Allahabad Court August 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. Raghunandan Saran
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-1976
Reported in: [1977]108ITR818(All)
C.S.P. Singh, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'B', has referred the following question for our opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled in determination of its profits for the assessment years in question to deduct the salary paid to the karta ?'2. The reference relates to the assessment years 1968-69 and 1969-70. The assessee is a Hindu undivided family consisting of Shri Raghunandan Saran, the karta, his wife and the minor children. The karta was a partner in 5 firms as a representative of the family. These firms were : M/s. Brijlal Kishan Lal, M/s. Dharam Prakash Vikram Sain, M/s. Dharam Prakash Nagalia & Co., M/s. Ramnath Gupta and Co. and M/s. Kishan Lal Open Pan Sugar Plant. In the accounts of the firm, M/s. Brij Lal Kishan Lal, an amount of Rs. 500 per month, i.e., Rs. 6,000 per annum, was debited to the account of the family in the books of the firm and the corresponding credit was given to the account o...
Produce Exchange Corporation Limited Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-1976
Reported in: [1977]39STC230(All)
C.S.P. Singh, J.1. In compliance with the order of this court, the Additional Revising Authority, Sales Tax, Allahabad, under Section 11(4) of the Act referred the following question for our opinion :Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was an importer liable to tax on the sale of sugar amounting to Rs. 9,71,680 made to dealers in Uttar Pradesh, who were not traceable ?2. During the assessment years 1956-57 and 1957-58, the assessee was a dealer in mobile oil, tyres, tubes, petrol and other commodities. They also were the selling agents of sugar manufactured by New Sewan Sugar Factory, Bihar. Regular assessment under Rule 41(5) of the U.P. Sales Tax Rules were completed for both the years and accounts of the dealers accepted. Subsequently, information was received that the assessee had sold several thousand bags of sugar in Uttar Pradesh in the names of fictitious parties. Proceedings were as such initiated under Section 21 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act ...
Krishna Bricks Field Vs. Sales Tax Commissioner
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-16-1976
Reported in: [1977]40STC315(All)
D.M. Chandrashekhar, J.1. The following question has been referred for the opinion of this court by the Additional Judge (Revisions), Sales Tax, Allahabad :Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the survey dated 29th April, 1964, could be used for the assessment pertaining to the year 1962-63 ?2. The assessee runs a brick kiln manufacturing and selling bricks and allied products. It returned a net turnover for the year in dispute at Rs. 1,24,724.40. In a survey made by the sales tax authorities on 29th April, 1964, a rough copy and a note book were recovered from the assessee and they contained entries for the period from 1st July, 1963, to 26th August, 1963 and from 16th October, 1963, to 29th April, 1964. The assessing authority, relying on the documents recovered in the survey, rejected the account books of the assessee and determined the turnover at Rs. 1,75,000. An appeal filed by the assessee was allowed and the case remanded for reassessment. Dissatisfied wi...
Krishna Bricks Field Vs. Sales Tax Commissioner.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-16-1976
Reported in: (1977)6CTR(All)24
R. M. Sahai, J. - The following question has been referred for the opinion of this court by the Additional Judge (Revision) Sales Tax, Allahabad.'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the survey dated 29-4-1964 could be used for the assessment pertaining to the year 1962-63'.The assessee runs a brick kiln manufacturing and selling bricks and allied products. It retuned net turnover for the year in dispute at Rs. 1,24,724.40. In a survey made by the Sales Tax authorities on 29.4.1964 a rough copy and a note book were recovered from the assessee and they contained entries for the period from 1st July 1063 to 26th August 1963 and from 16th October 1963 to 29th April 1964. The assessing authority, relying on documents recovered in the survey, rejected the account books of the assessee and determined the turnover at Rs. 1,75,000/-. An appeal filed by the assessee was allowed and the case was remanded for re-assessment. Dissatisfied with the order of the appellate author...
QamaruddIn Vs. Kamta Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-13-1976
Reported in: AIR1977All202
Om Prakash Trivedi, J.1. The facts giving rise to the present appeal may be summaris-ed as follows. Kamta Prasad obtained a decree against Baqar deceased whose legal representatives are respondents 3 to 6. In execution of the decree he put the disputed house to sale. Thereupon Qamaruddin filed an objection under Order XXI, Rule 58, C.P.C. alleging that the house belonged to him and did not belong to the judgment-debtor and was not liable to attachment and sale in execution of the decree against the judgment-debtor. His objection was dismissed and thereafter he filed a suit under Order XXI, Rule 63, C.P.C. for declaration that the house belongs to him and not the judgment-debtor and that it is not liable to be sold in execution of the decree of respondent No. 1. While the matter was pending before the trial court, judgment-debtor Baqar died but no application for substitution of his legal representatives was moved by the appellant. The trial court, therefore, held that the suit had abat...
M/S. Lakshmiratan Cotton Mills Vs. the Addl. Commissioner of Income-ta ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-13-1976
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(All)324
D. M. Chandrashekhar, J. - In this application under Section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) the applicant-assessee has prayed for a direction to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (shortly called the Tribunal) to refer three questions of law.2. The first of such question is whether the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the advance tax order and notice of demand under Section 18-A (1) of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922, were not rendered void even though they suffered from an unrectifiable infirmity. This question is in our opinion, undoubtedly a question of law and arises from the appellate order of the Tribunal. Hence we direct Tribunal to refer this question to this Court with a statement of the case.3. The second of those questions is not shown to have been urged before the Tribunal to refer the question to this Court.4. Though the third of those questions was also not urged before the Tribunal, Shri R. K. Gulati, learned counsel f...
Fida Ali Vs. Amroha Sahkari Kraya Vikaraya Samiti Ltd. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-12-1976
Reported in: AIR1977All158
R.B. Misra, J. 1. The present appeal is a sequel to proceedings under Section 33 of the Arbitration Act and arises in the following circumstances. 2. M/s. Amroha Sahkari Kraya Vikaraya Samiti Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Society) set up a claim for Rs. 21,756.60 p. against Fida Ali, the appellant. The plaintiff denied his liability to pay any amount. Thus, a dispute arose between the parties. Mohammad Umar, Additional District Co-operative Officer, respondent No. 3, was appointed as Arbitrator within the meaning of Rule 115 of the Rules framed under the Co-operative Societies Act (hereinafter referred to as the Rules). The Arbitrator called upon the plaintiff to appear on 27th November, 1964, in connection with the claim. The plaintiff filed a written statement refuting the allegations of the Society. He also challenged the jurisdiction and the authority of the Arbitrator. The Arbitrator, however, accepted the claim of the society and gave an award in favour of the Society f...
Bhagwati Singh Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-12-1976
Reported in: AIR1977All163
ORDERHari Swarup, J.1. This is an application for the review of my judgment. The writ petition was argued by a counsel and was decided on merits on the points raised by him at the time of hearing. It was held that the finding about adverse possession recorded by the Deputy Director of Consolidation was a finding of fact which was not shown to be vitiated by any error of law. The present application has been moved by another counsel and the wants to argue the writ petition afresh and raise grounds of attack which were not taken by the learned counsel who had argued the writ petition. The contention is that the counsel had committed mistake in not relying on and arguing these points.2. It is not possible to review a judgment only to give the petitioner a fresh inning. It is not for the litigant tojudge of counsel's wisdom after the case has been decided. It is for the counsel to argue the case in the manner he thinks it should be argued. Once the case has been fully argued on merits and ...
Madho Prasad Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-12-1976
Reported in: [1978]112ITR492(All)
D.M. Chandrashekhar, J.1. At the instance of the assessees the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (Delhi Bench 'C') has, under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act 1961, referred to this court the following question of law :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the share income of the minor sons of each of the assessees in the firm of M/s. Arvind Cold Storage was rightly included in the individual assessment of the respective assessee ?'2. The material facts are these: The assessees, Sahu Madho Prasad and Sahu Govind Prasad, are partners of a firm by name Arvind Cold Storage. The minor son of each of them had been admitted to the benefits of partnership in this firm. Each of them was the karta of his joint family and was a partner in the aforesaid firm on behalf of his joint family. The share of each of these partners in the said firm was assessed to tax in the hands of the respective joint family. In the assessment years 1967-68 to 1969-70, the share of each of the m...
Kamala Shanker Upadhya Vs. State Electricity Board, U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-11-1976
Reported in: AIR1977All185
M.N. Shukla, J.1. By means of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner has challenged his liability to pay the amount of electricity dues demanded from him by the State Electricity Board, Uttar Pradesh vide Recovery Certificate dated 11-12-1974 (Annexure 7 to the writ petition) tendered to the Collector, Varanasi for execution against the petitioner.2. The petitioner installed an Electric Pumping Set near his residence in Village Ganjari in the district of Varanasi in the year 1968 and the Pumping Set was supplied electricity by respondent No. 1, A dispute has arisen over the electricity charges outstanding against the petitioner. The Recovery Certificate was for a total sum of Rs. 3912.30 out of which the petitioner admits hie liability to the extent of Rs. 1699.90, which amount has admittedly been paid by the petitioner to respondent No. 1 during the pendency of the writ petition. The dispute, therefore, is now confined to the balance of Rs. 2212.40. Th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »