Allahabad Court November 1979 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Lucknow Diocesan Trust Association
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-30-1979
Reported in: (1980)17CTR(All)94; [1980]123ITR38(All); [1980]4TAXMAN90(All)
R.R. Rastogi, J. 1. This reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereafter 'the Act', relates to the assessment year 1972-73. The assessee is a company incorporated under Section 25 of the Companies Act. It is the trustee of a trust known as B.I.G. Mission, Kanpur Trust, which is a religious and charitable trust within the meaning of Section 11 of the Act. The affairs of the assessee are managed by the Lucknow Diocesan Trust Association, hereafter the association. In the previous year relevant to the year under consideration the assessee had paid Rs. 10,000 to the association as management charges and it claimed deduction of the same. The ITO did not accept the claim for the reason that it was not ascertainable what amount had actually been incurred by the association for the management of the assessee-trust. From the income and expenditure account of the assessee the ITO found that the assessee had claimed expenses on account of salaries, allowances, legal charges,...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Indian Turpentine and RosIn Co. Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-30-1979
Reported in: [1980]124ITR830(All)
R.R. Rastogi, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, has referred the following question under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, hereafter 'the Act', at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, for the opinion of this court :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in allowing the assessee's claim of Rs. 71,648 as a loss incidental to the trade in the assessment year 1969-70 '2. The facts giving rise to this question, briefly stated, are : The assessee which is a public limited company carries on the business in the manufacture and sale of rosin and turpentine. It follows the financial year as its year of account. In the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1966-67, the assessee had despatched goods worth Rs. 73,081 to M/s. Mandya Paper Mills, Madras, and credited the sales by debiting the purchaser's account accordingly. The purchaser did not retire the documents relating to those goods and the asses...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. ElgIn Mills Co. Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-29-1979
Reported in: [1980]123ITR712(All)
R.R. Rastogi, J. 1. These two references relate to similar set of facts and are, therefore, being disposed of by a common judgment. Income-tax Reference No. 1151 of 1976 relates to the assessment years 1967-68 and1968-69 and the question referred for our opinion is ;'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that levy of interest under Section 216 in this case for assessment years 1967-68 and 1968-69 was not justified and then in dismissing the departmental appeals?'2. Income-tax Reference No, 986 of 1976 relates to the assessment years1969-70 and 1970-71 and the question referred for our opinion is ;' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that levy of interest under Section 216 for the two years under appeal was not justified '3. The respondent-assessee, M/s. Elgin Mills Company Ltd., Kanpur, is a public limited company. For the assessment years 1967-68 and 1968-69, the acco...
Tag this Judgment!Moti Lal Chaddami Lal JaIn Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-28-1979
Reported in: [1980]122ITR949(All)
R.R. Rastogi, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'E', New Delhi, has referred the following questions for the opinion of this court:'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that out of the interest of Rs. 1,09,492 interest pertaining to this year alone was liable to be included in the assessment ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, income of Rs. 6,329 from properties purported to have been transferred to the trust was not assessable in the hands of the assessee-family ? 3. Whether, on a proper construction of the lease deeds dated May 3, 1960, and May 5, 1962, and the accompanying facts and circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 10,000 is the income of the assessee and not that of Chhadami Lal Jain Degree College?' 2. So far as questions Nos. 2 and 3 are concerned, we need not set out the facts relating thereto because they stand covered by a decision of this court inter parties in ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Wealth Tax Vs. NaraIn Dass Jain.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-28-1979
Reported in: (1980)17CTR(All)50
JUDGMENT : R. R. Rastogi, J. - The ITAT, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad, has referred the following question for the opinion of this Court : "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in holding that penalties u/s 18(1)(a) for asst. yrs. 1967-68 and 1968-69 were liable to be calculated in accordance with the law as it stood before amendment on 1-4-1969 even for the period of default after 31-3-1969, and not as per the increased scale of penalty introduced w.e.f. 1-4-69 by the Finance Act, 1969." The reference relates to the asst. yrs. 1967-68 and 1968-69. The assessee, a HUF should have filed its returns of total wealth for these years by 30th June, 1967 and 30th June 1968 respectively. These were, however, filed on 20th February 1973. The WTO hence took action for levy of penalty u/s 18(1)(a) of the WT Act and issued a notice to the assessee to show cause. Pursuant to that notice the assessee furnished an explanation but that did not find favour with...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Pioneer Leather Works
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-22-1979
Reported in: [1980]46STC224(All)
R.R. Rastogi, J.1. The Commissioner of Sales Tax had made applications under Section 11(3) of the U. P. Sales Tax Act before the Additional Judge (Revisions), Sales Tax, Kanpur Range II, Kanpur, for reference of the following two questions to this Court for its opinion:(1) Whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case, leather beltings and washers are taxable as mill stores under Notification No. ST-747/X-950 (22)-67 dated 1st March, 1968 ?(2) If the answer to the above question is in the affirmative, then whether the additional revising authority was legally justified to treat them as leather goods and thus taxable at a lower rate of tax ?2. In view of the amendment made in Section 11 of the Act, these applications were transmitted to this Court and are to be treated as revisions under Section 11(1) of the Act.3. The assessee is a dealer in leather goods and washers. The assessment year is 1969-70 and the dispute is as to whether leather beltings and washers fall within the c...
Tag this Judgment!Food Corporation of India Vs. Kishan Lal Agarwal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-20-1979
Reported in: AIR1980All181
H.N. Seth, J.1. This first appeal by Food Corporation of India is directed against the order of the Civil Judge, Pauri dated 15-12-78, refusing its prayer made under Section 34 of the Arbitration Art for staying the proceedings in a suit filed by respondent Kishan Lal Agarwal.2. Plaintiff Kishan Lal Agarwal carried on the business in the name and style of M/s Agarwal Mills at Kotdwara. According to him the defendant Food Corporation of India approached him for manufacturing 'Bal Ahar' (a high protein Baby Food) and the plaintiff accepted the offer on terms and conditions incorporated in the agreement executed by the parties on 26-10-1972. The period under the agreement was with the consent of the parties extended from time to time. The plaintiff continued to supply the goods in accordance with the terms of that agreement up to 28-2-76. According to Clause 9 (6) of the said agreement, cards showing the Formula of Bal Ahar had to be deposited inside each bag and another card on which bat...
Tag this Judgment!Hamid Khan Vs. Official Receiver
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-19-1979
Reported in: AIR1980All131
Yashoda Nandan, J.1. The applicants were adjudged insolvents under the provisions of the Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The Official Receiver was appointed as receiver for the property of the applicants-insolvents. Their property, inter alia, consisted of certain Bhumidhari plots. On 24th October, 1971 the receiver (opposite party No. 1) held a public auction for sale of 12 1/2 bighas of Bhumidhari land that had vested in him as a result of his appointment as such. Counsel for none of the parties claimed that the land in question had been put to auction sale as a consequence of any order previously obtained from the court. The insolvents applied to the court for staying confirmation of the sale on the allegations, inter alia, that the market price of the property sold was more than Rs. 50,000/- but the receiver acting quite illegally and in collusion with the purchaser was selling it for the grossly inadequate amount of Rs. 21,000/- only. The cour...
Tag this Judgment!Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Rani Pritam Kunwar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-15-1979
Reported in: (1980)16CTR(All)117; [1980]125ITR102(All); [1980]3TAXMAN472(All)
R.R. Rastogi, J.1. This is a reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench-A, has stated a case and referred the following three questions to this court for its opinion :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and having regard to the agreement dated March 22, 1943, the hon'ble High Court's order in Suit No. 2 of 1962, dated August 24, 1967, and the judgment dated January 22, 1962, in Suit No. 95 of 1953 of the civil judge, Moradabad, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the allowance paid to Rani Amrit Kunwar and Rani Jai Devi were dependent on obligation arising from family custom and usage, from the provisions of Hindu law and from the provisions of the U.P. Zamindari Estate Act ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and having regard to the documents mentioned in question No. (1) above, the Tribunal was legally correct in ...
Tag this Judgment!Sterling Machine Tools Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-15-1979
Reported in: [1980]122ITR926(All)
Rastogi, J.1. The assessee, M/s. Sterling Machine Tools, Agra, was a partnership firm consisting of 4 partners including Sri Satish Chandra. The assessee carried on business of manufacture and sale of centering machines and also purchase and sale of spare parts for the assessment year 1965-66. For the previous year ended December 15, 1964, the assessee filed a return showing an income of Rs. 34,148-43 on sales of Rs. 1,86,000. The ITO made the assessment on August 5, 1966, and computed the total income at Rs. 37,218. During the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1966-67, the assessee carried on the same business and during the course of assessment for that year, on enquiry from the Vigilance Bureau and the Boards of Experts, the ITO found that the actual cost of a centering machine came to Rs. 7,331, whereas the assessee claimed the same at Rs. 9,432. When Satish Chandra, partner, was confronted with that report he gave a note in writing on May 15, 1968, to the ITO stating t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »