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.
Rajendra Prasad Gupta Vs. Krishan Murari Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-12-1971
Reported in: AIR1972All181
J.S. Trivedi, J.1. This is a defendant's second civil appeal directed against the judgment and decree of the Additional District Judge, Meerut.2. The plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for possession of an enclosure specified in the plaint claiming arrears of rent and mesne profits for use and occupation till the date of delivery of possession.3. According to the plaintiff the defendant-appellant under a deed of agreement which is Ext. 3 on record, was occupying the premises in suit on monthly rent of Rs. 100/-. The lease according to him was for a period of one year only and on expiry of one year's period on 11-4-1965, his status became that of a tenant from month to month and he was liable to ejectment after his tenancy was determined by notice dated 20th April. 1966. The eviction was also claimed on the ground of forfeiture for breach of a term of the agreement. The claim of the ejectment on the ground of forfeiture, however, was subsequently abandoned.4. The appellant pleaded that o...
Chitra Cinema Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-11-1971
Reported in: [1972]86ITR203(All)
H.N. Seth, J.1. At the instance of the assessee, Messrs. Chitra Cinema, Varanasi, this court by its order dated 16th of May, 1966, called upon the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, to submit a statement of the case under Section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, in respect of the following question:'Whether there was no evidence on the basis of which the Tribunal could record the finding that the partnership evidenced by the deed of partnership dated May 2, 1957, was not genuine ?'2. The assessee, Messrs. Chitra Cinema, Varanasi, claims to be a partnership concern and the relevant assessment years are 1958-59 and 1959-60. This firm was constituted under a partnership deed dated 2nd May, 1957. It consisted of three partners, namely, Sri Jyoti Bhushan Gupta, his wife, Smt. Sulabha Devi Gupta, and their son, Anil Kumar Gupta.3. According to the assessee, ordinarily, Sri J. B. Gupta was running the Chitra Cinema as his sole proprietary business. Smt. Sulabha Devi had advanc...
L. Kashi Nath Vs. the Collector, Central Excise, Allahabad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-10-1971
Reported in: AIR1972All16; 1973LC7(Allahabad)
ORDERK.N. Singh, J.1. The petitioner a partnership firm which carries on business in gold ornaments and articles of gold under the name and style of M/s Lala Kashi Nath Seth at Lucknow. The petitioner firm is a licensed dealer under the Gold Control Act, 1968. It is authorised to acquire ownership, possession, custody and control of gold, ornaments and articles of gold in accordance with the provisions of the Gold Control Act. On 27th April, 1971 at about 11 a.m. Superintendent of the Central Excise Department, Lucknow and other officers took a search of the petitioner's business premises. In the course of search, the officers of the Excise Department found ornaments kept on the ground floor for sale for which there was no licence, the account books of the firm were not maintained for certain period and the forms prescribed under the Gold Control Act were also not maintained. One piece of foreign gold was found from the possession of one of the artisans working at the business premises...
TurabuddIn Haji Niaz Ahmad and ors. Vs. the Commissioner, Meerut Divis ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-10-1971
Reported in: AIR1972All146
ORDERK.N. Singh, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 12th May. 1971, of the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Meerut, granting temporary permits to respondents Nos. 3 to 12 of Muzaffarnagar-Budhana-Kurthal route. Petitioners Nos. 1 and 2 are existing operators on Muzaffarnagar-Budhana-Kandla, route, which is completely overlapped by Muzaffar-nagar-Budhana-Kurthal route. Petitioner No. 3 claims to be an applicant for a permanent stage carriage permit on the route in question. 2. Muzaffarnagar-Budhana-Kandla route is fifty kilometers in length. There are 35 stage carriages plying on this route. The town of Kurthal is situated at a distance of about eight kilometers from Budhana and, therefore, a stage carriage operating from Muzaffarnagar to Kurthal overlaps the entire route from the Muzaffarnagar-Budhana-Kandla route. The Regional Transport Authority by its resolution No. 53 dated April 5/6,...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Security Printers of India (P.) Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-09-1971
Reported in: [1972]86ITR210(All)
R.S. Pathak, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question ; 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, it could be held that the provision for bonus, provision for taxation and provision for proposed dividends represented 'reserves' and were to be included in the computation of capital under the Super Profits Tax Act, 1963 ?'2. The assessee is a private limited company. During assessment proceedings under the Super Profits Tax Act, 1963, for the assessment year 1963-64 (the relevant previous year being the financial year ending March 31, 1963), the assessee claimed that the following three items of reserves should be considered while computing its capital investment. (a) provision for bonus Rs. 5,000 (b) provision for taxation Rs. 81,000 (c) provision for proposed dividends Rs. 52,5003. The Income-tax Officer rejected the claim on the ground that these amounts were designed to meet a contingent liability and, therefore, could not be trea...
Kundan Kishanlal Vs. Board of Revenue, U.P. at Allahabad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-05-1971
Reported in: AIR1972All184
ORDERR.L. Gulati, J.1. The petitioner is a co-sharer of certain land with respondent Nos. 3 to 5. In 1963 respondent Nos. 3 to 5 filed a suit in the court of the Assistant Collector, First Class, Moradabad, under Section 59 of the U. P. Tenancy Act seeking a declaration that they were the owners to the extent of 5/6th share of the land comprised in Schedule I annexed to the plaint and the petitioner was the owner of the remaining 1/6th. The petitioner contested the suit on various grounds. He contended that earlier in 1950 he had filed a suit for partition and an ex parte decree was passed in his favour declaring him to be the owner of 1/3rd share and he was put in possession of the one-third share through a dakhalnama. The ex parte decree was later set aside and a fresh decree was passed in 1952 allotting to him only a one-sixth share, but he continued in possession of the one-third share which he had already occupied. His contention was that the opposite parties had failed to apply f...
Mahabir Prasad Sharma and anr. Vs. the State Transport (Appellate) Tri ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-03-1971
Reported in: AIR1972All186
ORDERK.N. Singh, J.1. By means of the Present Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, orders passed by the State Transport (Appellate) Tribunal granting temporary permits to Mrs. B.O. Hearn and Shri Mahabir Prasad Sri. vastava, opposite parties 2 and 3 have been challenged.2. In order to appreciate the controversy between the parties, a brief narration of facts is necessary. Delhi Garh Mukteshwar route is an Inter Statal route. In 1959 there existed 15 vacancies on that route which were required to be filled up by the Transport authorities of Uttar Pradesh. The Regional Transport Authority. Meerut In vited applications for grant of stage carriage permits on the said route. The petitioner No. 1 and several others including Shri B.O. Hearn, husband of opposite party No. 2, made applications for the grant of stage carriage permits on the said route. Before these applications could be considered on merits, 13 permits were issued by the Regional Transport Authority, Meerut ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Radha Swami Bank
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-03-1971
Reported in: [1972]85ITR136(All)
R.S. Pathak, J.1. The assessee, the Radha Swami Bank Ltd., is a banking company. In the course of its banking business, it invested Rs. 75,000 out of its borrowed funds partly in treasury deposit certificates and partly in post office national savings certificates. During the previous year ended December 31, 1962, relevant for the assessment year 1963-64, the assessee received Rs. 2,750 as interest on those securities. Admittedly, interest on treasury deposit certificates is exempt from income-tax.2. In the assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1963-64 the Income-tax Officer accepted the claim of the assessee that the interest income of Rs. 2,750 was exempt under Section 10(15)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. But, he negatived the further claim of the assessee that the expenditure incurred in earning the said income, including the interest paid on funds borrowed for purchasing those securities, was a permissible deduction. Adopting a pro rata basis he apportioned Rs. 2,533 as...
Singhal Electric Works Vs. Commissioner, Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-03-1971
Reported in: [1973]30STC112(All)
S.N. Dwivedi, J.1. This is a reference under Section 11(4) of the U. P. Sales Tax Act on a direction by this court to the Judge (Revisions). The reference is made at the instance of the assessee. The questions referred are these :(1), Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the notice under Section 21, U. P. Sales Tax Act, was validly served on the assessee ?(2) Whether the notice requiring the assessee to attend on 26th March, 1964, was validly served on the assessee?(3) Whether the assessment order and the notice of demand were duly served on the assessee ?2. We are concerned with the assessment year 1959-60. The assessee was assessed ex parte on 21st March, 1964, by the Sales Tax Officer, Allahabad. 3. It appears that the assessee is ordinarily doing business at Lucknow. But he got a certain contract at Allahabad in the relevant assessment year. So he opened an office at No. 2, Sapru Road, Allahabad, under the name and style of M/s. Singhal Electric Works, Allahabad. The...
H.T. Chemical Laboratories Vs. the State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-02-1971
Reported in: [1972]29STC148(All)
R.L. Gulati, J. 1. The short question raised in this petition is whether distilled water is a medicine or a pharmaceutical preparation so as to attract tax under the U. P. Sales Tax Act.2. The petitioner, among other things, prepares and sells distilled water. The sale of water is exempt under Section 4(1 )(a) of the Act. In respect of the assessment year 1967-68 the turnover of distilled water was exempted from tax by the Sales Tax Officer. He, however, later on took proceedings under Section 21 of the Act and levied tax on the turnover of distilled water for the assessment year 1967-68 at the rate of 2 per cent, by an assessment order dated 10th September, 1970. He did so because the revising authority had in another case held that distilled water should be taxed as a medicine.3. As stated earlier, the sale of water is exempt from tax. Under Notification No. 3504/X dated 10th May, 1956, tax is levied on the sale of medicines and pharmaceutical preparations at the point of sale by the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›