Allahabad Court February 1980 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.
Chaman Lal Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-05-1980
Reported in: AIR1980All308
R.S. Singh, J.1. This is the plaintiff's appeal against the decree and judgment dated 30-3-1972 passed by the IInd Additional District Judge, Kanpur affirming the decree of the trial Court and dismissing the plaintiff's suit.2. The plaintiff had filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 14,347. The plaintiff appellant is a recognized contractor in the U. P. P. W. p., Kanpur. In the year 1953, the plaintiff obtained a contract from the defendant for constructing culverts at Chaubeypur, Bela Road, G. T. Road, Kanpur vide contract bond No. 60/SE dated 27-2-1953 (hereinafter referred to as first contract). Value of the contract was Rs. 1,86,515. Later on, the plaintiff got another contract from the defendant for constructing two roomed labour quarters at Jajmau, Kanpur vide contract bond No. CB 27/EE dated 2-3-1963 (hereinafter referred to as the second contract). The plaintiff completed the work of second contract by 31st Dec., 1963 and the final measurement of work was also done in the month of S...
Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Prem Kumar Rastogi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-05-1980
Reported in: [1980]124ITR381(All)
Satish Chandra, C.J.1. For the assessment year 1965-66, the ITO passed an assessment order on 28th February, 1967. It was served on Sri R. K. Rastogi on 7th March, 1967. The assessee felt aggrieved and filed an appeal on 23rd March, 1969. The AAC held that the service on Sri Rastogi was valid. The appeal was beyond time by one year, 11 months and 15 days. It was accordingly dismissed. Aggrieved, the assessee went up to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal held that Sri Rastogi was not an authorised agent of the assessee. Service on him was immaterial. In fact, the assessee came to know of the passing of the assessment order later and he applied to obtain a copy on 25th February, 1969, and of the demand notice on 8th April, 1969. So, the appeal was filed within time. The further finding of the AAC that the memorandum of appeal was not accompanied by the demand notice was held not to vitiate the appeal. The Tribunal held that at the worst it was an irregularity. Accordingly, t...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Oriental Motor Car Co. (P.) Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-04-1980
Reported in: (1980)16CTR(All)140; [1980]124ITR74(All); [1980]3TAXMAN567(All)
C.S.P. Singh, J. 1. The Income-tax 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 Tribunal was correct in allowing the sum of Rs. 32,660 on account of infringement commission in the accounting period relevant to the assessment year 1972-73?'2. The assessee is a private limited company. It is a dealer of Standard Cars, Tractors, Rajdoot Motor Cycles, Scooters and spare parts, etc. In the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1972-73, the assessee had supplied 42 tractors to the Public Works Department. The Public Works Department, in turn, distributed these tractors to various districts. Its principal, M/s. Escorts Ltd., required the assessee to pay infringement commission on the sale of these tractors to its various dealers outside Lucknow as, according to M/s. Escorts Ltd., whose agent the assessee was, the dealers in other districts were entitled to co...
Gangadhar Ramchand Oil Mills Vs. Sales Tax Officer and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-04-1980
Reported in: [1981]48STC356(All)
H.N. Seth, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner impugns the validity of the proceedings for recovery of a sum of 2,26,500 which has been assessed as sales tax due from the petitioner for the first quarter of the assessment year 1970-71.2. The petitioner, M/s. Gangadhar Ramchand, is a dealer registered under the U. P. Sales Tax Act, 1948. It did not file the return of its turnover for the first quarter of the assessment year 1970-71 (ending 30th June, 1970). On 14th September, 1970, the Sales Tax Officer, Agra, acting under Rule 41(3) of the Rules framed under the U. P. Sales Tax Act, passed two provisional assessment orders (one under the U. P. Sales Tax Act and the other under the Central Sales Tax Act), creating tax liability amounting to Rs. 2,52,500 (Rs. 2,02,600 under the U. P. Sales Tax Act and Rs. 50,000 under the Central Sales Tax Act) against the petitioner. Eventually, in revision the tax liability of the petitioner for the first quarter ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›