Allahabad Court November 1982 Judgments
Commissioner, Sales Tax Vs. Ashoka Dairy
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-26-1982
Reported in: [1983]53STC231(All)
B.N. Sapru, J.1. This is a revision by the Commissioner of Sales Tax and pertains to the year 1975-76.2. The assessee has a dairy and he purchases butter from the villagers, converts it into ghee and sells it as ghee. The dispute in the present case is regarding the taxability of ghee sold by the assessee.3. The Tribunal held that the sales of ghee by the assessee are not taxable within the meaning of Notification No. ST-II-4944/X-10(2)-74 dated 30th May, 1975. The assessee was held liable to pay tax on his first purchase of butter.4. The Commissioner of Sales Tax is aggrieved and has filed this revision.5. The department seeks to tax the assessee under the provisions of Section 3-D(2) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act. The assessee has to pay purchase tax on his purchases of butter under Section 3-D(1)(b).6. It is well-known that ghee and butter are different commercial commodities though they are produced from milk. In the case of Commissioner of Commercial Taxes in Mysore, Bangalore v. Sama...
Tag this Judgment!Noor Mohammad Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-26-1982
Reported in: 1983CriLJ995
R.C. Deo Sharma, J.1. Through this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner has challenged the validity of the order of his detention under the provisions of the National Security Act. The District Magistrate Bara Banki by his order dated 24-4-1982 and in exercise of the powers under Section 3 of the National Security Act 1980, ordered the detention of the petitioner on the ground that it was necessary to detain him in order to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. The grounds of detention which were also served on the petitioner the same day, mentioned the following incidents which led to the satisfaction of the District Magistrate in the passing of the aforesaid order.A. The petitioner along with his associates committed dacoity at the house of Pooranmasi in Subedar purwa hamlet of village Nasirpur on the night between 1st and 2nd June, 1981. They were armed with deadly weapons and assaulted Pooranmasi and his wife ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. J.K. Synthetics Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-24-1982
Reported in: (1983)33CTR(All)216; [1983]143ITR396(All); [1983]12TAXMAN322(All)
H.N. Seth, J.1. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has, at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, in respect of the assessment of the assessee, M/s. J.K. Synthetics Ltd., Kanpur, under Section 62 of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as ' the Act '), for the assessment years 1967-68 and 1968-69, referred the following question of law for the opinion of this court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the amount of relief allowed to the assessee under Section 80J of the Income-tax Act was not income not includible in the total income of the assessee within the meaning of Rule 4 of the Second Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964?'2. The assessee is a company. For the assessment years 1967-68 and 1968-69, it was allowed deduction under Section 80J of the I.T. Act, 1961. While computing its capital for the purposes of surtax under the Act, the ITO held that the ass...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Ishwari Prasad Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-23-1982
Reported in: (1983)33CTR(All)48; [1983]143ITR789(All); [1983]12TAXMAN302(All)
R.M. Sahai, J.1. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, submitted the following question of law in compliance with the order passed by this court under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act:' 1. Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee was not entitled to be assessed on receipt basis and was liable to tax on accrual basis only ? 2. Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that before the assessee could switch over from accrual basis to receipt basis, it was obligatory to obtain permission from the Income-tax Officer before the end of the previous year ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that one application for assessment years 1968-69 and 1969-70 was not maintainable notwithstanding that the appeals for the two years were disposed of by a consolidated order and only one copy of the order was served ' 2. Facts relevant for question No. 2 are bein...
Tag this Judgment!Awadh Kumar Shukla Vs. Superintendent of Central Jail and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-23-1982
Reported in: 1983CriLJ192
M. Wahajuddin, J.1. Petitioner Avadh Kumar Shukla is detained in pursuance of the detention order dated 9-8-1982 of the District Magistrate, Allahabad, passed under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act. The detenu was already in jail in connection with a criminal case when this detention order was passed and he was served with the order alone with grounds and materials on 10-8-1982. The order was approved by the State Government on 16-8-1982. The detenu submitted his representation in triplicate to the Superintendent, Central Jail, Naini on 27-8-1982 and the Superintendent, Central Jail. Naini, sent the representation to the District Magistrate on 27-8-1982 and the State Government as well as the Advisory Board direct on 28-8-1982. The petitioner further claims that Sri Laxmi Narain Dwivedi Advocate, Allahabad delivered an application and a copy of the representation to respondent No. 3, namely, the District Magistrate, Allahabad on 25-8-198?, who directed him to approach responde...
Tag this Judgment!Flocks (India) Private Limited Vs. Government of India and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-22-1982
Reported in: 1983(12)ELT197(All)
H.N. Seth, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, petitioner M/s. Flocks (India) P. Ltd. seeks quashing of the order of the Central Government dated 23rd January, 1978 as also that of the order passed by the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Kanpur dated 3rd November, 1979. The petitioner further prays for a suitable writ commanding the respondents to levy excise duty on the goods manufactured by it in accordance with Tariff Item No. 19-1 and to refund the excess duty charged from it under Tariff Item No 19-111 of the Central Excise Tariff.Petitioner commenced production of flocked valvet, flocked suede and other flocked fabrics with effect from 1st January, 1976. The manufacturing process employed by the petitioner consists of applying adhesive to some cotton based cloth and thereafter processing the same through flocking chamber where flocksare attached to the sticky based cloth by electrostatic force of over one lakh volt. The fabric is then subjected to cer...
Tag this Judgment!Wealth-tax Officer Vs. Aisha Begam
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-12-1982
Reported in: (1983)3ITD710(All.)
1. The short point, in these appeals preferred by the revenue is whether the assessee is entitled to exemption under Section 5(1)(xxxii) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ('the Act'), in respect of the land/building owned by the firm in which she is a partner.2. The assessee is a partner in the firm, Asia Tannery, Jajmau, Kanpur.The assessment years are 1973-74 to 1975-76 and the relevant valuation dates are 31st of March, 1973, 1974 and 1975 respectively.3. In her wealth-tax return, the assessee claimed exemption of Rs. 1,50,000 each under Section 5(1)(xxxii), in respect of the value of her interest in the aforesaid firm. In the wealth-tax assessment for the assessment years, 1973-74 and 1974-75, the WTO gave exemption of Rs. 94,721 and Rs. 1,09,514 respectively, while in the assessment year 1975-76, he rejected such claim with the following remarks : The assessee has claimed exemption of Rs. 1,50,000 under Section 5(1)(xxxii) in respect of her interest in M/s. Asia Tennery vide this offic...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. U.B.S. Publishers and Distributors
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-12-1982
Reported in: (1983)34CTR(All)86; [1984]147ITR114(All); [1983]13TAXMAN94(All)
K.N. Seth, J. 1. The, assessee carried on business of purchases and sales of both Indian and foreign books in wholesale as well as in retail. This business was carried on by Sri D.R. Chawla and Sri C.M. Chawla (father and son respectively) in partnership under the name and style of M/s. Universal -Bookstall, Kanpur (hereinafter called 'the Kartpur firm'). In the year 1963, an office was opened at Delhi for wholesale business in books as also a publishing house. The Delhi business was started under the name and style of M/s. U.B.S. Publishers and Distributors (hereinafter called 'the Delhi firm') in partnership with two other persons (brother and mother of Sri C. M. Chawla). In the opinion of the Department, these two firms did not have separate identity and the Delhi firm was held to be a branch or an extension of the Kanpur firm. The Tribunal, however, did not accept the stand taken by the Department and treated them as distinct and different entities and that controversy is not befor...
Tag this Judgment!Mukand Lal Malik Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-09-1982
Reported in: (1983)35CTR(All)76; [1984]148ITR461(All)
K.N. Seth, J.1. The petitioner is a legal practitioner. On April 1, 1973, the petitioner and another advocate, Shri Har Gopal Malik, constituted a partnership firm, M/s. Malik and Company, Thaparnagar, Meerut, to carry on legal profession. The share of the petitioner was 40 per cent, and that of Sri Har Gopal Malik 60 per cent. The firm was registered under the I.T. Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and continued till March 31, 1978. For the assessment years 1974-75 to 1978-79 (five years) the ITO assessed the firm and the share of the partners in the firm was separately assessed to tax. The petitioner filed applications before the ITO under Section 154 of the Act for the years 1974-75 to 1977-78 for rectification of the assessments. It was pleaded that excess tax had been recovered from the petitioner inasmuch as tax had been recovered from the registered firm as well as from him individually on the same income. The assessment for 1978-79 was sought to be revised by the Commi...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. U.P. Hotel and Restaurants Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-09-1982
Reported in: (1983)34CTR(All)62; [1984]145ITR598(All)
N.N. Sharma, J. 1. This reference under Section 256, Sub-clause (1), of the I.T. Act, is being disposed of by this order. It was initiated by the Commissioner of income-tax and arose out of the Tribunal's order in Income-tax Appeals Nos. 1502 and 1503 (Allahabad) of 1972-73. The following two questions have been referred to this court : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the assessee's claim for development rebate in respect of assets installed up to September 30, 1968, wasrightly considered by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in the assessment year 1970-71, even though this claim had been rejected by the Income-tax Officer in the assessment order for 1969-70 and the grounds raised by the assessee had been treated as irrelevant by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner while disposing of the appeal for that year? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in upholding...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »