Allahabad Court January 1976 Judgments
Shyam Murari Lal Saxena Vs. the District Magistrate and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-30-1976
Reported in: AIR1977All198
Satish Chandra, J.1. The members of the Municipal Board, Kaimganj, passed a motion of no-confidence against the President. The term of the senior Vice-President, namely. Sri R. K. Agar-wal, was to expire on 11th July, 1975. He, however, submitted his resignation to the District Magistrate on 7th July, 1975. On 8th July. 1:975, Shyam Murari Lal Saxena, the appellant, made a representation to the District Magistrate that he was a duly elected junior Vice-President and so was entitled to function as the President of the Municipal Board. The District Magistrate, however, passed an order on 8th July 1&75 directing that the Sub-Divisional Magistrate can function and perform the duties of the President of the Municipal Board, Kaimganj, tinder Section 54-A of the U. P. Municipalities Act. It appears that the representation filed by the appellant reached the District Magistrate subsequently whereupon he asked the appellant to appear before him on 14th July 1975 to substantiate his case that he ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Shakuntala Banerji Vs. Assistant Controller of Estate Duty-cum-in ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-30-1976
Reported in: [1977]108ITR68(All)
C.S.P. Singh, J. 1. The petitioner is the accountable person for the estate of late Sri P. K. Banerji. Estate of the value of Rs. 1,16,166 was disclosed by the accountable person, but assessment was made at a value of Rs. 11,27,261. The value was enhanced mainly on account of the addition of the value of the trust property to the extent of Rs. 10,08,200. Subsequent to the finalisation of the assessment, a notice under Section 60(2) was sent to the accountable person as to why action against him should not be taken under Section 60(1 )(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars and concealment of the estate of the deceased. The petitioner filed reply to the notice but the Assistant Controller by his order imposed a penalty of Rs. 5,000. 2. We have gone through the order of the Assistant Controller. The Assistant Controller found that there had been a non-disclosure of the full particulars of the estate of the deceased, and from that he inferred that the accountable person had c...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Kanpur Engineering Stores
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-30-1976
Reported in: [1976]38STC234(All)
C.S.P. Singh, J.1. The Judge (Revisions), Sales Tax, Lucknow, has referred under Section 11(3) the following question for our opinion :Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the instant case, the Judge (Revisions) was justified in law in partly accepting and partly rejecting form C No. C/I-901122?2. The question arises out of assessment proceedings for the year 1962-63. The assessee declared a turnover of Rs. 53,708. Benefit to reduced rate of tax under Section 8(1) of the Central Sales Tax Act was claimed on a turnover of Rs. 45,527.24. The assessee filed a number of forms in respect of the transaction of sale. One such form related to three bills of the following amounts : Rs. 1,694.00, Rs. 3,210.00, Rs. 752.50.3. The Sales Tax Officer held that inasmuch as this particular form was in respect of more than one transaction and of the value of more than Rs. 5,000, benefit of the reduced rate of tax could not be given to the assessee on the basis of this form in respect of the...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. M/S. Kanpur Engineering Stores.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-30-1976
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(All)0117A
C. S. P. Singh, J. - The judge (Revisions) Sales Tax, Lucknow has referred under section 11(3) the following question for our opinion :-'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the instant case, the Judge (Revisions) was justified in law in partly accepting and partly rejecting the Form C No. C/1-901122 ?'The question arises out of assessment proceedings for the year 1962-63. The assessee declared a turnover of Rs. 53,708/-. Benefit to reduced tax under section 8(1) of Central Sales Tax Act was claimed on a turnover of Rs. 45,527.24. The assessee filed a number of forms in respect of the transactions of sale. One such form related to three bills of the following amounted :-Rs. 1,694.00Rs. 3,210.00Rs. 752.50The Sales Tax Officer held that inasmuch as this particular form was in respect of more than one transaction and of value of more than Rs. 5,000/-, benefit of the reduced rate of tax could not be given to the assessee on the basis of this form in respect of the transactions ...
Tag this Judgment!Roop NaraIn Ram Chandra Vs. Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-29-1976
Reported in: [1988]112ITR890(All)
C.S.P. Singh, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, referred the following question for our opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the claim for deduction of Rs. 3,00,114 was admissible under Section 36(1)(vii)/ 36(2)(ii)/41(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in the present assessment ?'2. The assessee was the sole selling agent of Messrs. Elgin Mills Company Ltd. and Messrs. Kanpur Textiles Ltd. In the accounting year corresponding to the assessment year 1959-60, the assessee claimed a deduction of Rs. 3,00,114 as bad debt. The basis of the claim were these. An amount of Rs. 3,00,114 was advanced by the assessee to Sri Brahmaputra Tea Company (India) Ltd. on September 13, 1957. In the immediately preceding year, the assessee had advanced an amount of Rs. 2,50,000 to Messrs. S. B. Industrial Development Company (P.) Ltd., Calcutta, and Rs. 50,000 to Messrs. F. & Cosier (India), Calcutta, and...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner, Sales Tax Vs. Bechu Ram Kishorilal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-29-1976
Reported in: [1976]38STC236(All)
C.S.P. Singh, J.1. The following question of law was referred by the Additional Judge (Revisions), Sales Tax, Gorakhpur :Whether the mixing of scents in ordinary til oil amounts to manufacture of perfumed hair-oil 2. The assessing authority recorded a finding that the assessee purchased oil and after adding scent to it sold it as hair-oil. The appellate authority accepted the arguments advanced on behalf of the assessee that mere addi-sion of scent does not bring out a different commodity. Aggrieved by the view taken by the appellate authority the Commissioner, Sales Tax, filed revision, which was dismissed. The Judge (Revisions) recorded the following finding :As held in Harbilas Rai's case [1968] 21 S.T.C. 17 (SC.) referred to above, the word 'manufacture' has various shades of meaning and, in the context of the sales tax legislation, if the goods to which some labour is applied remain essentially the same commercial article it cannot be said that the final product is the result of m...
Tag this Judgment!The Commissioner of Income-tax, U.P. Ii, Lucknow Vs. M/S. Nathimal Gay ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-29-1976
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(All)115
C. S. P. Singh, J. - In compliance with the orders passed by this Court, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'A' has referred the following question for our opinion :-'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appellate order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal containing the finding that the assessee had satisfactorily proved that the speculative transactions were entered into by it on behalf of the persons to whom the profits had been paid, can be supported in law ?'2. The facts relevant for the decision of this reference may be shortly stated. The assessee is a registered firm and acts as a commission agent in the sale of agricultural produce. In the assessment year 1964-65, the assessee did speculative business. The assessee showed a profit of Rs. 1,14,347/- in respect of some speculative transaction and showed a loss of Rs. 1.13.135/- in respect of others. It showed a net profit of Rs. 1,213/-. The Income-tax Officer on scrutiny of the transactions...
Tag this Judgment!Harish Chandra and ors. Vs. Chandra Shekhar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-27-1976
Reported in: AIR1977All44
Chandra Prakash, J. 1. This is a defendants mortgagees' second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 7-8-1971, dismissing the appellant's appeal after confirming the judgment and decree of the trial Court.2. The following pedigree is undisputed:-- Smt. LAXMI BAHU _______________________________________|______________________________________________ | | | | Smt. Kalawati Chandra Shekhar Chandrabhal Chandra Shish (Defdt. No. 4) Plfl. (Defdt. No. 5) (Defdt. No. 6)Smt. Laxmi Bahu was undisputed owner of the house in dispute. On 10-1-1930 she executed a deed of mortgage in favour of Ram Sumer in respect of the house for Rs. 2,500. Defendants Nos. 1 and 2 are admittedly the successors in respect of all the property of Ram Sumer.3. The suit giving rise to this appeal was filed by respondent No. 1 for the redemption of aforesaid mortgage on the allegations that Smt. Laxmi Bahu was the owner of the disputed property. She died on 30th January, 1930 leaving behind her three sons including ...
Tag this Judgment!Phool Chand Varshney Vs. the C.i.T., Lucknow and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-23-1976
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(All)113
C. S. P. Singh, J. - The Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad under section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 has referred the following question for our opinion :-'Whether upon the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the findings of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal that the amounts of Rs. 19,620/- and Rs. 8,140/- were the income of the assessee Hindu Undivided Family taxable during the assessment years 1959-60 and 1960-61 respectively and also that, therefore, the claim of Shrimati Sukho Kunwar, wife of the Karta of the assessee family, was liable to be disallowed, were findings valid in law ?'The assessment years involved are 1959-60 to 1962-63. The assessee, a Hindu Undivided Family, during the relevant accounting period, was carrying on the business of supplying sand. While examining the account for the year 1959-60 and 1960-61, the Income-tax Officer, found that there was an account of Shrimati Sukho Kunwar, wife of the Karta of the assessee showing depos...
Tag this Judgment!Raghavendra Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-21-1976
Reported in: 1976CriLJ1782
Hari Swarup, J.1. This petition was moved for a relief to quash the proceedings pending against the petitioner in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Unnao and for setting the petitioner at liberty. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner has made a statement that he does not press the first part of the relief but will confine the petition to the second part, namely, the relief to set the petitioner at liberty. He has contended that he prays only for a writ in the nature of habeas corpus.2. The petitioner was taken into custody at Lucknow on August 9, 1975 and is in jail since then. A criminal prosecution is pending against the petitioner in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Unnao. A charge sheet in the case was filed on 9-10-1975. The case was then adjourned to 22-10-1975. The accused who was in jail did not appear in court as he was not brought to court by the authorities. The Magistrate went on adjourning the case and fixed 10-11-1975, 9-12-1975, 9-1-1976 and h...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »