Allahabad Court April 1977 Judgments
Udai Bir Singh Vs. the District Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Soci ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-29-1977
Reported in: AIR1977All395
C.S.P. Singh, J. 1. These petitions,raise a common question of law as to whether the administrative directions issued by the U. P. Co-operative Institutional Service Board have binding efficacy before Regulations regarding recruitment, emoluments, terms and conditions of service, disciplinary control etc. of. servants of Co-operative Societies are framed. 2. The circumstances in which the present dispute arises may be shortly stated. In Writ Petition No. 235 of 1977, the petitioner was appointed on 9-12-1972 by the President of a Bank, which appointment was approved by the Committee of Management later on. An administrator was appointed for the Bank, who by the order dated 18-12-76 terminated services of the petitioner on the ground that the U. P. Government had constituted the U. P. Co-operative Institutional Board by Notification No. 366/C/12 P-3-36-71 dated 4-3-1972 which alone had been empowered to select suitable candidates for appointment by the committee of management, and as th...
Tag this Judgment!Seth Banarsi Das Gupta Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-29-1977
Reported in: [1977]108ITR377(All)
R.M. Sahai, J. 1. In this reference the following two questions of law have been referred for the opinion of this court: '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, depreciation is allowable on the 1/6th share in S. B. Sugar Mills, Bijnor, which the assessee had acquired from Seth Shiv Prasad 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the loss of Rs. 3,90,750 arising on sales of shares of M/s. Jaswant Sugar Mills Ltd. was loss of capital nature ?' 2. So far as question No. 1 is concerned, it is concluded by the decision of this court in Seth Banarsi Das Gupta v. Commissioner of Income-tax : [1971]81ITR170(All) , a case of this very assessee, but for a different assessment year. Counsel for the assessee has not been able to persuade us that the aforesaid decision needs reconsideration or that the principle laid down in this decision is not applicable to the present case. 3. Regarding question No. 2, the ...
Tag this Judgment!Katra Education Society Vs. Income-tax Officer, a Ward
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-28-1977
Reported in: [1978]111ITR420(All)
Chandrashekhar, J. 1. After hearing the learned counsel we have allowed the amendment application filed by the petitioner and have permitted it to ask for an additional relief of quashing the assessmentorder dated March 28, 1977 (Produced as annexure I to Civil Misc. Application No. 3486 of 1977). 2. The petitioner is Katra Education Society. According to its averments, it is running an Intermediate College which is recognised under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act. The petitioner claimed exemption from income-tax under Sub-section (22) of Section 10 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), and also claimed refund 'of an amount of Rs. 325 alleged to have been deducted at source by a company while distributing dividends. 3. The Income-tax Officer, by his order dated October 16, 1976, rejected the petitioner's claim for refund of income-tax on the ground that it (the petitioner) did not come within the ambit of Section 10(22) of the Act. 4. Sub-section (22) ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Shyam Kumari and ors. Vs. Ejaz Ahmad Ansari
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-27-1977
Reported in: AIR1977All376
Yashoda Nandan, J.1. When this second appeal came up for hearing before a learned single Judge, he felt disinclined to agree with the views of this Court expressed in Dr. Kundan Lal v. Shamshad Ahmad : AIR1966All225 and Rahim Bux v. Mohammad Shafi : AIR1971All16 and consequently referred the following two questions for consideration by a large Bench:'1. Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case doctrine of frustration as contained in Section 56 of the Contract Act will apply and whether the tenancy was automatically terminated after the building had fallen down?2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case relationship of landlord and tenant subsists even with regard to newly constructed shops and the plaintiffs can claim possession of the same?'That is how this appeal which should have been decided by a learned single Judge happens to be before this Bench.2. The material facts giving rise to this appeal are that admittedly Radhey Kishun alias Chillar, the predeces...
Tag this Judgment!Baldeo Sahai Ishwar Chand Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-1977
Reported in: [1977]40STC448(All)
R.M. Sahai, J.1. The following question has been referred for the opinion of this court:Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee could be said to be a dealer liable to tax in respect of the transaction in dispute ?2. It is not necessary to give the facts in detail as admittedly the assessee carried on business both on his own account as well as for commission. The account books were accepted. The assessee claimed to have acted merely as a broker regarding commission sales.3. On remand, one of the partners was examined by the assessing authority. After considering his statement all the three authorities have held that the assessee was a dealer.4. It has been urged by the counsel for the assessee that the authorities below have not appreciated the evidence of Shri Chetan Lal properly. He further contended that in any case from the facts found, the assessee could not be considered to be a dealer. Reliance was placed on Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Vijay Kum...
Tag this Judgment!Baldeo Sahai Ishwar Chand Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-1977
Reported in: (1977)6CTR(All)211
R. M. Sahai, J. - The following question has been referred for the opinion of this court;'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the assessee could be said to be dealer liable to tax in respect of the transaction in dispute ?'2. In is not necessary to give the facts in detail as admittedly the assessee carried on business both on his own account as well as for commission. The Account Books were accepted. The assessee claimed to have acted merely as a broker regarding commission sales.3. On remand, one of the partners was examined by the assessing authority. After considering his statement all the three authorities have held that the assessee was a dealer.4. It has been urged by the counsel for the assessee that the authorities below have not appreciated the evidence of Sri Chetan Lal properly. He further contended that in any case from the facts found the assessee could not be considered to be a dealer. Reliance was placed on Commissioner of Sales tax vs. Vijaya Kuma...
Tag this Judgment!Beni Madho Mishra Vs. Budha Dev Bazaz and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-22-1977
Reported in: AIR1977All384
ORDER1. Aggrieved against the order rejecting an application under Section 7-C of the U. P. Act No. 3 of 1947, the applicant filed a revision. The same was dismissed on the ground that it was not maintainable. The learned District Judge relied on the decision in Har Prasad Singh v. Ram Swamp (AIR 1973 All 390) (FB). The Full Bench construed Section 115 of the Code of Civil procedure as amended by Section 6 of U. P. Act No. 37 of 1972 which provided:'The High Court in cases arising out of original suits of the value of twenty thousand rupees and above, and the District Court in any other case may call for the record of any case which has been decided by any court subordinate to such High Court or District Court, as the case may he and if such subordinate court appears- (a) to have exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law, or (b) to have failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested, or (c) to have acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity ...
Tag this Judgment!Brijendra Bahadur Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-22-1977
Reported in: [1988]113ITR848(All)
Chandrashekhar, J. 1. At the instance of the assessec, the Income-tax Appellate' Tribunal, Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as ' the Tribunal '), has referred to this court two questions of law. 2. The facts of the case have been set out in the order of reference and it is unnecessary to repeat them. 3. It is convenient to take up first, the question No. 2 referred by theTribunal. That question reads : ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there was any material before the Tribunal to conclude that the payment to theminor is not diversion of income but application of income in view of the charge and liability created by the agreement dated 24th August, 1963?' 4. In the course of its order the Tribunal has observed : ' So far as the story, that the minor is a very lucky person and in case some of his money was invested in business, that business would prosper is concerned, there is no tangible evidence on record. We have already stated above that the amounts ha...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Ashok Stores Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-22-1977
Reported in: (1977)6CTR(All)172
R. M. Sahai, J. :- The question referred for the opinion of this Court is :Whether there is any material for rejecting the account books of the assessee and making the estimate of net turnover as adopted by the Additional Judge (Revisions) and the break up thereof ?2. The assessee, M/s. Ashok Stores, carried on business in hosiery and ready made garments. Its account books for the assessment years 1964-65, 1965-67 and 1966-67 were rejected by the assessing authority. The only evidence which formed the basis for such rejection consisted of four surveys held on 30-8-1963, 15-2-1965, 30-6-1965 and 7-8-1967. The Additional Judge (Revisions) himself held that the first and the last survey were not strictly relevant for these three assessment years. He took the view that 'they however indicated that the assessees conduct was not bona fide in recording its transaction.'3. In the survey dated 30-8-1963 the surveying officer had reported that the assessee dealt in umbrellas also. In the grounds...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Ganga Prasad and ors. Vs. Municipal Board and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-21-1977
Reported in: (1977)6CTR(All)157
K. N. Singh, J. - This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the validity of toll tax imposed by the Farrukhabad-cum-Fatehgarh Municipal Board.2. Farrukhabad-cum-Fatehgarh Municipal Board is a municipality constituted under the U.P. Municipalities Act, 1916 (hereinafter referred to as the Board). The Board took decision to impose toll-tax on vehicles took decision to impose toll-tax on vehicles and other conveyances, animals and laden coolies entering the limits of the municipality as contemplated by S. 128(1) (vii) of the Act. The Board adopted a special resolution, prepared draft rules, invited objections, and submitted the same to the Prescribed Authority, namely, the Commissioner, Allahabad for his sanction. The Prescribed Authority sanctioned the proposals but it directed the Board to reframe rules in accordance with the model rules framed by the State Government. The Board thereupon again passed a special resolution framing proposals and draft rules and ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »