Allahabad Court April 1982 Judgments
Rashtra Deep Laboratory Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-1982
Reported in: [1983]53STC419(All)
V.K. Mehrotra, J.1. M/s. Rashtra Deep Laboratory, Firozabad, is the applicant in this Court in the present revision under Section 11(1) of the U. P. Sales Tax Act. It has assailed the view taken by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Kanpur, that the turnover of 'water for injection' manufactured by it during the year 1974-75 was liable to tax at the rate of 7 per cent as an unclassified item and not at the lower rate of 3 per cent as being a medicine or pharmaceutical preparation as provided in Notification No. ST-II-332/X-1012-1971 dated 15th November, 1971, issued in exercise of the powers under Section 3-A of the Act. The Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) Sales Tax had held it taxable at the lower rate and had, differing from the view taken by the assessing authority that it was taxable as an unclassified item, granted relief to the dealer.2. It has been noticed by the Tribunal in its order that the applicant manufactures and deals in medicines and water for injection. It has held that water f...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Rajhans Soda Water Factory
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-1982
Reported in: [1984]55STC128(All)
V.K. Mehrotra, J.1. The three submissions made on behalf of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, U. P., applicant in this revision under Section 11(1) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, are, firstly, that the turnover of the dealer, opposite party in the revision, of sale of ice-cream was wrongly held exempt from levy of sales tax as a milk product, secondly, that part of taxable turnover of self manufactured soda lemon was erroneously held not liable to tax, and thirdly, that the turnover of sale of acrylic yarn was erroneously held liable to tax at a lower rate of 2 per cent instead of 7 per cent.2. So far as the first contention is concerned, it is obvious that the view taken by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Saharanpur, was plainly correct. It has been ruled by a Division Bench of this Court in Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P. v. Rita Ice Cream 1981 ATJ 476 that ice-cream was exempt from levy of sales tax as a milk product.3. The second submission also does not deserve acceptance for a perusal of the or...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Bhagwati Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-1982
Reported in: AIR1982All310; [1984]56CompCas396(All)
A.N. Varma, J.1. These connected Civil Revisions have come before us upon reference made by a learned single Judge. The revisions are directed against identical orders passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Allahabad, disposing of certain preliminary issues. The main question which was debated before us was with regard to the decision of the court below on the issue whether a Claims Tribunal exercising powers under Section 110 of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) has jurisdiction to entertain a claim against the Railway. The contention raised by the Union of India (the applicant herein) through the General Manager, Northern Railway was that the claims in question -- all of which arise out of the same accident involving a Tempo-Taxi and the Allahabad-Saharanpur Passenger train -- are not maintainable against the Railway as under the Act a decree can be passed only against the insurer or owner or driver of the motor vehicle involved in the accident. It c...
Tag this Judgment!Prithvi Nath Kapoor Vs. the State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-1982
Reported in: AIR1982All349
K.C. Agarwal, J.1. This bunch of writ petitions challenges the validity of the notification dated 28th April, 1979, issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, published in the U. P. Gazette dated 9th June, 1979, and the notification dated 26th May, 1981, published in the official gazette dated June 19, 1981 issued under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act. By these notifications the lands of some villages situate within the jurisdiction of the Nagar Mahapalika Allahabad are being acquired for establishment of Avas Colony under a Planned Development Scheme.2. Some of the petitioners challenging the aforesaid notification have been decided by a separate judgment. Some arguments which have not been dealt with in that judgment are being decided in this judgment.3. The submission first made by the petitioners learned counsel was that as the acquisition of the land is for the Allahabad Development Authority, the mandatory provisions contained in U. P. Urban Planning and Develop...
Tag this Judgment!Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Lalta Prasad Bishambhar Saran.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-22-1982
Reported in: (1982)29CTR(All)265
1. JUDGMENT : R. R. Rastogi, J. - The IT Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench B, 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, were the AAC and the IT Appellate Tribunal legally correct in admitting the amendment deed dt. 19-8-1969 ? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the provisions of rr. 22(2), 22(3) and 24 of the IT Rules, 1962 were not complied with by the assessee and was the assessee entitled to the benefit of registration u/s 185 of the IT Act, 1961 ? 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessees failure to divide the profits in the profit sharing ratio specified in the partnership deed dt. 19-8-1969 is fatal to the assessees claim of benefit of registration as per its application in Form 11-A filed on 30-3-1970 ?" The facts briefly stated are that the respondent M/s. Lalta Pd. Bishambhar Saran, Kashipur, a partnership firm was origi...
Tag this Judgment!Jai Singh Vs. Garhwal Motor Owners and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-21-1982
Reported in: AIR1982All480
Deoki Nandan, J.1. This is a plaintiff's -second appeal in a suit for recovery, of Rs. 7,500/- as damages arising from the personal injury caused to him by a motor accident which occurred on 15th Jan., 1950. The most tragic part of this tragic story is the fact that the suit giving rise to the second appeal, filed by the plaintiff in the year 1951 in the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Garhwal has taken more than 30 years to come up for final decision. The delay has not been caused by any fault of the parties in this case. The process of our Courts has been entirely responsible for the delay.2. The plaintiff was posted as an Assistant Engineer in the Irrigation Department of the Government of Uttar Pradesh in Garhwal, when on 15th Jan., 1950 he was travelling from Rudra Prayag to Srinagar (Garhwal) with his staff by a motor bus owned by defendant-respondent 2, who has since died and is now represented by his heirs and legal representatives, which was operating under the control and ma...
Tag this Judgment!Additional Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Mangalsen Mohanlal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-21-1982
Reported in: (1982)31CTR(All)218; [1982]136ITR905(All); [1982]10TAXMAN313(All)
R.R. Rastogi, J.1. In compliance with the direction of this court, at the instance of the Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, Kanpur, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'A' (hereafter 'the Tribunal') has drawn up a statement of the case and referred the following questions for the opinion of this court:'1. Having regard to the circumstances in which the Tribunal itself in the quantum appeal had confirmed an addition of Rs. 30,000 for unexplained investment in property, whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee could not be deemed to have concealed the particulars of its income in terms of the Explanation to Section 271(1)? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was legally justified in cancelling the penalty imposed upon the assessee in terms of the Explanation, to Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. The assessee, Mangahen Mohanlal, a HUF, was engaged in the b...
Tag this Judgment!income-tax Officer Vs. Smt. Usha Sah
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-20-1982
Reported in: (1982)1ITD774(All.)
1. This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order of the AAC, Allahabad Range, Allahabad.2. The assessee is an individual and the appeal relates to the assessment year 1977-78. The assessee's husband, Shri J.P. Sah, was an official of the United Nations who unfortunately expired. After his death, the assessee became entitled as the widow of the deceased official of the United Nations to receive benefits under Article 35 of the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund. The amount received during the previous year relevant to this assessment year was Rs. 60,427 by way of pension under the aforesaid article. It was claimed before the ITO that this amount was exempt from tax in view of the specific provisions of Clause (b) of Section 18 of the United Nations (Privileges and Immunities) Act, 1947. The ITO, however, held that in the first place, the assessee was not an official of the United Nations and, secondly, the amount received by her was not in the nature of either salary or...
Tag this Judgment!Secured Investment Company and ors. Vs. Registrar of Firms, Societies ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-20-1982
Reported in: AIR1984All28
K.S. Varma, J. 1. This writ petition is directed against certain orders passed by the Registrar of Firms. Societies and Chits. Uttar Pradesh. Lucknow. The action, which purports to have been taken against the petitioners under the provisions of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act. 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) is sought to be challenged.2. Petitioners Nos. 1 and 2 are partners of an unregistered partnership firm M/s. Secured Investment Company (petitioner No. 1). It is claimed that petitioner No. 1 deals in the business of acting as an agent for Retting money deposited in nationalised or scheduled banks only and also for promotion of sales of certain commodities. The petitioners are carrying on their business mainly in Lucknow with branches at Kanpur and Bareilly. It is further claimed in the writ petition that the petitioner's firm started a scheme for investment in which persons who were interested were required to pay a sum of Rs. 220 only once. T...
Tag this Judgment!Om Prakash and anr. Vs. Smt. Rukmini Devi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-20-1982
Reported in: AIR1982All389
K.N. Singh, J. 1. These nine FAFOs and two writ petitions arise out of an accident which took place on 14-6-70 in District Muzafarnagar. Since the subject matter involved in these cases is common, we consider it proper to dispose of all these cases by a common order.2. On 14-6-1970 a marriage party left Muzafarnagar for Rishikesh in a stage carriage but No. USL 7134 which belonged to the U. P. State Road Tran-sort Corporation When the vehicle reached near Purqazi outpost, another bus having registration DLP No. 3692 was coming from opposite, direction, it collided head on with the Corporation's bus as a result of which several persons received injuries. Virendra Kumar and Sewak Ram who were members of the marriage party succumbed to their injuries while Raghunath Das received injury and he was confined to Hospital. The dependents of the two deceased persons as well as Raghunath Das the injured person filed three separate claim petitions claiming compensation from the owners of the vehi...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »