Allahabad Court August 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 Sales Tax Vs. Punjab Gramophone House
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-08-1978
Reported in: [1979]43STC141(All)
C.S.P. Singh, J.1. The following question has been referred for opinion of this Court at the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, U. P. :Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the revising authority was justified in holding that gramophone needles are not component parts of gramophone ?2. The assessee carried on business in gramophone, its needles, radio, etc. The turnover of the assessee was estimated. The estimate included the turnover of Rs. 9,371.19 for gramophone needles. According to the assessee, this turnover was taxable at the rate of 2 per cent, gramophone needles being unclassified items, while according to the assessing authority, needles were liable to tax at the rate of 10 per cent being components of gramophone. The appeal filed by the assessee was allowed and the revision filed by the Commissioner of Sales Tax failed.3. The question posed is as to whether gramophone needles are 'component parts of the gramophone'. It has arisen in the context ...
Vishwanath Lohia Vs. the Allahabad Bank and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-04-1978
Reported in: AIR1979All12
ORDERSatish Chandra, C.J.1. To a suit the defendant filed a written statement making a counter claim therein. He made an application for permission to sue for counter claim in forma pauperis. This application was directed to be disposed of on May 26, 1975. On May 26, 1975, the Court passed an order:'There is a written statement but defendant has also preferred his counter claim. There is no court-fee on the counter claim. Hence the counter claim is rejected. Let it be treated as written statement only.'2. Aggrieved, the defendant has come to this Court in revision. Order VIII, Rule 6-A permits a defendant to plead counter claim against the claim of the plaintiff. Sub-rule (2) provides that such counter claim shall have the same effect as a cross suit so as to enable the Court to pronounce a final judgment in the same suit, both on the original claim and on the counter claim. Under Sub-rule (3), the plaintiff is entitled to file a written statement to the counter claim. Order XXXIII Rul...
Ram Saran Dauji Vs. Commissioner, Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-01-1978
Reported in: [1979]43STC292(All)
C.S.P. Singh, J.1. After having heard counsel for the parties, I am satisfied that the question referred should be reframed as under :Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the cheque drawn by the assessee in favour of the department would be treated as valid payment of the amount of admitted tax due on the date of filing of the appeal ?2. An ex pane assessment order was made against the assessee determining his turnover at Rs. 9,50,000 and imposing a tax of Rs. 19,700. The assessee filed an appeal before the Assistant Commissioner. The appeal was presented on the last day of limitation and, along with the appeal, the assessee enclosed a cheque for an amount of Rs. 770, which admittedly covered all the arrears of admitted tax outstanding against the assessee. The cheque was presented at the bank but was dishonoured. The reference application filed by the assessee is supported by an affidavit; it was stated in paragraph 3 of the affidavit that the cheque was dishono...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›