 of the Inter-State Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi. 2. The State of Uttar Pradesh, through its Transport Department, plies stage carriages on a number of routes which lie partly within Uttar Pradesh and partly within Delhi. The State Transport undertaking is referred to as the U. P. Government Roadways. In respect of some of the routes, the Transport Department has been plying the vehicles from as long ago as 1950 or even from before. Originally, they were plied pursuant to executive orders issued by the State Government. Subsequently, the U. P. Legislature enacted the U. P. State Road Transport Act, 1950 under which the operation of the vehicles of the State Transport undertaking on those routes was validated. The Act was struck down by the Supreme Court in Sa...
Tag this Judgment!Allahabad District Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-21-1971
Reported in: [1972]83ITR895(All)
H.N. Seth, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner is a co-operative society registered under the Cooperative Societies Act. It carries on banking business and has various co-operative credit societies as its members. During the assessment year 1963-64, it derived income from various sources, viz., banking business, property, interest on securities and dividends. By his order dated January 13, 1964, the Income-tax Officer computed the petitioner's total income under various heads as follows :Rs.Property income2,488Business income2,02,477Interest on securities5,537Other sourcesDividend income11From cheque supplied back6Total2,10,5192. The Income-tax Officer directed that the amount of Rs. 2,02,477, which represented the petitioner's income from banking business, was to be included in its total income for rate purposes only. Subsequently, he issued a notice under Section 154/155 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, stating that the order dated Janua...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Smt. Saroj Agarwal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-21-1971
Reported in: [1972]83ITR875(All)
H.N. Seth, J.1. This is a reference under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, the Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question for the opinion of this court:' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances; of the case, the assessee was entitled to the set-off of speculation losses brought forward from earlier years against the speculation profits of the assessment year under appeal '2. Assessee in this case is Smt. Saroj Agarwal and the assessment year in question is the year 1962-63.3. One Prem Shanker was a partner in three partnership firms styled as (1) Hari Shanker Gauri Shanker, (2) M/s. Hari Shanker Gauri Shanker Rice and Dal Mills and (3) Hari Ram Mahadeo Mills. He died on 24th of July, .1959, leaving behind his widow, Smt. Saroj Agarwal, as his heir and legal representative. On 27th July, 1959, Smt. Saroj Agarwal adopted one Sudhir Kumar as her son. It is said that, on the same date, she joined the afore-men...
Tag this Judgment!Shervani Sugar Syndicate (Private) Ltd., Allahabad Vs. the Union of In ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-20-1971
Reported in: AIR1972All71
ORDERB.N. Lokur, J.1. By a notification dated the 12th November, 1970, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Notification') the Central Government, in exercise of the powers conferred by Clause (3) of the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966, made under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, fixed the minimum price payable by the owners of the vacuum pan process sugar factories all over India for the sugarcane supplied to them during the year 1970-71. The various sugar factories to which the notification applied and minimum sugarcane price payable by them were set out in the Schedule to the notification. Under the Schedule the Neoli Sugar Factory, owned by the petitioner. Messrs. Shervani Sugar Syndicate(Private) Limited, was required to pay Rs. 7-57 per quintal as the minimum price of sugarcane supplied to that factory. The principles on which the prices in the Schedule were fixed for the various factories by the Central Government were set out in a Circular letter of the same date issued to all ...
Tag this Judgment!Banshidhar Vs. Smt. Dhirjadbari and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-20-1971
Reported in: AIR1971All526
H. Swarup, J.1. I have had the advantage of going through the proposed judgments of brothers Satish Chandra and A. K. Kirty, I entirely agree with them in the conclusion proposed and the reasons given for the same. I would, however like to add the following paragraph:Section 134 (1) of the U. P. Zamin-dari Abolition and Land Reforms Act entitled a Sirdar, on fulfilling the conditions mentioned therein, to a declaration that he had acquired, in respect of the land, the rights mentioned in Section 137, i.e. the Bhumidhari rights. Section 137 (1) casts on the Assistant Collector the duty to make the declaration and certify it. The order of the Assistant Collector making the declaration tantamounts to the grant of certificate and the Sirdar must be deemed to acquire Bhumidhari rights upon the passing of the order. The 'sanad' provides only the documentary evidence of the fact that the declaration has been made and certified. The rights accrue on the making and certification of the declarat...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hira Lal Mittal and Sons
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-20-1971
Reported in: [1972]86ITR463(All)
Pathak, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question 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 held that the interest receipts of Rs. 11,029 and Rs. 21,572 were not assessable in the hands of the assessee family ?'The assessee is a Hindu undivided family carrying on business under the name and style of Messrs. Hira Lal & Sons, Meerut. It instituted a suit against the Government claiming damages for breach of contract. The trial court decreed the suit for Rs. 68,454. In 1950, the decretal amount was realised by the assessee. It was credited by it in its account books in a separate account called the amanat khata. The interest earned on the amount in that account was also credited in the same account. The assessee offered the interest in its return of income for the purposes of income-tax, and was in fact taxed on that income until the assessment year 1960-61. The ...
Tag this Judgment!J.P. Srivastava and Sons Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-20-1971
Reported in: [1972]86ITR730(All)
H.N. Seth, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has made this reference under Section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, at the instance of the assessee, Messrs. J. P. Srivastava and Sons, Kanpur.2. The assessee is an association of persons and the relevant assessment year is 1959-60. In January, 1951, the assessee purchased 3,040 shares of Messrs. Gwalior Agriculture Co. Ltd. for a sum of Rs. 1,52,000. Out of these shares, it transferred 700 shares to Messrs. J. P. Srivastava and Sons Private Ltd. for a sum of Rs. 35,000 on 1st of April, 1953. Balance of 2,340 shares valued at Rs. 1,17,000 remained with the assessee. Due to certain reasons, on 15th December, 1954, the assessee wrote off a sum of Rs. 1,16,999 from the value of 2,340 shares amounting to Rs. 1,17,000. The result was that in the assessee's books the value of these 2,340 shares was shown as rupee one only. The assessee claimed the amount written off in its assessment for the year 1955-56, which claim w...
Tag this Judgment!Behari Lal Ram Charan Kothi Vs. Income-tax Officer, b Ward and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-20-1971
Reported in: [1972]84ITR113(All)
Pathak, J.1. The petitioner is a partnership firm carrying on business as bankers and cloth dealers. It had business dealings with B. R. Sons Ltd., at one time the selling agent of the Lakshmi Ratan Cotton Mills Company Ltd. In the course of those dealings the petitioner and B.R. Sons Ltd. maintained in their respective account books a running account of the transactions between them. On May 21, 1966, the Income-tax Officer issued a notice under Section 226(3)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, to the petitioner stating that a sum of Rs. 22,89,281.97 was due from B. R. Sons Ltd. on account of income-tax and allied dues and that the petitioner should forthwith pay to the Income-tax Officer any amount due to or held for B.R. Sons Ltd. up to the aforesaid amount. The petitioner was warned that if it failed to make payment it would be deemed to be an assessee in default and proceedings would be taken against it for realisation of the amount as if it were-in arrears of tax. On July 1, 1966, th...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »