Allahabad Court March 1979 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax, Kanpur Vs. J.K. Bankers.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-1979
Reported in: [1979]120ITR924(All)
C.S.P. SINGH J. - The I.T. Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad, has referred the following question of law for our opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the I.T. Appellate Tribunal was legally justified in allowing deduction of commission pertaining to assessment year 1958-59, out of the total income for the assessment year 1959-60 ?'the assessee-firm acted as bankers of M/s. J.K. Cotton ., Kanpur, for a number of years, and was in receipt of commission at the rate of 1% as collection charges. This amount used to be credited by monthly credit notes, and the companys account debited by the corresponding amount. The assessee followed the Samvat year as its accounting year. For the assessment year 1958-59, the previous year ended on 20th March, 1958, and for the assessment year 1959-60, on the 8th April, 1959. So far as the company was concerned, its previous year ended on the 30th September, 1957, and 30th September, 1958, for these two assessme...
Tag this Judgment!Sukh Lal Vs. Ghasi Ram
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-30-1979
Reported in: AIR1979All411
ORDERA.N. Varma, J. 1. This is a judgment-debtor's application in revision directed against an order passed by the learned District Judge, Rampur allowing a Revision filed by the opposite party against an order passed by the learned Munsiff Rampur dismissing the application of the opposite party for delivery of possession under Order 21, Rule 95 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 2. The relevant facts are these. In execution of a decree obtained against the judgment-debtor-applicant, certain properties belonging to the judgment-debtor were auctioned on 14-11-73. The property was purchased by the opposite-party. A formal order confirming the sale was passed on 30-5-1974, The judgment-debtor-applicant filed an objection under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure on 26-7-1974 questioning the liability of the properties in question to be sold and challenging the validity of the execution proceedings which had led to the sale of the properties in question. This objection was contested by ...
Tag this Judgment!Ranjit Singh Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-30-1979
Reported in: 1979CriLJ1140
ORDERM.P. Saxena, J.1. Ranijt Singh has filed this revision application against the judgment and order dated 28-10-1976 passed by the IInd Addl. Sessions Judge, Nainital.2. Briefly stated, the facts are that on 9-8-1974 the Supreme Court of India in Criminal Misc. Petn. No. 1074 of 1974 Criminal Appeal No. 32 of 1972 released Boota Singh son of Kakka Singh on parole for a period of three months. The order read as follows:Boota Singh son of Kakka Singh be released on parole for a period of three months on the ground of ill health on his furnishing to the satisfaction of the District Magistrate, Nainital and this Court doth further order that this order be punctually observed and earned into execution by all concerned. 3. As Boota Singh was confined in Haldwani Jail the order was received by the District Magistrate, Nainital on 12-8-1974. On 17-8-1974 the counsel for Boota Singh moved an application before the Sessions Judge, Nainital for directing the Chief Judicial Magistrate Nainital,...
Tag this Judgment!Bhagwan Industries (P) Ltd., Lucknow Vs. Uttar Pradesh State Electrici ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-1979
Reported in: AIR1979All249
1. The petitioners entered into separate but identical agreements with the U. P. State Electricity Board for supply of electrical energy for industrial purposes. At that time the rate schedule of 1972 framed by the Board under Section 49 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was in force. The relevant rate schedule applicable to the petitioners was Rate Schedule HV-28. By a notification dated Oct. 12, 1974 the Board, in exercise of powers under Section 49 of the Act, issued revised rate schedules for supply of electricity. Besides revising the rates for demand charge, energy charge etc., a charge called minimum consumption guarantee charge was introduced for large and heavy consumers, the category to which the petitioners belong. In these petitions validity of the revised rates in the tariff as also imposition of the minimum consumption guarantee charge has been challenged. During the course of hearing it was conceded that the dispute regarding char...
Tag this Judgment!Umesh Chandra and ors. Vs. Krishna Murari Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-1979
Reported in: AIR1980All29
ORDERA.N. Varma, J.1. This is a defendants' application in revision directed against an order passed by a learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge granting a temporary injunction restraining the defendant-applicant from interfering with the possession of the plaintiff-opposite party over certain agricultural land, a tube-well existing thereon and some crops standing over the said land.2. The relevant facts are these. The plaintiff-opposite party Sri Krishna Murari Lal filed a suit for a permanent injunction against the applicant restraining him from interfering with his possession over some agricultural lands described in schedule Ga in the plaint of the suit, as well as with the tube-well existing therein and the crops standing thereon. Along with the above suit, the plaintiff-opposite party also moved an application (4-C) for temporary injunction restraining the defendant-applicant from interfering with the plaintiffs' possession over the aforesaid properties during the pen...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. N.D. Vindsar and Company
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-1979
Reported in: [1980]45STC495(All)
C.S.P. Singh, J.1. The assessee manufactured and sold thermometers. His accounts were accepted, but the Sales Tax Officer did not accept the assessee's contention that they were taxable as an unclassified item. He treated them as hospital equipment and apparatus, and taxed them accordingly. On an appeal being filed, the appellate authority took the view that they were taxable as an unclassified item. The Commissioner then filed a revision. The revising authority held that the thermometers were not hospital apparatus or equipment as contended by the department and as a result he upheld the order passed by the appellate authority.2. Sri V.D. Singh, the learned standing counsel, appearing on behalf of the State, urged that the thermometers were either taxable as hospital equipment and apparatus or as glassware, and could not be taxed as an unclassified item. So far as the contention that it is glassware is concerned, in my view, this point cannot be raised here for the first time in the r...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Murari Brothers
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-28-1979
Reported in: [1980]46STC88(All)
C.S.P. Singh, J.1. The revising authority has referred the following question of law for the opinion of this Court :Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Additional Judge (Revisions), Sales Tax, Meerut Range, Meerut, was justified in holding that the turnover of sale of bhimseni kajal was not to be taxed as cosmetic and toilet requisites ?2. This reference is being treated as a revision in view of the amendment in the law.3. The assessee manufactures and sells bhimseni kajal. Its disclosed turnover for the year 1968-69 was rejected, and the turnover estimated. The estimated turnover was taxed at the rate of ten per cent as, in the view of the Sales Tax Officer, bhimseni kajal sold by the assessee fell within the purview of 'cosmetic and toilet requisites'. The appellate authority, however, held that bhimseni kajal sold by the assessee did not fall within the category of cosmetic or toilet and, as such, imposed tax at the rate of two per cent. The revising auth...
Tag this Judgment!Misri Lal Vs. Rajeshwar Prasad Agrawal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-22-1979
Reported in: AIR1979All205
Yashoda Nandan, J. 1. This second appeal has been referred to a larger Bench by a learned single Judge because he found himself in disagreement with the decision of K.B. Asthana, J., in Second Appeal No. 1508 of 1970 Munni Lal v. Pandit Har Prasad and another decided on 13th October, 1972.2. The second appeal arises out of a suit instituted by the plaintiff-respondent for ejectment of his tenant (the appellant) from the premises in suit and for recovery of arrears of rent. The appellant undisputably is the tenant of a house of which the plaintiff respondent is the landlord on a monthly rent of Rs. 20. On account of some dispute, the respondent refused to accept rent from the appellant and the latter consequently made an application before the court competent to entertain the same on, the 1st May, 1967 and deposited the rent till then due on the same day, under Section 7-C (1) of the U. P. (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act--hereinafter referred to as the Act. Subsequently by ...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Kishore Sharma and ors. Vs. Gopi Nath and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-21-1979
Reported in: AIR1979All281
Yashoda Nandan, J.1. These two connected appeals have been referred to a larger Bench by a learned single Judge because he found himself unable to agree with the decision of one of us in Civil Revn. No. 1135 of 1976 (Triloki Nath v. Sri Tula Ram decided on 21st December, 1976). In both these appeals identical question of law arises for consideration,2. The material facts giving rise to these appeals arc that the plaintiff respondents after obtaining requisite sanction of the Advocate General of the State filed a suit under Section 92 of theCode of Civil Procedure -- hereinafter referred to as the Code--against the appellants in the court of the Dist Judge, Bareilly. The suit was transferred for decision to the Third Additional District Judge, Bareilly, who decided it ex parte on the 11th February, 1976. The appellants applied for setting aside of the ex parte decree but the application was dismissed. Against the dismissal of the application for the setting aside of the decree, the appe...
Tag this Judgment!State of U.P. Vs. Janki Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-21-1979
Reported in: 1979CriLJ1431
S.C. Mathur, J.1. This appeal has been directed by the State against the order of acquittal dated 10-7-74 recorded by the learned Sessions Judge, Unnao in proceedings relating to charge under Section 7 read with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. The respondent had been convicted of the offence by the learned Magistrate by his order dated 30-3-1974 and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and imprisonment till rising of Court. On appeal preferred by the respondent the learned Sessions Judge passed the order of acquittal.2. Before the learned trial Court the charge against the respondent was that he was selling Pera with fat contents of 246% instead of 5% prescribed under the U.P. Pure Food Rules 1952 framed in exercise of the power conferred under Section 47 of the U.P. Pure Food Act, 1950.3. The respondent did not dispute the fact that the fat contents of the Pera of which sample was taken from him was 2.46% instead of 5% prescribed under the rules. His case...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »