Allahabad Court May 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.
Badri NaraIn Kashi Prasad Vs. Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-25-1978
Reported in: [1988]115ITR858(All)
Satish Chandra, C.J. 1. Doubting the correctness of the law laid down in earlier decisions of this court in Ganesh Lal's case : [1968]68ITR696(All) and in Ram Narain's case : [1972]84ITR233(All) , a Division Bench of this court has referred the following question of law to a Full Bench : 'Where a minor admitted to the benefits of a partnership, attains majority and elects to be a partner of the firm, is there a change in theconstitution of firm as contemplated by Clause (i) of the prov. to Sub-section (7) of Section 184 of the I.T. Act, 1961?' 2. Chap. XVI of the I.T. Act lays down special provisions applicable to firms. Head 'A' is entitled Assessment of firms. It consists of Section 182 (assessment of registered firms) and Section 183 (assessment of unregistered firms). Head 'B' is entitled Registration of firms. It consists of Sections 184 to 186. Under section 184(1) an application for registration is to be made if the constitution of the partnership is evidenced by an instrument a...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Modi Industries Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-25-1978
Reported in: (1978)7CTR(All)440
Satish Chandra, C.J. - These two references raising similar questions have been made by the Tribunal in cases relating to the same assessment company in respect of two different assessment years, namely, 1963-64 and 1965-66.2. In respect of the assessment year 1963-64 the following question has been referred at the instance of the Commissioner in I.T.R. No. 503 of 1974 :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in holding that the amount of Rs. 33,45,417/- on account of provisions of taxation and Rs. 11,00,844/- on account of proposed dividend was to be included in the computation of capital under the Super Profits tax Act, 1963 ?'3. In respect of the assessment year 1965-66 the following question has been referred at the instance of the assessee in I.T.R. No. 504 of 1974 :-'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal erred in law in confirming the exclusion of a sum of Rs. 8,80,675/- in the com...
Abdul Razzaq Vs. Izzat Ali
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-24-1978
Reported in: AIR1979All23
U.C. Srivastava, J.1. In the present appeal decree was prepared on 25th March, 1963 and thereafter the appeal was preferred and the said appeal was dismissed on 31st July, 1963 and the application for execution was presented on 24-4-75 i.e. 12 years after the date of preparation of the decree. As the final order was that of the appellate court which is dated 31st July, 1963, as such the limitation was to be computed from that date, as the earlier decree merged in the appellate decree. The learned counsel for the appellant contended that even if the appeal was not heard and disposed of on merit, but was dismissed summarily, the execution application was within limitation. The plea taken by the appellant is untenable. The learned counsel contended that so far as the question of merger is concerned that will not apply to each and every decree, at least not in the present case. It was further contended that he relied on Article 182 and not 136 and there is some difference between the two A...
Nand Kishore and ors. Vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-24-1978
Reported in: AIR1979All83
M.N. Shukla, J. 1. These two connected Writ Petitions arise out of the order of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, U, P. Lucknow dated 14th Sept. 1973.2. The material facts of the case are that applications for grant of permits were invited for three vacancies in the route known as Bulandshahr-Bhon-Bahadurnagar route. The Regional Transport Authority in its meeting held on 12-3-1962 granted one permit to the petitioner viz. Messrs Modern Transport Co-operative Society Ltd. Bulandshahr (hereinafter referred to as the society) and two to others. The applications of respondents Nos. 3 and 4, namely, Nand Kishore and Munshi Lal Sharma respectively, who hadmade a joint application, was however, rejected. Against the grant of permit to the petitioner and to others (with whom we are not concerned in this case) respondents 3 and 4 filed an appeal, which came up for hearing on 22-8-1964 before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, which cancelled the permit of the petitioner and granted ...
Satya NaraIn Singh and ors. Vs. Laudhar and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-24-1978
Reported in: AIR1978All399
Deoki Nandan, J.1. This is a plaintiff's second appeal in a suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from making any constructions on a portion marked Ka, Kha, Ga and Gha in the plaint map of the land described as 'Talab' No. 676. situate in village Kalaka-pura. The trial Court dismissed the suit and the appellate court has on appeal confirmed the same.2. The trial court framed seven issues in the suit. On the first issue which was to the effect whether Hari Lal Singh was the owner of the tank in suit, if so did he mortgage the tank in favour of Sheo Baran Singh, if so when; the trial court found that Hari Lal Singh was the owner of the tank in suit and that he mortgaged it in favour of Sheo Baran Singh before the year 1319 Fasli. On issue No. 2, it was found that the plaintiffs were not owners of the tank in suit. Issue No. 3 was answered by the trial court by saying that the defendants had failed to prove that their 'Dalan' existed at the site of the disputed construc...
Hafizur Rehman and ors. Vs. Mohammad Askari and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-24-1978
Reported in: AIR1978All428
ORDERK.N. Goyal, J.1. In this revision preferred by the judgment debtors the only question pressed before me is that the ejectment decree passed by the Small Cause Court could not be transferred by it for execution to the Munsif's Court and that the latter had no jurisdiction to execute the decree. The decree holder opposite party No. 1 was the landlord of the suit property while the judgment debtors applicants were tenants. In view of certain Uttar Pradesh amendments suits by landlords for ejectment are now cognizable by Small Cause Courts. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that as the suit itself is cognizable by Small Cause Court, therefore, the decree can also be executed by that court alone and not by Munsif's court.2. Relevant portion of Section 7 C. P. C. reads as under:'The following provisions shall not extend to courts constituted under the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887, or under the Berar Small Cause Courts Law, 1905, or to courts exercising th...
Smt. Ram Kali Vs. Sia Ram and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-24-1978
Reported in: AIR1978All546
D.N. Jha, J.1. Srimati Ram Kali has filed this review application and has also preferred an application for setting aside the ex parte order passed by a learned single Judge of this Court dated 13-4-1976.2. We have gone through the order passed by the learned single Judge in Second Appeal No. 355 of 1972. The appeal was allowed and the judgment and decree of the Civil Judge, Kheri, dated 20-7-1972 and the decree dated 31-8-1971 were set aside. Since the learned Judge has retired the matter has come up before this Bench.3. The sole question considered by the learned Judge while disposing of the second appeal was that the notice served under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act was bad as it did not give one month's notice and, therefore, the orders passed by the subordinate courts were not correct. We have gone through the application for setting aside of the ex parte decree and we are constrained to observe that no sufficient cause has been shown in the said application supporte...
Commissioner, Sales Tax Vs. Manohar Glass Works
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-24-1978
Reported in: 1978(2)ELT700(All)
Satish Chandra, C.J.1. The petitioner is a registered dealer. He submitted his return of turnover. That was rejected and the turnover was enhanced by the Sales Tax Officer He, thereupon filed stay application before the Additional Revising Authority for stay of the disputed tax and also made an application for waiver of one-third of the disputed tax. This application was made under Section 10(4) of the Act. The Additional Revising Authority rejected the application for waiver vide order which is in the following terms:-'Heard the parties and gone through the papers. In my opinion, no special and adequate reasons are made out. Waiver is rejected.'2. The petitioner has challenged this order on the ground that no reasons are given by the Revising Authority for passing the impugned order. * * * *5. Coming now to the merits of the controversy viz. as to whether it was incumbent on the Revising Authority to give reasons for rejecting the applications.6. The Revising Authority discharges judi...
Modern TIn Printers and Fabricators Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-24-1978
Reported in: [1979]43STC257(All)
Satish Chandra, C.J.1. The question of law referred for our opinion is whether tin trays and tin calendars manufactured by the assessee fall within the entry 'wares' as used in Notification No. ST-2104/X-902(16)-52 dated 21st May, 1963. In some of the cases, the question is whether the signboards are also covered by the term 'wares' within the meaning of the aforesaid notification. S-43-332. The assessee, inter alia, manufactures tin trays, tin calendars and tin signboards, etc. The entry 'wares' occurring in the aforesaid notification has been used in the sense of barton because that is the word used in the Hindi translation of the aforesaid notification. The question is whether the articles manufactured by the assessee answer the description of barton as known in the trade and in common parlance.3. The assessee manufactures tin trays from tin sheets which are coated with aluminium paint and by lithographic process prints thereon beautiful colours and designs, sceneries and pictures. ...
Maganlal Devji Mewawala and ors. Vs. Satya NaraIn and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-23-1978
Reported in: AIR1978All455
R.B. Misra, J. 1. The present appeal is directed against the order of the Additional District Judge, Gyanpur, district Varanasi, dated 10thApril, 1978, disposing of the preliminary issue that the court at Gyanpur had no territorial jurisdiction to try the suit.2. The facts leading to this appeal are as follows:3. Plaintiff-appellants Nos. 1 and 2 carried on business in partnership in the name as 'Rekha Warenhandels G. m. b. H & Co., K. G 2, Hamburg. West Germany.' Defendant respondent No. 1 carried on business of manufacturing Indian hand-knitted woollen carpets and rugs in the name and style of M/s. Satya Narain Lal & Sons, Bhadohi, district Varanasi. The plaintiffs entered into a contract through one Sri M. P. Ramchandran on 9th of Jan. 1973 with the defendants for the purchase of Indian hand-knitted woollen carpets and rugs. The details and particulars of the contract are given in para 3 of the plaint. The terms of the contract were incorporated in a letter-pad at the foot of which ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »