Allahabad Court April 1976 Judgments
Dildar HusaIn Vs. Ali HusaIn and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-30-1976
Reported in: AIR1976All502
ORDERD.N. Jha, J.1. The petitioners have filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for quashing of the order dated 14-7-1970 passed by the Settlement Officer (Consolidation) and the Deputy Director of Consolidation respectively.2. The brief facts of the case are that the dispute between the petitionersand opposite parties Nos. 1 to 3 was with respect to Khata No. 48. In the basic year opposite parties All Husain, Nizam-uddin and Mohd. Nazir were recorded as tenants of the disputed Khata which had 18 plots with an area of 17 Bigha, 5 Biswa and 12 Biswani. The petitioner claimedco-tenancy over the land in dispute with 1/3rd share each. The pedigree set out is as under:-- MOHAMMAD RAZA | ---------------------------------------------------------- | | | Gazaffar Khan Mohaammad Husain Ahmad Husain | | | Dildar Husain ------------------------------- Kamrul Nisa (Petitioner No.1) | | | (Daughter)= Ali Husain Nizamuddin Mohd. Nazir Married to (O.P.No.1) (O.P.No.2) (O.P.N...
Tag this Judgment!Amjad Ali Nazir Ali Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-29-1976
Reported in: [1977]110ITR419(All)
C.S.P. Singh, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'C', has referred the following question for our opinion :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the minimum penalty to be levied was to be determined by reference to the tax that would have been avoided if the first return submitted had been accepted or to the tax that would have been avoided if the second revised return submitted by the assessee had been accepted ' The assessee is a registered firm doing business in tobacco. For the assessment year 1962-63, the assessee submitted a return of income on August 17, 1962, declaring an income of Rs. 32,665. He filed a revised return showing an income of Rs. 55,000 on July 30, 1963. A second revised return was submitted on May 14, 1965, showing an income of Rs. 85,000.2. An assessment order was first passed on May 21, 1964, i.e., before the second revised return was filed and the total income computed by the Income-tax Officer was Rs. 1,62,257. On appe...
Tag this Judgment!Hari Shanker Gauri Shanker Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-27-1976
Reported in: [1977]108ITR160(All)
C.S.P. Singh, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, in compliance with orders passed by this court has referred the two questions for our opinion:'1. Whether, in law, the expenditure of Rs. 28,030 was not deductible, assuming that the loan, in connection with which it was incurred, was raised for the capital or revenue requirements of the assessee's fresh business ? 2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and lookingto the nature of such expenditure as related to the consumption of storesand payment of wages, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that suchexpenditure to the extent of Rs. 26,321 represented expenditure of capitalnature and not admissible for deduction under Section 37 of the Income-taxAct, 1961 ?' 2. The assessee, a registered firm, has two factories. One factory is engaged in the manufacture of tin containers of various sizes, while the other in manufacture of associated wire and wire products. A return was filed forthe assessment year 19...
Tag this Judgment!Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax, Lucknow Vs. M/S. Mahabir Rice and Da ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-27-1976
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(All)164
C. S. P. Singh, J. - The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following question for our opinion :-'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there was merely a change in the constitution of the firm under section 187(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 or a case of succession under sec. 188 of the Act and that two separate assessments should have been made for the two periods under consideration ?'The assessee a partnership firm was constituted under an instrument of partnership dated 20.11.1964 and had eight partners. One of the parties, Shri Tushiram dies on 16.4.1964. In the accounting period relevant to the assessment year 1965-66, a fresh instrument of partnership was executed on 23.4.1964. Two returns were filled, (1) for the period upto the death of Tushiram, and the other (2) for the period commencing on 17.4.64 and ending on 27.10.1964 during which a fresh deed of partnership has already been drawn up. The Income-tax Officer clubbed together ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner Sales Tax Vs. Chawla Stores
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-1976
Reported in: [1977]40STC57(All)
R.M. Sahai, J.1. The following questions have been referred for our opinion by the Additional Revising Authority, Sales Tax, Allahabad :(1) Whether perfumed hair-oil appertains to the class of 'cosmetics and toilet requisites' taxable at 10 per cent under Notification No. ST7094/X-1012-1965 dated 1st October, 1965, or as 'oils of all kinds other than edible oils manufactured on ghanis by human or animal power' under Notification No. ST-1470/X-902(63)-50 dated 15th March, 1965, for the year 1968-69 ?(2) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of this case, the turnover of Rs. 8,000 on perfumed hair-oil was taxable at 3 per cent or 10 per cent ?2. The turnover of the perfumed hair-oil manufactured and sold by the assessee was assessed at 10 per cent as in the opinion of the Sales Tax Officer it was covered by the entry in Notification No. ST-7094 dated 1st October, 1965. The assessee being unsuccessful in appeal filed revision which was allowed as the Judge (Revisions) was of the view th...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P. Vs. M/S. Chwala Stores, Allahabad.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-1976
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(All)178
R. M. Sahai, J. - The following question has been referred for our opinion by the Additional Revising Authority Sales Tax, Allahabad.'1. Whether perfumed hair oil appertains to the class of 'cosmetic and toiler requisites' taxable at 10% under Notification No. Sp- 7094/X-1012-1965 dated 1-10-1965 or as oils of all kinds other than edible oils manufactured on Ghanis by human or animal power under Notification No. S.T. 1470/X-902 (63)-50 dated 15-3-65 for the year 1968-69 ?.2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of this case, the turnover of Rs. 8,000/- and perfumed hair oil was taxable at 3% or 10% ?.2. The turnover of the perfumed hair oil manufactured and sold by the assessee was assessed at 10 per cent as in the opinion of the Sales Tax Officer it was covered by the entry 5T-7094 dated 1st October, 1975. The assessee being unsuccessful in appeal filed revision which was allowed as the Judge Revision was of the view that perfumed hair oil was included in the terms Bill of all kinds...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jwala Pd. Radha Kishan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-1976
Reported in: [1977]107ITR540(All)
R.M. Sahai, J.1. The following question has been referred by theIncome-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad. 'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the sum ofRs. 44,234 was allowable as a bad debt or as a business loss ?'2. The assessee claimed a deduction of Rs. 44,234 on account of a bad debt in proceedings for assessment year 1965-66. It was stated that the assessee had advanced a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs to Sri J. P. Srivastava on February 19, 1942, and on it the assessee had charged interest till Samvat 2007-2008 (corresponding to the year ending 1st July, 1942) amounting to Rs. 64,234. The assessee was thus to receive Rs. 5,64,234 from Sri J. P. Srivastava and this remained outstanding for a number of years. In the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1965-66, the assessee had in full settlement of this accepted from Sri J. P. Srivastava 1,200 preference shares of Rs. 100 each and 40,000 ordinary shares also of Rs. 100 each of a company styled New ...
Tag this Judgment!J.K. Rayon Workers' Union Vs. J.K. Rayon Co. Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-1976
Reported in: (1978)IILLJ428All
B.N. Sapru, J.1. The petitioner in this case is the J. K. Rayon Worker's Union, which is a trade union registered under the Trade Unions 'Act, and its members are the employees of the respondent M/s. J. J. Rayon Co. Ltd. The said company is incorporated under the Indian Companies Act. 2. The company and the trade union entered into a settlement which was registered by the duly authorised conciliation officer as provided in Section 6B (3) of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act. By Clause (i) amongst other things, the settlement provided for the payment of dear food allowance (D.F.A.) and by Clause 6 for payment of a milk allowance of forty-five paise per workman to those workmen who were not entitled to those allowances prior to the date of the settlement. The duration of the settlement was upto the end of 1976.3. On 7-1-1976 the company gave a notice under Section 4-1 of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act read with Rule 7(a) of the Rules framed under the Act. The notice complied with the re...
Tag this Judgment!Modi Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-22-1976
Reported in: [1977]110ITR855(All)
1.The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'A ', has under Section 256(1) of the Act referred Ihe following two questions for our opinion :' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally right in holding that the sum of Rs. 6,525 was not expenditure of allowable nature ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, any part of the expenditure amounting to Rs. 32,477 was inadmissible as deduction under Section 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ' 2. The facts necessary for answering these two questions may now be stated. The petitioner-company and one Modi Supply Corporation Ltd. were amalgamated under a scheme sanctioned by the Punjab High Court on May 25, 1956. The amalgamation, however, actually took place on 25th August, 1956. Subsequently, assessment was made of Modi Supply Corporation Ltd. for the assessment year 1952-53, on a total income of Rs. 3,97,644. Subsequently, a demand for an amount of Rs. 61,537 including tax...
Tag this Judgment!Indian Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Limited Vs. Government of U.P. and or ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-22-1976
Reported in: (1976)IILLJ438All
G.C. Mathur, J.1. The question which arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the reference made by the State Government under Section 4K of the Industrial Disputes Act for adjudication of an industrial dispute regarding earned leave to the Industrial Tribunal (I), U.P., Allahabad is incompetent on account of two earlier settlements and an earlier award of the Labour Court.2. There are three unions of workmen in the industry known as Indian Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Rishikesh, namely, the Antibiotics Project (Rishikesh) Karamchari Sangh (hereinafter referred to as the 'Karam chari Sangh'), the Rashtriya Sharmik Sangh (hereinafter referred to as the 'Sharmik Sangh') and Indian Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Limited Employees Union (hereinafter referred to as the 'I.D.P.L. Union'). Disputes were raised by each one of these three unions. The dispute raised by the Sharmik Sangh related to earned leave to workmen employed after 27-5-1969. Negotiations started between the company an...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »