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.
Vijaypat Singhania Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-24-1978
Reported in: [1978]113ITR165(All)
SATISH CHANDRA J. - Vijaypat Singhania, the assessee, was, in the year 1944-45, a minor. He had been admitted to the benefits of a partnership firm, 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.In that assessment year, the firm Messrs. Juggilal Kamlapat, being registered, was not liable to tax. Hence, the amount if Rs. 2,50,000 was apportioned to its partners. The assessees share came to Rs. 66,406.The assessee claimed...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Mango Mal Nanak Ram.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-23-1978
Reported in: (1978)7CTR(All)225
R. R. Rastogi, J. - The question referred is directly covered by a decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax U.P. vs. M/s. Mango Mal Nanak Ram, Rawatpara.2. We accordingly answer the question, by saying that white cement is included in the term 'Cement' as used in the Notification No. ST-6438/X - 10-12-1962 dated 1-12-1962 and is taxable at the rate of 7%. In the circumstances, parties shall bear their own costs. Counsels fee is assessed at Rs. 100/-....
Sukhvansh NaraIn Singh and ors. Vs. Collector and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-20-1978
Reported in: [1980]126ITR113(All)
Satish Chandra, J.1. By an order dated April 5, 1975, the respondents attached certain agricultural properties of the petitioner for recovering dues under the Agricultural Income-tax Act. The petitioner challenges this order on the ground that no such dues were payable by the petitioner and that no notice of demand was issued to him. From the counter-affidavit, it is apparent that the agricultural income-tax dues were payable by the father of the petitioner who was dead. Under section 19 of the U.P. Agricultural Income-tax Act, the legal representatives of an assessee are liable to pay the dues in so far as they are in receipt of the assets or properties of the deceased. The attached property originally did belong to the deceased. It is evident that the petitioners are liable to pay the demand. The notice of demand was duly served on the erstwhile asses-see. It is hence not necessary that the legal representatives must also be served with the notice of demand.2. The writ petition has n...
Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Abdul Razak Sher Mohammad.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-20-1978
Reported in: (1978)7CTR(All)78
Satish Chandra, J. - The Tribunal has found that in the course of the assessees normal business of taking forest contracts, the Assessee could not, owing to reasons beyond his control, work two lots for which he had deposited Rs. 8,200/- by way of security. The security was forfeited. Relying on the decision of the Bombay High Court in Narandas Mathurdas and Co. vs. C.I.T., Bombay South and Central, Bombay, the Tribunal held that the forfeiture represented trading loss of the Assessee.2. At the instance of the Department, the Tribunal has referred, for our opinion, the question of law whether the sum of Rs. 8,200/- was allowable as a trading loss. In C.I.T. Kanpur vs. Sugar Mills, similar point came up for consideration before a Bench of this Court. The Bench approved the decision of the Bombay High Court and held that such circumstances the forfeited deposit was a business loss.3. We, therefore, answer the question referred to us by holding that the sum of Rs. 8,200/- was a trading lo...
Mahesh Chandra Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-20-1978
Reported in: (1978)7CTR(All)224
ORDERSatish Chandra, J. - The petitioner wanted that the proclamation for the auction sale of the properties of Messrs. Shankar Flour, Rice & Oil Mills, Bareilly should state that the petitioner had an encumbrance of Rs. 1,79,500/- against the Shanker Flour, Mills, Bareilly, Since the proclamation of sale actually drawn up did not mention this encumbrance the petitioner came to this Court. In the counter affidavit it has virtually been admitted that in view of sub-clause (c) of clause (2) of Order XXI, Rule 66 of the Code of Civil Procedure, it was incumbent upon the officer drawing up the proclamation of sale to specify any encumbrance to which the property was liable. There was no dispute that the petitioner did hold an encumbrance as mentioned above. Consequently it was incumbent upon the respondents to specify this encumbrance in the proclamation of sale.2. The proclamation of sale was issued fixing the date of sale as January 20, 1975. That date has already passed. No auction had ...
Govnd Sugar Mills Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-19-1978
Reported in: 1978(2)ELT151(All)
Satish Chandra, J.1. The petitioner is a company which manufactures and sells sugar. In respect of its production of sugar in the season 1970-71, the Government of India on March 26, 1971, issued an order under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, directing the petitioner company to sell 6,340 quintals of sugar to the Government of Uttar Pradesh or their nominees at the levy price fixed by the Uttar Pradesh allotted portions of this quota of sugar to the District Magistrates of Kanpur and Lucknow. These District Magistrates lifted only 5,044 quintals of levy sugar. The balance 1,296 quintals were left with the petitioner company. On May 7, 1971, the Government of Uttar Pradesh passed an order directing the petitioner to sell the unltifted quantity of levy sugar to nominees of his own choice but at a price not exceeding the price of levy sugar. The order went on to state the excise duty at the rate of 37i% would be leviable on this, 1,296 quintals of levy sugar. The petitioner company i...
Satya NaraIn Agarwal and anr. Vs. the Government of India and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-18-1978
Reported in: 1978(2)ELT476(All)
Satish Chandra, J. 1. Petitioner No. 1, the sole proprietor of the firm M/s T.M. Industries Varanasi, manufactures aluminium conductors and cables The firm was registered under the Small Scale Industries Scheme, because its initial investment was below Rs. 7,50,000/- On 1st June, 1970, the Central Government issued a notification under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, laying down 4% ad valorem excise duty on winding wires made of aluminium and 12% on all electric wires and cables, in cases where 'an officer. not below the rank of Assistant Collector of Central Exciseis satisfied that the capital investment on plant and machinery duly installed therein, as or the date of the initial installation, is not more than Rs. 7,50.000/- On 2.08.1970, the petitioner addressed a letter to the Assistant Collector, Varanasi, that petitioner's initial investment being much below Rs. 7,50,000/, he was liable to pay duty at 4% and 12% ad velorem only under the notification dated 1.06.70. He in o...
Kishan Swarup Shukla Vs. Deputy Collector, Sales Tax-cum-recovery Offi ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-18-1978
Reported in: [1978]42STC453(All)
Satish Chandra, J.1. The petitioner wants that recovery proceedings for realising arrears of sales tax dues from the petitioner be quashed till proper demand and citation is made. This relief proceeds on the ground that though the petitioner was in arrears of sales tax dues for the years prior to 1973-74, yet no demand or citation was made by the authorities in respect of interest due on those arrears and so interest could not be recovered validly. In Haji Lal Mohammad Bin Works, Allahabad v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. 1973 U.P.T.C. 690, the Supreme Court has ruled that there is no provision in the Act which makes it obligatory on the part of the Sales Tax Officer to make an assessment in respect of the interest which the amount of sales tax would carry under Section 8(1-A) of the Act. There is also no provision in the Act which requires the issue of a notice of demand in respect of the interest. This point, therefore, fails.2. In the second place, it has been averred that the pet...
S.P. Agarwal Vs. R.R. Upadhya and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-18-1978
Reported in: 1978CriLJ789
K.N. Singh, J.1. These are two contempt applications, one filed Under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. and the other filed under Article 215 of the Constitution for taking action against R R. Upadhya and S. N. Tewari, respondent, for wilful disobdience of the orders of this Court.2. S. P. Agarwal, the applicant, was in the service of the District Co-operative Bank; Bijmor, as its Secretary. Certain charges were framed against him and he was placed under suspension on 6-2-1976. After enquiry he was removed from service on 11-6-1976. The Committee of Management of the Bank had been superseded and R. R. Upadhya, Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, was appointed Administrator Under Section 35 of the U. P. Co-operative Societies Act. 1965, to manage the affairs of the Bank, S. P. Agarwal challenged the validity of the order of his dismissal before this Court by means of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The writ petition (No. 1379 of 1976) was admit...
Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Smt. Mahinderpal Bhasin
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-17-1978
Reported in: [1979]117ITR26(All)
Satish Chandra, J.1. Messrs. Gulab Singh Anand & Sons was a partnership firm constituted under a deed dated October 1, 1.962. It consisted of three partners, one of whom was Smt. Mahinderpal Bhasin, the assessee, in the present case. The firm carried on business of supplying various commodities to the Defence Services. The accounting period of the firm ended on September 30 each year, Smt. Mahinderpal Bhasin, one of the partners, retired from the firm with effect from October 1, 1967. The remaining two partners continued the business. A deed of retirement was executed on October 1, 1967, under which the assessee was paid her share of the capital and her share of profits up to the date of retirement and also a sum of Rs. 20,000 as consideration, for relinquishment of her interest in the partnership firm.2. On October 3, 1968, Smt. Mahinderpal Bhasin filed a return for the assessment year 1968-69. In it she showed receipt of Rs. 20,000 as capital gains. The ITO held that the sum of Rs. 2...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »