Allahabad Court August 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.
Commissioner, Sales Tax Vs. Shambho Saran Naik
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-24-1971
Reported in: [1972]29STC326(All)
R.L. Gulati, J. 1. These are two references under Section 11(1) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act. The following question of law has been referred for the opinion of this court :Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the deposit of Rs. 1,165 by cheque shall be deemed to have been made towards the balance of admitted tax for 1962-63 ?2. For the assessment year 1962-63, the assessee was assessed to sales tax. The admitted tax for that year was Rs. 1,920. The assessee wanted to file an appeal against this assessment order and had, therefore, to deposit the admitted tax. The assessee deposited a sum of Rs. 815 in cash and for the balance it tendered a cheque. In the challan, which accompanied the memorandum of appeal, it was, however, mentioned that the cheque of Rs. 1,103 related to the year 1963-64. At the hearing of the appeal, an objection was raised that the entire admitted tax for the year 1962-63 had not been deposited. The assessee's contention was that the mention of th...
State Vs. IndersaIn Ahuja and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-24-1971
Reported in: 1972CriLJ358
Mohd. Hamid Hussain, J.1. Government Appeals Nos. 1517 and 1518 of 1967 have been referred for decision to Division Bench by the Hon'ble Ramabhadran, J. on the ground that since the question of limitation under Section 79 of the Mines Act 1952 has arisen and therefore, these two appeals be decided by a Division Bench.2. Government Appeal No. 1517 of 1967 arises out of Criminal Case No. 37 of 1966 in which, Indrasain Ahuja. Chandrasain Ahuja and Ammer Kalam were prosecuted under Sections 66, 69, 70 and 72C(i)(a) read with Sections 16, 17 and 18 of the Mines Act. 1952 on the complaint lodged on 17-2-1966 by the Regional Inspector of Mines. The other Government Appeal No. 1518 of 1967 arises out of Criminal Case No. 36 of 1966 in which Indrasain Ahuja and Chandrasain Ahuja were prosecuted for offences under Sections 66. 70. and 72C(1)(a) read with Sections 16. 17. and 18 of the Mines Act on the complaint lodged on 17-2-1966 by Regional Inspector of Mines.3. The question which has arisen i...
Baijnath Hari Shanker Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-1971
Reported in: [1973]91ITR208(All)
Pathak, J.1. Two questions have been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. They are:' 1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, it could be held that the assessment made under Section 34(1)(a) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, was valid ? 2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, it could be held that the surplus on the sale of land arose out of an adventure in the nature of trade and as such was rightly brought to tax '2. The reference relates to the assessment year 1954-55, the relevant previous year being the financial year ending March 31, 1954. The assessee has been assessed in the status of an association of persons.3. On August 19, 1946, four persons, Baijnath, Hari Shanker, Panna Lal and Ratan Lal, jointly purchased a plot of land measuring 33,226 square yards from one L. C. Jain for Rs. 1,50,000 in the joint names of Baijnath and Hari Shanker. The four purchasers contributed almost eq...
Padam Chand Garg Vs. Atar Singh Rikshawala
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-20-1971
Reported in: AIR1972All217
J.S. Trivedi, J. 1. This plaintiff's Second Civil Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree of II Additional Civil Judge. Agra. The appellants are the legal representatives of the plaintiff Padam Chand Garg. They had filed the suit for arrears of rent and ejectment. The relief of electment was claimed on the basis of default. It is not disputedthat a composite notice of demand and determination was served on the defend-and-respondent on 13-7-67. The defendant-respondent remitted the arrears on 10-8-1963. From the record it appears that 11th and 12th of August, 1963 were postal holidays and when the money order was offered after 14th August, 1968. it was refused by the landlord. The suit out of which this appeal arises was then filed by Sri Padam Chand Garg.2. The defendant-respondent contested the suit and contended that nodefault was committed. The trial Courtdecreed the plaintiff's suit. The lower appellate Court allowed the appeal holdingthat the money having been despatche...
Hamid HussaIn Vs. Controller of Estate Duty
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-20-1971
Reported in: [1972]83ITR309(All)
Pathak, J. 1. The Central Board of Direct Taxes has referred the following question for the opinion of this court : ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 3,61,939, or any part thereof being the value of the properties settled by the deceased as wakf properties, was rightly included in the principal value of the estate of the deceased and charged to estate duty under Section 12 or, in the alternative, under Section 10 of the Estate Duty Act '2. Haji Ahmed Hussain Rizvi died on December 28, 1955. His son, Syed Ahmed Hussain Aslam Rizvi, furnished an account of the property passing on his death to the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty. The deceased had executed a deed of wakf, and the Assistant Controller held that the wakf properties valued at Rs. 3,61,939, mast be deemed to have passed on the death of the deceased under Section 12, Estate Duty Act, or, alternatively, under Section 10 of that Act. An appeal was preferred by the accountable person ...
Arshad Waliullah Vs. Controller of Estate Duty
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-20-1971
Reported in: [1972]83ITR150(All)
Pathak, J.1. The Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question under Section 64(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 : ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the estate duty was rightly levied in respect of the house property at No. 12, Elgin Road, Allahabad, as property passing on the death of the deceased '2. The immovable property known as 12, Elgin Road, Allahabad, is Nazul land. It was first leased out of one E. E. Moreau by the Secretary of State for India in 1858, for a period of 50 years on terms with gave the lessee an option of renewal of the lease. The lease expired in 1908. Thereafter, by a deed of 1911 it was renewed with effect from 1908 for a further period of 50 years. There was no provision for any further renewal and the lease expired on November 29, 1958. 3. Dr. Mohammad Waliullah became the owner of the lease-hold rights in the land and of the bungalow standing thereon some years before the lease expired in 1958. On March 29, 1958, the Col...
K. Kumar Vs. Onkar Nath
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1971
Reported in: AIR1972All81
J.S. Trivedi, J.1. The appellant is admittedly the tenant and respondent the landlord of the accommodation in suit. Plaintiff-respondent, the landlord being a minor, a composite notice of demand and determination of rent was sent under Registered cover to the appellant on 8-4-1967. This notice is said to have been served on 11-4-1967. As the appellant neither paid the rent nor vacated the shop, hence the suit out of which this appeal arises was filed.2. The suit was contested by the defendant-appellant on the ground that the natural guardian of the minor being the father who is alive, the mother was incompetent to act as next friend of the minor and in any event the notice by the mother, Smt. Chameli Devi on behalf of the minor was bad in law. It was also contended that payment of the arrears had been made to Choudhary Gur Dayal Singh, father of the minor. The receipt of the notice of demand and determination of rent was also denied.3. The trial court held that Smt. Chameli Devi was co...
Mirzapur Electric Supply Co. Ltd. Vs. U.P. State Electricity Board, Lu ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1971
Reported in: AIR1972All127
ORDERR.L. Gulati, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petitioner is a private limited company carrying on business in the name of Mirzapur Electrict Supply Co. Ltd.2. Since 1929 the petitioner held a licence from the State Government under the Indian Electricity Act, 1910, for supply of electricity to the towns of Mirzapur and Vidhyachal. The petitioner had its own generating plant. The first respondent, the U. P. Electricity Board, Lucknow by an order dated January 15, 1962, directed the petitioner to closedown its generating station and to take the supply of electricity from the Board. The generating station was closed on February 20, 1962 and the Board has been supplying electrical energy to the petitioner since then. The total load of electrical energy which was being supplied from the Board from time to time has been increasing and went up about 3,000 KVA. In June 1961 the petitioner demanded an increase in the load by 1000KVA. The Board wrote back ...
Mrs. Lynatte Caroline Maria Mansford and anr. Vs. Mr. Granville Jacobs
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-16-1971
Reported in: AIR1972All129
K.B. Asthana, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 6-A of the Court-fees Act against an order of the learned Civil Judge of Jhansi directing the plaintiff to pay ad valorem court-fees on the value of the property involved under Section 7(iv)(a) of the Court-fees Act holding that the suit was one to obtain a declaratory decree with consequential relief. 2. The plaintiffs in their plaint sought later alia the following two reliefs: (a) A decree may be passed for declaration to the effect that the plaintiff No. 1 is entitled to the extent of 2/9th as her share and plaintiff No. 2 is entitled to the extent of l/3rd as her share and plaintiff No. 3 is entitled to her l/3rd share in the property mentioned in Schedules A and B which being the joint property of the plaintiffs along with defendant No. 1 and he has no right and title both to receive interest, dividends or to negotiate or transfer the properties mentioned in Schedules A and B annexed to the plaint alone and without the consent a...
Mamchand Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-16-1971
Reported in: 1971CriLJ1772
ORDERH.C.P. Tripathi, J.1. Applicant was convicted by a Magistrate First Class for an offence Under Section 16(1)(b) of the prevention of Food Adulteration Act and sentenced to six months' rigorous imprisonment and to a fine of Rs. 1000/-.2. On appeal, the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge affirmed the conviction and sentence of the applicant.3. According to the prosecution on 24-12-1968 Sri Vir Singh. Food Inspector. Municipal Board, Meerut found the applicant hawking' milk for sale within the Municipal limits at about 8.30 A. M. Applicant was in possession of the licence for selling milk. The Food Inspector asked the applicant to give a sample of his milk. Applicant, however, refused to give the sample and leaving the can of milk at the spot bolted away from the scene. The Food Inspector took the can of milk in posses-tion, sealed it in the presence of two witnesses and then produced the same in the Court of Magistrate. Subsequently, applicant was prosecuted for preventi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »