Allahabad Court October 1974 Judgments
Banwari Nathoo Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-31-1974
Reported in: AIR1975All199
ORDER1. Certain agricultural land was declared surplus in village Kurdi Khera Chahchak alias Kalluwala Jahanpur Uttari in the district of Saharanpur, under the provisions of U. P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The surplus land was allotted temporarily to one Surja and the third respondent, Basiram. After the proceedings by way of appeals etc. were over the Prescribed Authority proceeded to make permanent allotments. Petitioner was one of the applicants. Tahsildar Saharanpur recommended the case of the petitioner whereupon the Prescribed Authority by his order dated June 30, 1970 allotted a few plots of land to the petitioner and a lease was also executed in his favour, in the meantime the respondents Nos. 3 to 5 filed objections before the Prescribed Authority disputing the allotment in favour of the petitioner, on the ground that he was not a landless labourer but was living with his father who had plenty of land. After hearing ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Mohindar Kaur Vs. Central Government and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-29-1974
Reported in: [1976]104ITR120(All)
Satish Chandra, J. 1. The Income-tax Officer, Kanpur, fixed February 27, 1973, for the hearing of the petitioner's cases for the assessment years1967-68, 1968 69 and 1969-70. The petitioner's case is that his pairokar could not attend the hearing of the case on that date. The Income-tax Officer passed three assessment orders for each of the assessment years in question. He added certain cash deposits to the assessable income of the petitioner as income from undisclosed sources. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed three different appeals. At the hearing of the appeals the petitioner desired to produce additional documentary evidence to disprove the finding with regard to the cash deposits. The prayer for production of additional evidence was, however, refused by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner on the ground that the case of the assessee was not covered by any of the provisions of rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules. 2. The assessee has filed the present petition to challenge the validity ...
Tag this Judgment!Modi Spinning and Weaving Mills Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-28-1974
Reported in: [1975]101ITR637(All)
H.N. Seth, J.1. All these special appeals and writ petitions raise common and connected questions of fact and law and can be conveniently dealt with and disposed of by a common judgment.2. M/s. Modi Spg. and Weaving Mills, hereinafter referred to as 'the company', was incorporated in 1946. From time to time, the company purchased and installed machinery of the value of Rs. 75,00,000 for its factory. In proceedings for assessment of income-tax, the company was allowed, in computing its income from business for the assessment years 1950-51, 1951-52 and 1952-53, initial depreciation aggregating to Rs. 15,91,511 in respect of new machinery installed in the relevant previous years. The company was also allowed normal depreciation at the appropriate rates. In the assessment year 1956-57, the aggregate of all the depreciation allowances including initial depreciation exceeded the original cost of the machinery, but the Income-tax Officer, on the written down value of the machinery computed at...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Laxmi NaraIn Vs. Jia Lal JaIn and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-16-1974
Reported in: AIR1975All213
ORDERHari Swarup, J.1. This is an application under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act. The plaintiff had instituted a suit for ,a permanent injunction to restrain the defendants from interfering with the plaintiff's functioning as Principal of the Vaish Degree College. Shamli. The suit was dismissed. Lower appellate court allowed the appeal and decreed the suit directing defendants 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7 not to interfere with the plaintiff's functioning and discharging his duties as Principal of the Vaish Degree College till his services were validly terminated. Defendants came to this Court in appeal. The appeal was allowed so far as defendants 1 and 5 were concerned, and the decree was maintained against defendants 2, 4, 6 and 7. Opposite party No. 2 in the present application was defendant No. 7 in the suit. Opposite party No. 1 in the present case was not a defendant in the suit but he has been impleaded on the ground that he had been described in the memorandum of appeal as Se...
Tag this Judgment!Om Prakash Vs. Madan Gopal Gupta and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-16-1974
Reported in: AIR1975All282
M.N. Shukla, J.1. This appeal arises out of proceedings under Order 21, Rule 16, Civil Procedure Code in an execution case.2. The brief facts are that the Banaras Electric Light and Power Supply Co., Ltd., Banaras obtained a decree against the Parbati Hemp Bailing Press owned by a firm styled as Radhakrishna Shivadutta Rai in which Ram Kumar and Madan Gopal Gupta were the partners. The Electric Company put its decree in execution. The decree was, however, sold during the pendency of the execution on 28-4-1967 to Om Prakash appellant. He applied under Order 21, Rule 16, Civil Procedure Code for substitution of his name in place of the original decree-holder. The iudgment-debtors opposed the same and filed objections stating, inter alia, that Om Prakash was a man of no substance, that he did not have the capacity to purchase the decree on payment of Rs. 9,500/- to the original decree-holders, that the decree was actually purchased by Mahabir Prasad who was the grandson of Ram Kumar (one ...
Tag this Judgment!Shyam Enamel Works Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-16-1974
Reported in: [1975]35STC489(All)
Satish Chandra, J.1. The Revising Authority, Meerut, has submitted the statement of the case for the opinion of this court on the following question of law :Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, water-meters which the assessee manufactures and their parts are machinery and, as such, taxable under Notification No. ST-1367/X-1045(19)-1960 dated 5th April, 1961 ?2. The question relates to the assessment year 1963-64. For the assessment year in question the account books of the assessee were accepted, with the result that the turnover of the sale of water-meters manufactured by the assessee as shown in the account books was also accepted.3. The assessee pleaded that the water-meters manufactured by it were not machinery, and that, similarly, parts of water-meter manufactured by it could not be taxed as parts of machinery. According to the assessee, the turnover of sale of water-meters was taxable as sale of unclassified item at 2 per cent. The Sales Tax Officer repelled this...
Tag this Judgment!Manohar Lal Ahuja and ors. Vs. Income-tax Officer, Collection-ii and a ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-14-1974
Reported in: [1984]148ITR608(All)
Satish Chandra, J. 1. The petition under Article 226 of the Constitution prays for the quashing of a notice of attachment issued by the ITO, Kanpur, on April 22, 1972, under Section 226 of the I.T. Act, 1961, and for the refund of the sum of money attached thereunder.2. M/s. L. K. Ahuja & Co. was a partnership firm. It was constituted in February, 1969. The accounting period of the firm was from 1st February to 31st January, of the next year. It had five partners, Kanhaiya Lal, petitioner No. 2 being one of them. Four minors, including Km. Ashu and Shankar Lal, whose guardians are petitioners Nos. 3 and 4, had been admitted to the benefits of the partnership. This firm was reconstituted on 1st September, 1970. Some of the partners retired and some new persons, including Manohar Lal Ahuja, petitioner No. 1, became partners in this firm. The petitioners allege that soon after its constitution, the firm took several contracts with the railway department for construction of buildings. When...
Tag this Judgment!Jackard Machinery Works Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-14-1974
Reported in: [1975]35STC508(All)
Satish Chandra, J.1. The question of law which requires consideration in this reference is whether handloom (kargha) and its parts are machinery and machinery parts or unclassified articles. The reference relates to the assessment year 1965-66. The assessee carries on business in handloom machinery and its parts besides charkha, etc. The assessing authority accepted the turnover disclosed by the assessee. Up to 30th September, 1965, the turnover was assessed at 2 per cent as an unclassified item. With effect from 1st October, 1965, it was assessed as machinery at 6 per cent in view of the notification dated 1st October, 1965, issued under Section 3-A of the U. P. Sales Tax Act. The assessee went up in appeal, but failed. Thereafter, he preferred a revision on the ground that handloom (kargha) sold by him was not machinery within the meaning of Section 3-A and, as such, was not taxable at 6 per cent.2. The Judge (Revisions) held that inasmuch as the handloom was a mechanical contrivance...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Naini Glass Works
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-14-1974
Reported in: [1975]35STC517(All)
Satish Chandra, J.1. These two references relate to the assessment years 1966-67 and 1967-68. The assessee disclosed his turnover of Rs. 10,45,339 for the year 1966-67 and of Rs. 9,82,170 for the assessment year 1967-68 of own manufactured bottles. The Sales Tax Officer accepted the plea of the assessee that this turnover was liable to tax at 2 per cent as an unclassified item. Subsequently, the authorities discovered that the assessee in the bills of sales had designated the goods as 'jars'. Thereupon, the Commissioner of Sales Tax filed revisions on the ground that the turnover of 'jars' was taxable at 10 per cent as glassware. The commodity in question was not 'bottle' so as to be exempted under the notification dated 1st October, 1965. The Judge (Revisions) repelled this plea and dismissed the revisions.2. At the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, the revising authority has referred the following questions of law for the opinion of this court :(1) Whether the additional rev...
Tag this Judgment!Radha Krishna Mehra Vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-10-1974
Reported in: 1975CriLJ652
D.S. Mathur, C.J.1. This is a revision by Radha Krishna Mehra to challenge the order dated 2-7-1971 pf the City Magistrate, Varanasi, dropping the proceeding under Section 145 Code of Criminal Procedure on the ground that the dispute relates to partnership property.2. The material facts of the case are that Radha Krishna Mehra and Moh-kam Chand Mehra were partners of the firm Mehra Silk Mills in, the city of Varanasi. Certain disputes arose between the partners, who it may be mentioned, are brothers and, on 1.7-12-1970 the son of the applicant, namely. Kali Charan Mehra, lodged a report with the police. The mill had been closed and both the brothers had put in their locks on the gate of the mill. The police, thereupon submitted a report for taking proceedings under Section 145. Cr.P.C. in respect of the property as the dispute was likely to cause a breach of the peace. The City Magistrate passed a preliminary order and attached the Mehra Silk Mills and gave it in the custody of Kashi N...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »