Allahabad Court July 1976 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Mir Subha Hari Bhakta
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-07-1976
Reported in: [1988]112ITR544(All)
C.S.P. Singh, J.1. In pursuance of directions issued by this court, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'A' has referred the following two questions for the opinion of this court:'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessment for the year 1950-51 made on February 28, 1959, was barred by time ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that there was no concealment of income in this case ?' 2. The assesses is an individual and earns income by way of salary and commission. In the assessment year 1950-51, with which we are concerned, the Income-tax Officer sought sanction from the Commissioner of Income-tax for initiating proceedings under Section 34 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), Before that sanction was received, the assessee on January 4, 1955, filed a return of income under Section 23(3) of the Act. The return was dated 30th December, 1...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Banwari Lal Madan Mohan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-07-1976
Reported in: [1977]110ITR868(All)
C.S.P. Singh, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'A', on the directions of this court, has referred the following question for our opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the amount of Rs. 11,484 paid as sales tax by the assessee is an admissible deduction in computing the assessee's income for the assessment year 1962-63 ?'2. The assessee is a registered firm carrying on business in cloth at Bareilly. Up to the assessment year 1960-61, the assessment was completed in the status of Hindu undivided family, which consisted of seven members including its karta, Banwari Lal. On March 31, 1960, there was a partial partition of the Hindu undivided family in regard to the business, which was taken over by three members only out of the seven, viz., Banwari Lal, karta, Madan Mohan and Ghan Shyam. It carried on the business in the status of a firm. The balance-sheet of the Hindu undivided famil...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Sheo Kumar Gupta
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-06-1976
Reported in: [1978]111ITR92(All)
R.M. Sahai, J. 1. The Income-tax, Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad, referred the following question for the opinion of this court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the proportionate share of the taxes paid by the firm, in which the assessee, was a partner under Section 68 of the Finance Act, 1965, should be excluded from the wealth of the assessee on the relevant valuation date?'2. Sheo Kumar Gupta, the assessee, was a co-partner in the firm of Radhey Lal Munni Lal, Kanpur, with Ram Krishna Gupta and others. The partnership of Messrs. Radhey Lal Munni Lal in which the assessee was a partner made a voluntary disclosure under Section 68 of the Finance Act, 1965, declaring concealed income of Rs. 10,00,000. The assessee's share in the concealed income amounted to Rs. 87,500. The assessee paid a tax at the rate of 57 per cent. of the income disclosed which came to Rs. 49,870. It was urged on...
Hari Oil Mills Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-06-1976
Reported in: [1977]39STC225(All)
R.M. Sahai, J.1. The Additional Judge (Revisions), Sales Tax, has referred the following question for the opinion of this court:Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of remand passed by the Judge (Revisions) is valid in law ?2. The assessee carried on business of manufacture and sale of oil and oilcake. The total turnover disclosed was Rs. 75,183.22. The assessee did not disclose any net turnover. The assessing authority rejected the book version and assessed the net sales turnover at Rs. 1,66,308.46 to the best of his judgment. The purchase turnover was fixed at Rs. 32,017.96. The assessee went up in appeal. The turnover was not altered although the appeal was partly allowed regarding applicability of the rate of tax. Being dissatisfied with the order of the courts below, the assessee sought his remedy in the court of revision where its contention was accepted to the effect that the account books could not be rejected on the sole ground of higher consumption o...
M/S. Hari Oil Mills Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-06-1976
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(All)272
R. M. Sahai, J. - The Additional Judge Revision, Sales Tax has referred the following question for the opinion of this court.'Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case order of remand passed by the Judge Revisions is valid in law.'The assessee carried on business of manufacture and sale of oil and oil cake. The total turnover disclosed was Rs. 75,183-22. The assessee did not disclose any net turnover. The assessing authority rejected the book version and assessed the net sales turnover at Rs. 1,66,308.46 to the best of his judgement. The purchase turnover was fixed at Rs. 32,017.96. The assessee went up in appeal. The turnover was not altered although the appeal was partly allowed regarding applicability of the rate of tax. Being dissatisfied with the order of the courts below the assessee sought his remedy in the court of revision where its contention was accepted to the effect that the account books could not be rejected on the sole ground of higher consumption of electricit...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. M/S. Kharag Sen Jwala Pd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-05-1976
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(All)0273A
C. S. P. Singh, J. - The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench has at the instance of the assessee referred the following question :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the income of the Aligarh firm business could be assessed in the hands of the assessee Hindu undivided family for assessment years 1945-46 and 1946-47 ?Likewise at the instance of the Commissioner the Tribunal, Delhi Bench referred the following question :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was correct in holding that the income from business in the name of M/s. Babu Lal Om Prakash was not includable in the assessees income for assessment years 1945-46 and 1946-47 ?The reference in the present case relates to the assessment years 1945-46 and 1946-47. In the year 1944-45 a dispute has arisen between the assessee and the Department as to whether the income from M/s. Kharag Sen Jwala Prasad and Babu Ram could be assessed and included in the total in...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›