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.
Ram Krishna Ram Gopal Vs. C.i.T.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-10-1976
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(All)0328A
R. M. Sahai, J. - The following questions have been referred for the opinion of this court :1. 'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case a penalty under Section 271(1)(a) is precluded by virtue of the charging of interest under section 139 2. Whether the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Kulu Valley Transport Co. is properly distinguished by the Tribunal ?'The assessee, a firm, filed its return 4th January, 1967 in response to a notice under section 148 dated June, 1966. The return was due to be filed on 30th September, 1963. There was thus a delay of 41 months. The Income-Tax Officer issued a notice under section 271(1)(a) of the Income-Tax Act to show cause why penalty be not levied for the late filling to the return. The assessee submitted its explanation alleging mainly that its Munim was a patient of paralysis and the account could not be completed within time. The explanation was not accepted and the penalty was levied.2. Mr. Mahajan, learned co...
Thakur Prasad Vs. Smt. Kishora
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-1976
Reported in: AIR1977All98
Sinha, J.1. This revision has come to us on a reference made by a learned single Judge of this Court.2. Smt. Kishora (hereafter to be called, the opposite party) filed a suit under Section 176 of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and; Land Reforms Act (hereafter to be called the Act), in the Court of Munsif Allahabad in the year 1955, for partition of Bhumidhari and Sirdari plots, against Thakur Prasad (hereafter to be called the applicant). The suit was decided on 31st July 1961 and a preliminary decree for partition was passed in favour of the opposite party. An appeal filed against that decree was dismissed by Civil Judge, Allahabad on 8th May 1962 and the second appeal filed in this Court was dismissed on 28th of August 1968. Thereafter, on 30th of November 1971, the opposite party filed an application in the Court of Munsif Allahabad for preparation of final decree. Relying on a decision of this Court in the case Balbodh v. Mahabir, (1970 All LJ 11'45), the Munsif Allahabad came to th...
Ram Lakhan Saran Vs. the Sunni Central Board of Waqf, U.P., Lucknow an ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-04-1976
Reported in: AIR1976All532
T. S. Misra, J.1. This appeal is directed against an order passed by the Civil Judge Faizabad appointing a receiver of certain properties situate in Ayodhya, district Faizabad. The appeal was filed in this Court at Allahabad. It was urged before the Division Bench hearing the appeal that the appeal was not maintainable in view of the Supreme Court decision in Civil Appeal No. 1940-41 of 1972 (Nasiruddin v. State Transport Appellate Tribunal) : [1976]1SCR505 inasmuch as the district of Faizabad lies within the jurisdiction of the Lucknow Bench of this Court. The Division Bench, being of the view that the question involved was of considerable importance, desired that the matter be laid before a Full Bench for an authoritative pronouncement on it. That is how the matter has come up before this Full Bench.2. Notices were accordingly issued to the parties concerned as well as the Presidents of Allahabad High Court Bar Association and Avadh Bar Association, and to the Advocate-General who ha...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Janta Biscuit Factory
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-04-1976
Reported in: [1977]39STC121(All)
D.M. Chandrashekhar, J.1. At the instance of the revenue, the Additional Judge (Revisions), Sales Tax, Bareilly Range, has, under Section 11(4) of the U. P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 (shortly called the Act) referred to this court the following question of law :Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the biscuits and confectionery sold by the assessee could be said to be biscuits and confectionery sold in sealed containers 2. The above question arose in the assessment of the respondent herein, who is a manufacturer of biscuits. The assessee claimed that its turnover of sales of biscuits was taxable at the rate of 2 per cent only in view of Notification No. ST-3128/X-1012(4)-1965 dated 1st July, 1966, issued by the Government of Uttar Pradesh under the Act. Under that notification, with effect from 1st July, 1966, cooked food including sweetmeats and confectionery other than that sold in sealed or tinned containers is liable to sales tax at the rate of 2 per cent. The sale...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. M/S. Janta Biscuits Factory.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-04-1976
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(All)313
D. M. Chandrashekhar, J. - At the instance of the Revenue, the Additional Judge (Revisions) Sales Tax, Bareilly Range, has, under Section 11(4) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, (shortly called the Act) referred to this Court the following question of law :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the biscuits and confectionery sold by the assessee could be said to be biscuits and confectionery sold in sealed containers ?'2. The above question arose in the assessment of the respondent herein who is a manufacturer of biscuits. The assessee claimed that its turnover of sales of biscuits was taxable at the rate of 2% only in view of Notification No. ST. -3128-X-1012(4)- 1965, dated July 1, 1966, issued by the Government of Uttar Pradesh under the Act. Under that notification, with effect from July 1, 1966, cooked food including sweetmeats and confectionery other than that sold in sealed or tinned containers, is liable to sales tax at the rate of 2%. The Sales Tax authoriti...
Madan Kumar and anr. Vs. Hari NaraIn Agrawal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-03-1976
Reported in: AIR1977All141
K.N. Seth, J.1. These two appeals arise out of insolvency proceedings initialed by Vishnu Narain who made an application to the Insolvency Judge on 9-8-1966, for declaring him insolvent. The court by its order dated 15-1-1968 declared him insolvent. Respondents Nos. 1 to 5 in these appeals made applications under Section 4 of the Provincial Insolvency Act alleging that the disputed house and the shop were the assets of the insolvent and the transactions relating to them were sham and fictitious and hence void. It was alleged that on 16-4-1963 Vishnu Narain executed a gift deed in favour of his minor sons relating to the house in question. The mother of the minors, acting es their guardian, executed a sale deed dated 7-9-1966 in favour of Madan Kumer, appellant in S. A. F. O. No. 1 of 1973 Vishnu Narain executed a sale deed in favour of his brother-in-law Hari Krishna, appellant in S. A. F. O. No. 2 of 1973, on 27-9-1965 covering the shop in question. According to the respondent-credito...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Jassu Ram Bakery Dealer
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-02-1976
Reported in: [1976]38STC461(All)
D.M. Chandrashekhar, J.1. The Additional Judge (Revisions), Sales Tax, Meerut, has under Section 11(3) of the U. P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), referred the following question of law to this court:Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, biscuits come under the category of: (A) Cooked foodtaxable at 2 per cent vide entry No. 1 of Notification No. S.T. 3612/X -900(21)-69 dated 1st July, 1969, or(B) Confectionerytaxable at 3 per cent under entry No. 5 of the aforesaid notification, or(C) Unclassified itemat the general rate of tax under Section 3?2. The question, whether or not biscuit comes under the category of confectionery, is no longer res Integra as a Division Bench of this Court has held in Annapurna Biscuit (Mfg.) Co. v. State of U. P. 1974 U.P.T.C. 620 that biscuit is not an article of confectionery. So the only surviving question is whether biscuit comes under the category of 'cooked food' or forms an unclassified item.3. Under t...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Har Prasad Ayodhya Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-02-1976
Reported in: [1977]39STC420(All)
R.M. Sahai, J.1. The following question has been referred for the opinion of this court :Whether mehdi was a cosmetic item taxable at 10 per cent or an unclassified goods taxable at 2 per cent in the year 1967-68 ?2. The assessee, a manufacturer of mehdi powder used by the womenfolk for colouring, claimed before the assessing authority that it was liable to tax as an unclassified item. His plea was accepted, but, on appeal, the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) was of the opinion that it is used for beautifying one's person and, therefore, it was covered by the entry 'cosmetics and toilet requisites' and was taxable at 10 per cent. Aggrieved by the decision of the appellate court, the assessee filed a revision which was allowed and the order of the assessing authority was restored. The assessee has not appeared in this court but from the statement of case it appears that his case in the court below was as follows :Mehdi is a product of nature and has medicinal effect. The use of mehdi ...
Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P. Vs. M/S. Jassu Ram Bakery Dealer.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-02-1976
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(All)314
D. M. Chandrashekhar, J. - The Additional Judge (Revisions) Sales Tax, Meerut, has under section 11(3) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), referred the following question of law to this Court :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, biscuits come under the category of :(A) Cooked food :Taxable @ 2% vide entry No. 1 of notification No. S.T. 3612/X-900(21) - 69 dated 1.7.1969, or(B) Confectionery :Taxable @ 3% under entry No. 5 of the aforesaid notification, or(C) Unclassified item :at the general rate of tax under Section 3 ?'2. The question whether or not biscuit comes under the category of confectionery, is no longer res integra as a Division Bench of this Court has held in M/s. Annapurna Biscuit Mfg. Co. vs. State of U.P. (1974) U.P. Tax Cases (620) that biscuit is not an article of confectionary. So the only surviving question is whether biscuit comes under the category of cooked food or forms an unclassified item.3. Under the no...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. M/S. Har Prasad Ayodhya Prasad.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-02-1976
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(All)319
R. M. Sahai, J. - The following question has been referred for the opinion of this court :Whether Mehandi was a cosmetic item taxable at 10% or an unclassified goods taxable at 2% in the year 1967-68 ?'2. The assessee a manufacturer of Mehandi powder used by the women folk for clouring, claimed before the Assessing Authority that it was liable to tax as unclassified item. His plea was accepted but in appeal the Assistant commissioner (Judicial) was of the opinion that it is used for beautifying ones person and therefore it was covered by the entry, 'cosmetic and toilet requisite' and was taxable at 10%. Aggrieved by the decision of the appellate court the assessee filed a revision which was allowed and the order of the assessing authority was restored. The assessee has not appeared in this court but from the statement of case it appears that his case in the court below was as follows :'Mehandi is a product of nature and has medical effect. The use of Mehandi by women folk is only incid...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›