Allahabad Court July 1979 Judgments
Daya Shanker Vijay Kumar Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-31-1979
Reported in: [1980]124ITR691(All); [1979]2TAXMAN584(All)
C.S.P. Singh, J. 1. The Tribunal has at the instance of the assessee referred the following two questions for the opinion of this court :' 1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the claim for partial partition of the assessee under Section 171 of the Income-tax Act could be allowed ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to registration under Section 185 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ' 2. Shri Shyam Sunder, his wife, 'Gayatri Devi, and four minor sons, one of them being Daya Shanlcer, constituted a HUF. This family carried on business in iron and steel and was being assessed in the status of a HUF. In the year 1969-70, a claim was made before the ITO that a partial partition of the business had taken place between Shyam Sunder and three minor sons and Smt. Gayatri Devi and Daya Shanker with the result that the capital of the HUF firm was divided in accordance with the agreement dated 30th September, 1968. The ITO on the v...
Tag this Judgment!M.P. Sugar Mills Co. (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-31-1979
Reported in: (1979)13CTR(All)175; [1979]120ITR348(All); [1979]2TAXMAN587(All)
C.S.P. Singh, J.1. The assessee is a limited company. The Parliament passed the C.(P.)S.T. Act, 1964. It received the assent of the President on 2nd of May, 1964. Section 4 of the Act brought to tax the chargeable profits of a company for every assessment year commencing from the 1st ofApril, 1964, The chargeable profit that was subjected to tax was the amount which exceeded the statutory deduction. Section 2(8) defined statutory deduction as meaning an amount equal to ten per cent. of the capital of the company calculated in accordance with the provisions of the Second Schedule to the Act. 2. The chargeable profits were, in view of Section 2(5), to be calculated on the basis of the income of an assessee computed under the I.T. Act, 1961, for a previous year or years adjusted according to the provisions of the First Schedule. The First Schedule set out the various exclusions which were to be made from the income computed for the purposes of the I.T. Act. The Second Schedule set out the...
Tag this Judgment!Virendra Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-30-1979
Reported in: AIR1980All100
K.C. Agrawal, J.1. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner prays for quashing the citation dated 30th August, 1977 and for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 3 and 6 not to realise the forest-dues from the petitioner as arrears of land revenue,2. The facts relevant for our purposes are as follows :--The petitioner is a forest Contractor. At an auction held on August 20, 1968, the petitioner purchased lot No. 8 of the Pithoragarh Forest Division for a sum of Rs. 1,08,000/-. The sale money was to be paid by the petitioner in two instalments. These instalments were:--1. 1st instalment Rs. 36,000/- on 1-11-1969.2. 2nd instalment Rs. 72,000/- on 1-4-1970.3. The petitioner did not pay the instalments as mentioned above. Instead, he paid the amount in small bits. The total amount which had been paid by him by March, 1975 was Rs. 55,334.85p. After deducting the aforesaid amount from the total sum payable, the amount which remained to be paid was Rs. 52,6...
Tag this Judgment!Mohd. Yaqub Vs. the State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-30-1979
Reported in: AIR1980All213
Agrawal, J. 1. This is a writ petition seeking relief of mandamus commanding the respondents to restrain from arresting the petitioner or from selling his interest in the residential house situate in mohalla Mohammad Wasil, Pilibhit. Another, relief claimed was for a writ of certiorari quashing the notice dated 10th Sept. 1974. 2. At an auction of lot No. 719 relating to drift timber in Banbasa Canal Forest Division, Khatema Range, Pilibhit, the petitioner was declared to be the highest bidder and the timber was sold to him for Rs. 14,000/-. The petitioner deposited Rs. 4200/-, as security. Subsequently, an agreement was executed between the petitioner and the department. Under the agreement, the last date to be worked out was 15-6-1974. Leaving out the unnecessary details, the fact appears that by letter dated 31-5-1974 the petitioner was permitted to store the timber at a safe place on the bank of river. The petitioner was, however, directed that he could be given export permit on th...
Tag this Judgment!C.B. Joshi Vs. Smt. Ganga Devi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-27-1979
Reported in: AIR1980All130
ORDERDeoki Nandan, J. 1. This is an application for revision of an order dated 28th October, 1976 of the court of the District Judge, Nainital directing the applicant-husband to pay Rs. 600/- for the expenses of the proceedings and Rs. 300/- per month as maintenance pendente lite from 12th September, 1978 (sic) when the application for the same was made, under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The applicant-husband had filed the petition for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, in which the application for maintenance pendente lite and expenses of the proceedings was made by the wife under Section 24 of the Act.2. Mr. L. M. Pant, learned counsel for the applicant-husband, has raised the point that no affidavit was filed in support of the application nor did the application contain the necessary particulars as prescribed by Rule 17 of the Hindu Marriage and Divorce Rules, 1956. It appears from a reading of the order that while the wife examined her father as a witness...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Bajrang Glass Works
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-27-1979
Reported in: [1980]45STC270(All)
R.R. Rastogi, J. 1. This reference was made under Section 11(3) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, but, in view of the amendment made by the U.P. Taxation Laws (Amendment and Validation) Act, 1978, it would be treated as a revision under Section 11(1) of the Act.2. The question for consideration in this revision is as to whether sales of coal-dust made by the assessee who carries on the business of manufacture of glass bangles are liable to tax. The assessment year involved is 1971-72. During this year, the assessee sold coal-dust worth Rs. 18,173. The claim of the assessee was that these sales were not liable to be taxed. The assessing authority did not accept this contention, but, on appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (Judicial), Sales Tax, accepted it. There was revision filed by the Commissioner of Sales Tax before the Additional Judge (Revisions), Sales Tax, Agra, who confirmed the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) and hence this further revision before th...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hindustan Commercial Bank Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-26-1979
Reported in: [1980]122ITR645(All)
C.S.P. Singh, J. 1. The assessee, which is a banking company, had a trade debtor, M/s. Usha Cycle Industries, the amount of debt being Rs. 18,086. This was written off in the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1965-66. The claim was, however, not allowed for the assessment year 1965-66 as the assessee had claimed a portion of the amount from the insurance company, which had insured the goods of the debtor, which were stolen. In fact, the assessee was able to recover an amount of Rs. 10,000 out of this debt in the subsequent previous year relevant to the present reference, viz., the year 1966-67. This view of the ITO was upheld by the Tribunal in appeal relating to the assessment year 1965-66. While disposing of the appeal for the assessment year 1965-66, the Tribunal observed on facts, that the assessee would be at liberty to claim it in the subsequent year, if the facts stated by the assessee before the Tribunal were found to be correct by the lower authorities. In the asse...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Rajdei Vs. Lautan and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-26-1979
Reported in: AIR1980All109
Deoki Nandan, J. 1. This is a wife's second appeal in a suit for maintenance.2. The trial Court decreed the suit for maintenance at the rate of Rs. 40/- per month. The lower Appellate Court has modified the decree by reducing the amount of maintenance from Rs. 40/- per month to Rs. 10/- per month.3. The appeal in this Court is directed against the reduction of the amount of the maintenance. It is an appeal by the wife. The respondent husband has challenged the factum of the marriage between the parties, by filing a cross-objection. I shall take up the cross-objection first.4. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, there was no evidence to show that 'Saptpadi' was performed and that in the absence of proof of 'saptpadi', there could have been no marriage between the parties. He relied on Bhaurao Shanker Lokhande v. The State of Maharashtra, AIR 1965 SC 1564, which was a case of prosecutionfor bigamy under Section 494 of the I.P.C.J and obviously somewhat different considera...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Vaidehi Kuar Vs. Banshu and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-23-1979
Reported in: AIR1979All413
A.N. Varma, J.1. This is an executionsecond appeal arising out of an application filed by the appellant under Section 144, C. P. C. praying for restitution by way of redelivery of possession to the applicant over a piece of land. The application has been rejected by both the courts below and hence this second appeal.2. The relevant facts are these. A suit was filed by the predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiff-respondents against the defendant-appellant in respect of the piece of land which is the subject-matter of this second appeal, The suit was for following reliefs:--(a) A decree for possession over the land in dispute.(b) A permanent injunction asking the defendants not to remain in possession over the land in dispute or from taking earth from the same.(c) A mandatory injunction directing the defendants to fill up the pits which they have dug over the land in dispute.3. This suit was compromised. The compromise provided that the plaintiff would in due course sell the land tothe ...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Prasad Sharma Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-23-1979
Reported in: [1979]119ITR867(All)
R.R. Rastogi, J. 1. The assessee, as individual, used to carry on contract business. For the assessment year 1970-71, he did not file his return of income voluntarily under Section 139(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961. He, however, filed it under Section 139(4) after receipt of notice under Section 139(2), disclosing an income of Rs. 4,273. Daring the course of the assessment proceeding the assessee did not put in appearance nor did he furnish evidence as required and hence the assessment was made under Section 144 of the Act. The ITO computed the income from contract business at Rs. 15,000. He had found from the copy of the account filed by the assessee that the assessee had taken two loans during the relevant previous year from Sri Ram Swarup Bhalla and Sri A. N. Nayyar of Rs. 20,000 and Rs. 8,000, respectively. Since the assessee did not produce any evidence whatsoever to prove the genuineness of those loans, the ITO treated the same as the assessee's income from undisclosed sources.2. The ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »