Allahabad Court April 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.
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Shiv NaraIn Karmendra Narain.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-04-1978
Reported in: (1978)7CTR(All)0309A
Satish Chandra, C.J. - The question referred to us is whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that solvent plant represented new Industrial Undertakings qualified for exemption under S. 84(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. This question has been referred in respect of the assessment years 1962-63 and 1963-64. For the assessment years 1959-60 and 1960-61 the Tribunal had referred this identical question to this Court. In Income Tax Reference No. 487 of 1973 inter partes, a Bench of this Court answered the question in the affirmative in favour of the assessee and against the Department. Since the facts are identical, following the aforesaid decisions we answer the question referred to us in the present case in the affirmative in favour of the assessee and against the department. The assessee will be entitled to costs which are assessed at Rs. 200/-....
Modi Spinning and Weaving Mills Co. and anr. Vs. Ladha Ram and Co.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-03-1978
Reported in: AIR1978All260
ORDERS.D. Agarwala, J. 1. This is a revision filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure against an order rejecting an application made by the applicant for framing additional issues in the case. The facts giving rise to the present revision are as follows :The plaintiff respondent Ladha Ram and Co. filed a suit no. 21 of 1971 in the court of the 2nd Civil Judge, Meerut for a decree for Rs. 1,30,000/- against the defendant applicants. A written statement was filed on behalf of the defendants applicants. Thereafter almost after three years of the filing of the written statement an application was made for the amendment of the written statement. The proposed amendments were for deletion of paragraphs 25 and 26 and for substitution of new paragraphs 25 and 26. The trial court rejected the application of the defendants applicants for amendment. On the ground that the defendants applicants wanted to resile from the admissions made by them earlier and that the application for amen...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ganesh Trading Co.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-03-1978
Reported in: [1979]117ITR975(All)
Satish Chandra, C.J.1. The Tribunal has referred to us two questions, one at the instance of the Commissioner, while the second question is at the instance of the assessee. The assessee, however, did not make any application under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act. It made a prayer for reference of the second question at the hearing of the application filed by the Commissioner. In our view, the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to refer a question at the instance of a party which has not applied for it. The second question, hence, is returned unanswered.2. So far as the first question is concerned it stands decided by a Bench of this court in U.P. Hardware Store v. CIT : [1976]104ITR664(All) . It was held that there was no justification for accepting the plea that the word 'expenditure' used in Section 40A(3) should be restricted to overhead expenses enumerated in Sections 30 to 43A. The word 'expenditure' was of wide import. It would cover the expenses to be taken into account while determini...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Cosmopolitan Trading Co. (No. 2)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-03-1978
Reported in: [1979]116ITR815(All)
Satish Chandra, C.J. 1. Messrs. Cosmopolitan Trading Co., the assessee, derives its income from the sale of cloth and money-lending business. On March 28, 1960, it advanced a sum of Rs. 3,00,000 to Messrs. New Bhopal Textiles Co. Ltd., carrying an interest of 7% per annum besides commission at 1/2% per mensem. It was agreed that the interest will be receivable every quarter. The assessee-company had adopted the mercantile system of accounting. Up to the assessment year 1963-64, the interest receivable by the assessee from Messrs. New Bhopal Textiles Co. Ltd., was duly shown as credited to the debtor-company's account in the assessee's books on mercantile basis.2. For the assessment year 1964-65, the assessee did not credit the debtor's account with the receipt of any interest or commission. On enquiry by the ITO, it took up the plea that since it had not actually received interest or commission even for the year 1962, it felt that its loan was in jeopardy and hence for purposes of this...
Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Govind Prasad Ramesh Chand Agarwa ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-03-1978
Reported in: (1978)7CTR(All)0304A
BY THE COURTSatish Chandra, C.J. - The question of law referred to us for our opinion in this case is whether S. 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961 applies to purchase price is respect of the goods purchased for purposes of trading or manufacturing business of the assessee. The Tribunal held that they were outside the purview of this provision. A Bench of this Court in U.P. Hardware Store vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, U.P. held that there was no justification for accepting the plea that the word expenditure used in S. 40(3) should be restricted to overhed expenses enumerated in Ss. 30 to 43A. The word expenditure was of wide import. It would also cover the expenses to be taken into account while determining the gross profit. The gross profit is determined by the difference between the opening stock and the purchases on the one hand and the closing stock and the sales on the other. The payments made for purchases would also be covered by the word expenditure and such payments could be ...
Ram Kishan Rajendra Kumar Vs. Income Tax Officer and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-03-1978
Reported in: (1978)7CTR(All)368
Satish Chandra, C.J. - These three writ petitions raise common questions. They are all directed against an order of the Income Tax Officer, Kanpur dated October 30, 1975, dismissing a revision filed by the petitioners u/s. 264 of the Income Tax Act, refusing to waive or reduce the interest imposed upon the petitioners for late filing of the return as well as u/s. 217(1) of the Act, for failure to file the requisite estimate of income.2. It appears that the petitioners premises were raided on October 18, 1973 and the books of account for the current year beginning April 1, 1973, were seized. The last date for filing of the return in the ordinary circumstances for the year 1974-75 and July 31, 1974. It appears that the petitioners applied for inspection of the account books which had been seized by the Department. This prayer was allowed. The petitioners also applied for extension of time for filing of the return which prayer was also acceded to. Ultimately, the petitioners filed a retur...
Arora Brothers Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-03-1978
Reported in: (1978)7CTR(All)366
Satish Chandra, C.J. - For the assessment year 1970-71 the Income-tax Officer first granted registration to the petitioner firm M/s. Arora Brothers. Subsequently he cancelled it. The assessee went up in appeal and succeeded. The Income-tax Officer went up to the Tribunal. The Tribunal held that the petitioner firm was, under the circumstances, not entitled to registration. It allowed the departmental appeal. Against this order of the Tribunal the petitioner has come to this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.2. At the stage of admission hearing learned counsel for the department raised a preliminary objection that the petition was not entertainable because the petitioner had an efficacious alternative remedy by way of a reference to this Court under section 226 of the Act. The Bench heard the counsel on this point and ultimately held that under the circumstances the preliminary objection was overruled. Thereafter the Bench admitted the petition.3. On merits the position is tha...
Delhi Iron Syndicate Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-01-1978
Reported in: [1979]44STC228(All)
C.S.P. Singh, J. 1. The revision is by the assessee and relates to the assessment year 1971-72. The account books of the assessee have been rejected and estimate made. The assessee has challenged both the rejection of the account books and the estimate of turnover made by the assessing authority.2. The only reason for rejection of the accounts for the year 1971-72 was that a survey was made on the premises of the firm on 7th August, 1971. At the time of the survey, kachcha rokar contained no entries except the opening balance for 6th August, 1971, and no entries were found in that book for 7th August, 1971. Apart from this, the stock register was not available on the firm's premises. Relying on these two circumstances, the account books of the assessee were rejected, although no specific defect was found in the accounts. The assessee's explanation was that as no sales had been effected on 6th August, 1971, on account of it being Rakshabandhan day, no entries were made on 6th August, 19...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›