Allahabad Court February 1977 Judgments
Tahsildar and anr. Vs. Shyam Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-25-1977
Reported in: AIR1977All466
Hari Swarup, J. 1. This appeal has been filed against the judgment of the learned single Judge by which he allowed the writ petition filed by the present respondents against the order of the Tahsildar, directing initiation of proceedings to take possession of the plots in dispute in exercise of the powers under Rule 115-D of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Rules (hereinafter referred to as the Rules), The petition was allowed on the ground that the Tahsildar had no power to take proceedings under Rule 115-D. Reliance was placed on the decision of this Court in Paras Nath Singh v. State of U. P. (1961 R. D. 60) in which it was held that the Tahsildar was not empowered to take proceedings.2. The proceedings under Rules 115-G to 115-F of the Rules are taken by virtue of the provisions of Section 120-B of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act (hereinafter called the Act). The learned Standing Counsel has produced a copy of the notification dated 7-1-1964, By not...
Tag this Judgment!Beni Prasad Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-23-1977
Reported in: 1977CriLJ1632
ORDERH.N. Kapoor, J.1. This petition has been filed Under Section 482, Cr. P. C. for quashing the proceedings in Criminal Case No. 197 of 1975, Sarif v. Som Prakash and Ors., pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate Nakur, district Saharanpur in a case Under Sections 120B, 193 and 205 I. P. C. The opposite party Zarif filed a complaint to the effect that some persons had impersonated him before the Assistant Collector (Tahsildar) on 24-7-1974 by moving an application for issue of Bhumidhari Sanad and had wrongly obtained the Sanad by applying a fraud upon the Tahsildar. The complaint was filed against Beni Prasad petitioner and several persons on the ground that they had conspired and set up an imposter for obtaining Bhumidhari Sanad. These persons had identified that imposter as Zarif before the Assistant Collector. The learned Magistrate held enquiry Under Section 202 Cr. P. C, and summoned the petitioner and the other accused persons Under Sections 120-B, 193 and 205 I. P. C, An ...
Tag this Judgment!Gulab Chitra Mandir, Mahoba Vs. Municipal Board, Mahoba and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-23-1977
Reported in: (1977)6CTR(All)170
R. M. Sahai, J. - This Writ Petition is directed against the Notification dated 18th January 1975 imposing Cinema tax and notices dated 14th February 1975 and 31st March 1975 issued by the Municipal Board, Mahoba, district Hamirpur in pursuance of the aforesaid Notification.2. Counsel for the petitioner has urged that the imposition of tax is bad as no sanction was obtained by the prescribed authority as contemplated under S. 133(I) of the U.P. Municipalities Act. This point was not taken specifically in the Writ Petition except for a vague allegation that the procedure prescribed in Ss. 131 to 135 of the Act was not followed. Counsel for the respondent however produced before us the record of the Municipal Board Hamirpur and after going through the same we are satisfied that there is no substance in the argument advanced on behalf of the petitioner. It is true that respondent has not been able to produce any specific letter received from the Prescribed Authority according its sanction...
Tag this Judgment!Maqsood Mohammad Vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-22-1977
Reported in: [1978]41STC324(All)
D.M. Chandrashekhar, J.1. In these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the assessment orders levying sales tax on their sales of kala namak.2. Section 4 of the U. P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter called the Act), has exempted from sales tax certain goods. One of them is salt. In Commissioner, Sales Tax, U.P. v. Balwant Singh Jag Roshan Lal [1970] 26 S.T.C. 129, a Division Bench of this Court held that 'black salt' is included in the word 'salt' occurring in Section 4(l)(a) of the Act and hence is exempt from U.P. sales tax. The above decision was rendered on 18th February, 1970. On 1st December, 1973, the Government of Uttar Pradesh issued a notification in exercise of its powers under Sub-section (2) of Section 3-A of the Act providing that the turnover in respect of the goods set out in the schedule thereto shall be liable to tax at all points of sale at the rate specified against each in column III of that schedule. The releva...
Tag this Judgment!Kanpur Salt Refinery Vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-22-1977
Reported in: [1978]41STC329(All)
R.M. Sahai, J.1. This writ petition is directed against a notice dated 25th September, 1976, directing the petitioner to deposit tax on kala namak for the first quarter of 1976-77. He was further intimated that in case he failed to deposit the tax, proceeding shall be taken against him and the quarterly return shall be rejected.2. In Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 760 of 1975, Maqsood Mohammad v. State of U.P. and Anr. [1978] 41 S.T.C. 324, we have held that kala namak is not liable to tax under Notification No. ST-II-6628/X-1012-72 dated 1st December, 1973.3. The petitioner may appear before the Sales Tax Officer who has to decide the matter in accordance with the law declared in the abovenoted decision. With these observations, we dismiss this petition and vacate the interim order dated 28th September, 1976....
Tag this Judgment!Kedar Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-22-1977
Reported in: 1977CriLJ1230
ORDERJ.M.L. Sinha, J.1. This is an application for bail Under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. Sri Virendra Saran, who has argued this bail application, has not said anything touching the merits of the case in order to canvass for bail. His argument was that the detention of the applicant has all along been unlawful and consequently, the applicant should be released on bail. In order to appreciate the contention raised by Sri Virendra Saran, it will be necessary to mention a few dates.3. The applicant surrendered himself in the court of the Munsif Magistrate, Budaun on 10th of January, 1976. The Magistrate took him into custody and sent him to jail. On 24th of January, 1976, the investigating officer applied for, and was granted, fourteen days remand. On 6-2-1976 the investigating officer obtained a further remand of fourteen days. A charge-sheet was submitted on 20th of February, 1976, and on 7th of April, 1976, the applicant was committed to the Court of Session. Some...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Maqsood Mohammad Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-22-1977
Reported in: (1977)6CTR(All)124
Chandrashekhar, J. - In these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner have prayed for quashing the assessment orders levying sales tax on their sales of Kala Namak.2. S. 4 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, (hereinafter called the Act) has exempted from sales tax certain goods. One of them is salt. In Commissioner, Sales Tax U.P. vs. Balwant Singh Jag Roshan Lal a Division Bench of this Court held that black salt, is included in the word salt occurring in S. 4(1)(a) of the Act and hence is exempt from U.P. sales tax. the above decision was rendered on 18-2-1970. On 1-12-1973, the Government of Uttar Pradesh issued a notification in exercise of its powers under sub-section (2) of S. 3-A of the Act providing that the turnover in respect of the goods set out in the Schedule thereto shall be liable to tax at all points of sales at the rate specified against each in Column III of that Schedule. The relevant portions of serial no. 22 of that schedule read :'22 species, ...
Tag this Judgment!Kanpur Salt Refinery Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-22-1977
Reported in: (1978)7CTR(All)0020A
R. M. Sahai, J. - This writ petition is directed against a notice dated 25th September 1976 directing the Petitioner to deposit tax on Kala Namak for the first quarter of 1976-77. He was further intimated that in case he failed to deposit the tax proceeding shall be taken against him and the quarterly return shall be rejected.2. In Maqsood Mohammad vs. State of U.P. and Another we have held that Kala Namak is not liable to tax under Notification No. ST-II-6628/- X-1012-72 dated 1-12-1973.3. The petitioner may appear before the Sales Tax Officer who has to decide the matter in accordance with the law declared in the above noted decision. With these observations we dismiss this petition and vacate the interim order dated 28th September 1976....
Tag this Judgment!Jan Daood and Co. Vs. Income-tax Officer, B-ward and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-18-1977
Reported in: (1977)6CTR(All)130; [1988]113ITR772(All)
Chandrashekhar, J. 1. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order of the Income-tax Officer, B Ward, Moradabad, refusing to continue registration of the petitioner-firm for the assessment year 1971-72, and the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax dismissing the petitioner's revision petition against the order of the Income-tax Officer.2. Certain material facts which are not in dispute may be stated at the outset. The petitioner-firm had been granted registration for the assessment year 1961-62 under Section 26A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. Thereafter, the registration of the firm was continued from year to year. For the assessment, year 1971-72, the petitioner filed its return of income on March 10, 1972. Along with the return it sent its declaration in Form No. 12 for continuation of the registration of the firm, under Sub-section (7) of Section 184 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ' the Act ...
Tag this Judgment!Jan Daood and Co Vs. Income-tax Officer, B-ward, Moradabad, and Anothe ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-18-1977
Reported in: [1978]113ITR772(All)
CHANDRASHEKHAR J. - In this petition under article 226 of the constitution, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order of the Income-tax Officer, B ward, Moradabad, refusing to continue registration of the petitioner-firm for the assessment year 1971-72, and the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax dismissing the petitions revision petition again the order of the Income-tax Officer.Certain material facts which are not in dispute may be stated at the outset. The petitioner-firm had been granted registration for the assessment year 1961-62 under section 26A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. Thereafter, the registration of the firm was continued from year to year. For the assessment year 1971-72, the petitioner filed its return of income on March 10, 1972. Along with the return it sent its declaration in Form No. 12 for continuation of the registration of the firm, under sub-section (7) of section 184 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The incom...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »