Allahabad Court January 1978 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.
Bhawani Prasad Girdhar Lal and Co. Vs. Income Tax Officer.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-27-1978
Reported in: (1978)7CTR(All)249
ORDERSatish Chandra, J. - The petitioner challenges the orders cancelling registration for the assessment years 1966-67 and 1967-68. On our pointing it out the learned counsel for the petitioner has to admit that the impugned order is appealable Under the Income Tax Act. In view of S. 58 of the 42nd Amendment Act the writ petition is liable to abate because of the existence of an alternative remedy.2. Mr. Gulati, counsel for the petitioner, urged that the petitioner came to this Court after the expiry of thirty days, which is the prescribed period for limitation of an appeal. The petitioner will then have to apply for condonation of delay. In law this cannot prevent the abatement of the petition, but, of course when an appeal is filed alongwith an application for condonation of delay, we presume that the appellate authority will consider it sympathetically.3. The petition is according declared to have abated....
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Mahatab Chand
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-25-1978
Reported in: [1979]117ITR32(All)
Satish Chandra, J.1. For the five assessment years 1965-66 to 1969-70, the assessee filed his return under the W.T. Act on 28th February, 1970. The same day the WTO passed an assessment order accepting the wealth returned for each of the five years. Subsequently, he issued a notice proposing to impose penalty on the assessee. In response, the assessee appeared and made several submissions as to why the returns were filed with delay. The various submissions were repelled, and varying amounts of penalty were imposed by an order dated January 2, 1971. The assessee went up in appeal, but failed. He then went up to the Tribunal. The Tribunal, relying on the decision of the Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT v. Vegetable Products Lid. : [1971]80ITR14(Cal) and also of the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Hindustan Industrial Corporation : [1972]86ITR657(Delhi) held that the phrase 'tax, if any, payable by him' occurring in Section 18(2)(i) of the W.T. Act means the tax outstanding o...
J.K. Synthetics Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-25-1978
Reported in: [1979]118ITR629(All)
Satish Chandra, J.1. The Tribunal has referred the following questions of law for our opinion :'1. Whether, the Appellate Tribunal was right in its finding that the normal allowance referred to in Explanation 1 under Machinery and Plant in Appendix I-5(1) relating to Rule 5 of the I.T. Rules, 1962, refer to the normal depreciation actually allowed and not to the hypothetical figure of normal depreciation had the machinery and plant worked for a period of 180 days or more and accordingly the plant and laboratory equipments are entitled to only a proportion of the actual allowance ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was legally justified in holding that the sum of Rs. 2,85,733 formed part of the actual cost of the assets of the assessee and accordingly entitled to depreciation and development rebate on such actual cost?' 2. The second question, learned counsel for both the parties are agreed, is covered by the decision of the Supreme Co...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Upper Doab Sugar Mills
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-25-1978
Reported in: [1979]116ITR240(All)
Satish Chandra, J.1. The Upper Doab Sugar Mills Ltd., the assessee, is a public limited company. It does the business of manufacture and sale of sugar. The question referred to us relates to the assessment year 1964-65.2. During the accounting period relevant to this assessment year, which ended on 30th September, 1963, the assessee sold machinery worth Rs. 1,21,000. It also received Rs. 1,17,192 in settlement of insurance claim in respect of certain other machinery lost by fire. The ITO held that these receipts resulted in profit under Section 41(2) amounting to Rs. 1,10,302 and in capital gains amounting to Rs. 1,23,523, as against the assessee's computation of the capital gains at a little over Rs. 20,000. The case fell within the purview of Section 50(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, and Section 50(2) thereof was not attracted. The claim of the assessee that it was entitled to exercise the option of treating the fair market value as cost of acquisition was rejected.3. The assessee went up...
Janki Pd. Laxmi NaraIn Vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-25-1978
Reported in: (1978)7CTR(All)124
Satish Chandra, J. - The Tribunal has solicited our opinion on the following question of law :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case on Sri Chandra Prakash attaining majority on 20-7-1967 in the accounting year relevant to the assessment year 1968-69 there took place a change in the constitution of the firm and, as no fresh partnership deed was executed within this accounting year, the firm could not have been granted continued benefit under S. 184(7) of the Act ?'2. In C.I.T. vs. National Medical Stores a Bench of this Court held that if the minor attains majority before the expiry of six months from the end of the accounting period, no change occurs in the constitution of the firm. This decision was followed in C.I.T. v. Mathura Prasad Annual. On facts there is no doubt that the minor attained majority on the 20th July, 1967 while the accounting period ended on 2nd November, 1967. In other words, the period of six months had not expired from the date of his attain...
Prakash Chand Vs. Sales Tax Officer and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-25-1978
Reported in: (1978)7CTR(All)226
ORDERC. S. P. Singh, J. - The petitioner has challenged proceedings for recovery of sales tax against him on the ground that the dues relate to the firm Messrs. Sheetal Prasad Bir Sen, and as he has no concern with that firm, the amounts could not be recovered from him. From the Counter Affidavit filed, it appears that the dues relate to the year 1972-73 and relate to the firm Messrs Sheetal Prasad Birsen. In that year, the firm obtained registration and in Form No. 14 that was filed for the purposes of registration, Birsen was shown as the sole proprietor. It does not appear that the registration was even cancelled by the Sales Tax Officer on the ground that the firm was not a genuine firm. It is also clear that the assessment order was made against this registered firm and there is nothing on the record to indicate at present that in the assessment proceedings, it was found that the petitioner was a partner of the firm. The demand notice also does not appear to have been served upon ...
Bhikari Lal Ram Kumar Sarraf Vs. Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-25-1978
Reported in: (1978)7CTR(All)115
Satish Chandra, J. - Messrs. Bhikharilal Ram Kumar was a partnership firm constituted under a deed dated October 6, 1957. It consisted of three partners. Two minor sons of one of the partners were also admitted to the benefits of this partnership. One of the minors attained majority on June 14, 1966. No new partnership deed was drawn up. The Assessee sought the benefit of continuance of registration by applying in Form No. 12 on August 12, 1967 for the Assessment year 1967-68. The relevant previous year for this assessment year ended on October 22, 1966. It is thus evident that the minor attained majority before the expiry of six months from the end of the previous year.2. The Income Tax Officer refused to renew the registration on the ground that with the attainment of majority by the minor, a change in the constitution of the firm had taken place and the firm should have applied for a fresh registration, which had not been done. He also found that the firm had not executed a fresh pa...
Sri Ram Narayan Jaiswal Vs. Smt. Rajeshwari Devi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-24-1978
Reported in: AIR1978All214
ORDERDeoki Nandan, J. 1. This revision is directed against the order of the court of the District Judge, Ghazipur dated 7th Sept., 1977 rejecting a revision under Section 115 of the Civil P. C. which had been filed in that court on 31st May, 1977 from an order of the Court of the IIIrd Additional Munsif, Ghazipur dated 26th May, 1977 in Suit No. 203 of 1973 dismissing the defendant's application for amendment of written statement. The learned counsel for the defendant applicant was unable to point out any error in the order of the learned District Judge except for saying that the learned District Judge ought not to have rejected the revision but should have ordered it to be returned for presentation to this Court. Even if the order of the learned District Judge is treated to be an order returning the revision for presentation to this court, the revision from the order of the Munsif would be highly belated as the revision in this Court was filed on 21st Dec., 1977 that is, more than thr...
Vijaypat Singhania Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-24-1978
Reported in: [1988]113ITR165(All)
Satish Chandra, J. 1. Vijaypat Singhania, the assessee, was, in the year 1944-45, a minor. He had been admitted to the benefits of a partnershipfirm, Messrs. Juggilal Kamlapat. This firm acted as managing agents of Messrs. J.K. Cotton . The company prematurely terminated the managing agency of the firm and paid Rs. 2,50,000 as compensation to the firm. The firm claimed this amount as a capital receipt for the loss of its income earning apparatus. This claim was negatived. It was held that the termination of the managing agency was a collusive affair based on extra-commercial reasons. The receipt of Rs. 2,50,000 was not capital in nature but revenue in its true nature and character. The case that it was compensation for the loss of managing agency was disbelieved.2. In that assessment year, the firm Messrs. Juggilal Kamlapat, being registered, was not liable to tax. Hence, the amount of Rs. 2,50,000 was apportioned to its partners. The assessee's share came to Rs. 66,406.3. The assessee...
Chandra Shekhar Shastri Vs. State and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-24-1978
Reported in: 1978CriLJ540
ORDERV.K. Varma, J.1. This revision is directed against an order dated 20-9-1975 setting aside the order dated 22(27?)-7-75 passed by the learned Magistrate rejecting the application of O.P. No. 2 for release of the properties which had been attached in pursuance of the processes issued against the applicant Under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.PC2. At the relevant time the applicant (Chandra Shekhar Shastri) was the Registrai of Rishikul Brahmacharya Ashram Hardwar, district Saharanpur, He was wanted in a case Under Section 307, IPC from P. S. Hard-war- It is said that he evaded his arrest by the police whereupon the Court issued processes against him under Ss, 82 and 83, Cr, P. C- Several items of property belonging to him were attached. Subsequently, he appeared in Court and was released on bail. He then made a prayer for release of his properties. The Court allowed his prayer and passed an order releasing all his properties. After a few days O.P. No. 2 calling himself as Officiating General...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »