Allahabad Court May 1974 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.
Motor Transporters' Association and Ors. Vs. the Senior Superintendent ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-15-1974
Reported in: AIR1974All448
ORDERR.L. Gulati, J.1. This is a petition by truck owners and two of their associations. The petitioners have their business premises in the following five areas which are business centres in Kanpur city :(a) Collector Ganj. (b) Canal Range, (c) Rizvi Road, Nai Sarak, (d) Luqman Mohal, Canal Range, (e) Dhankutti. Previously they used to load and unload goods in front of their business premises abutting the road patri where the trucks use to be parked. On October 17, 1969 the senior Superintendent of Police, Kanpur, issued an order under Section 74 of the Motor Vehicles Act read with Rule 183 of the Rules framed thereunder prohibiting the parking of heavy vehicles at any time during the day or night in certain localities of Kanpur except under a permit to be granted by him or the Superintends it of Police City, Kanpur. Roads which were affected by this order are situate in Collectorganj, Rizvi Road, Ifti-kharabagh, Birhana Road and Canal Range. This affected the business of the transpor...
Tika and ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-15-1974
Reported in: 1975CriLJ337
M. N. Shukla, J.1. This is an application under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure with a prayer that this Court may recall its judgment dated 25-5-1973 whereby it dismissed criminal Appeal No. 2849 of 1970. This application' originally made before Hon'ble Mr, Justice H. N. Kapur who had decided the appeal, but he referred it to a larger Bench for an authoritative pronouncement and it is in these circumstances that this case has come before us.2. The applicants were convicted by the Temporary Sessions Judge, Etah under Sections 147, 304/149 and 323/149 I.P.C. by his order dated 17-12-1970 and they were sentenced to different terms of imprisonment. The applicants preferred the aforesaid appeal to the Hon'ble Court against their conviction and sentences and the memo of appeal was presented by Sri Sudhir Chandra Varma, Advocate. The applicants were granted bail at the time of the admission of the appeal but before the date of final hearing the applicants engaged Sri Rajesh Ji...
Hari Krishna Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-14-1974
Reported in: [1976]105ITR612(All)
Satish Chandra, J.1. The assessee is a Hindu undivided family of which Hari Krishna is the karta. For the assessment year 1964-65, Had Krishna received Rs. 6,000 as managing director's remuneration from M/s. Beharilal Mannilal Investors and Financiers Private Ltd. The claim of Hari Krishna that this was his individual income was rejected by the Income-tax Officer on the ground that the family funds were Invested in the purchase of the shares of the company of which the assessee became the director.2. On appeal the finding was affirmed and it was held that the managing director's remuneration was the income of the Hindu undivided family. The assessee carried the dispute to the Tribunal but failed.3. At the instance of the assessee the Tribunal has referred the following question of law for the opinion of this court :'Whether, upon the facts and circumstances of the case, the amount of Rs. 6,000 received by Sri Hari Krishna as salary in the capacity of a managing director of M/s. Beharil...
Hind Lamps Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-14-1974
Reported in: 1978(2)ELT78(All)
Satish Chandra, J.1. M/s Hind Lamps Ltd., the petitioner, is a public limited incorporated in 1951. It carried on the business of manufacture and sale of electric bulbs, fluorescent bulbs, miniature bulbs and their components at its factory at Sikohabad. The entire share holding of the petitioner company is held by six Ltd. companies. Of these four are foreign companies incorporated in England and Netherland and two are companies incorporated in India. Since its very inception the petitioner company has long term agreements with six other companies which have been described in the Counter Affidavit as subsidiary companies of the six Companies which are share holders in the petitioner company. The bulbs and fluorescent tubes etc. manufactured by the petitioner company are branded by the petitioners with the trademarks like 'PHILIPS', 'OSARAM', 'MAZDA', 'CROMPTION', 'BAJAJ' and 'KLEER-TON', under which names the customer companies sell these goods. The Petitioner Co. sells the goods manu...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. J.K. Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-13-1974
Reported in: [1975]98ITR153(All)
Gulati, J. 1. A short but interesting question of law arises in this reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922.2. The assessee is a company. The assessment years involved are 1960-61 and 1961-62 of which the relevant previous years are the calendar years ending on 31st December, 1959, and 31st December, 1960, respectively. The assessee-company is engaged in the business of production and sale of cotton textile goods and paints at Kanpur. It set up a rayon plant in a different locality at Kanpur and this new rayon plant went into production from 1st August, 1959. In its return for the assessment year 1960-61, the assessee disclosed a loss of Rs. 86,30,813 and in the return for the year 1961-62, it also disclosed a loss of Rs. 60,75,273. The returns for both the years were accompanied by audited copies of profit and loss account and the balance-sheet. There was a separate balance-sheet in respect of the rayon unit which was described as J. K. Rayon branch. The book...
Indian Hume Pipe Company Ltd. Vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-10-1974
Reported in: [1974]34STC230(All)
Satish Chandra, J. 1. The petitioner-company manufactures reinforced cement concrete pipes. These pipes are constructed with cement, sand and stone grits which are reinforced with steel wires and rods.2. For the assessment years 1963-64 and 1964-65 the Sales Tax Officer brought the turnover of these pipes to tax at the rate of 7 per cent on the ground that they were sanitary fittings. On appeal, the petitioner's claim that these pipes were not sanitary fittings was accepted and the turnover was held liable to tax at 2 per cent as unclassified item. The Commissioner of Sales Tax went up in revision. The Judge (Revisions) held that, in view of the decision of the High Court in Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd. v. State of U. P. [1972] 29 S.T.C. 487, hume pipes manufactured by the petitioner were not sanitary goods and so they were liable to be taxed as unclassified goods at 2 per cent. The Judge (Revisions) further noticed that the High Court did not consider the notification dated 21st May, 196...
Suryalal Makand Lal Vs. the State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-09-1974
Reported in: [1975]36STC225(All)
R.L. Gulati, J.1. The petitioner is a partnership-firm and carries on business, amongst other things, in vanaspati. It carries on the business on its own account as well as on commission agency basis for ex-U.P. manufacturers. During the assessment years 1970-7.1 and 1971-72 its turnover of vanaspati sold on commission basis amounted to Rs. 53,280 and Rs. 2,12,332 respectively.2. Under a notification issued under Section 3-A of the U. P. Sales Tax Act the turnover of vanaspati is taxable at a single point, the point being the sale by the manufacturer in the case of goods manufactured in U. P. and the sale by the importer in the case of goods imported from outside U. P. The Act, as it stood on the material time, did not contain a definition of the word 'importer'. Such a definition was given in Rule 2(d-1) of the U. P. Sales Tax Rules. Under Sub-clause (c) of Clause (d-1) an importer means 'in a case where the goods are imported into Uttar Pradesh otherwise than as a direct result of a ...
J.K. Synthetics Ltd. Vs. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax and anr ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-07-1974
Reported in: [1976]105ITR344(All)
Satish Chandra, J.1. During the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1966-67, the petitioner-company installed machinery to commence manufacture of Nylon-6. The petitioner-company claimed that this was a petro-chemical industry to which Section 33(i)(b)(B)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was applicable. It was a priority industry and was entitled to depreciation under Section 80E of the Act. The Income-tax Officer examined this claim and finding that the petitioner-company was engaged in petro-chemical industry upheld the claim. It allowed 35 per cent. development rebate under Section 33(1)(b)(B)(i) and also allowed depreciation at 15 per cent. under Section 80E of the Act for the assessment year 1967-68. Since some of the deductions claimed by the assessee had been disallowed, the assessee riled an appeal which was partly allowed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner on 14th December, 1972, with the result that the assessment was modified. 2. On 20th December, 1973, the Add...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kanodia Cold Storage
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-07-1974
Reported in: [1975]100ITR155(All)
H.N. Seth, J.1. This is a consolidated reference, relating to the assessment years 1964-65 and 1965-66.2. At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following two questions of law for the opinion of this court:'I. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct, in holding that the portion of the walls of the freezing chamber containing insulation materials constituted 'plant' within the meaning of Section 43(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and that it was entitled to depreciation as on a 'plant' ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the payment of Rs. 14,742 to the Allahabad Electric Supply Undertaking towards cost of transformer and service line for replacing the existing line to enable it to have higher K. V. A. electric power for cold storage was an allowable expenditure in computing the income of the a...
Smt. Ainunnisa Vs. Mukhtar Ahmad and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-06-1974
Reported in: AIR1975All67
M.P. Mehrotra, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order of the District Judge allowing an application under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act of 1890. The respondent No. 1, Mukhtar Ahmad, claiming to be the real father of a male minor named, Mohd. Yusuf, sought for the return of his custody as the guardian of the said minor,2. The brief facts are these: The appellant, Smt. Ainun Nisa, is the daughter of the respondent No. 2, Mohd. Munir. The appellant was married to the respondent No. 1, Mukhtar Ahmad. In 1962 she was divorced by her said husband and after that divorce the latter remarried another woman from whom he has several children. Smt. Ainun Nisa also remarried one Sheikh Bhullan. There is a minor son of Smt. Ainun Nisa whose name, according to Mukhtar Ahmed, respondent No. 1, is Mohd. Yusuf but according to Smt. Ainun Nisa, the appellant, and Mohd. Munir, the respondent No. 2, his name is Ghani. Mukhtar Ahmad claimed that the said son of Smt. Ainun Nisa was begott...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »