Allahabad Court October 1986 Judgments
Triveni Engineering Works Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-30-1986
Reported in: [1987]167ITR742(All); [1987]31TAXMAN128(All)
R.K. Gulati, J. 1. This is a cross reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), and concerns the assessment year 1971-72 for the period ending on January 31, 1970. M/s Upper India Sugar Mills P. Limited, a company, was engaged in the business of manufacturing crystal sugar. This company was amalgamated with M/s Triveni Engineering Works Ltd., New Delhi, with effect from February 1, 1970, as a result of an order passed by the Delhi High Courtunder the Companies Act, 1956. As a result thereof, all the profits of M/s Upper India Sugar Mills Ltd., together with its assets, became the property of M/s Triveni Engineering Works Ltd. Return for the assessment year in dispute was filed by M/s Triveni Engineering Works Ltd. and the merged company has been assessed to tax in respect of its income as a unit of M/s Triveni Engineering Works Ltd. 2. At the instance of the Department, the following two questions have been referred to this court fo...
Tag this Judgment!National Textile Corporation (U.P.) Ltd. Vs. Additional Labour Commiss ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-29-1986
Reported in: [1987(54)FLR299]; (1994)IIILLJ783All
Varma, J.1. This bunch of petitions is being disposed of by a common judgment as the controversy raised therein is identical. The petitions have been filed by the National Textile Corporation (Uttar Pradesh), Ltd., against the orders passed by the Controlling Authority, Kanpur, constituted by the State Government under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, upholding the claims of the workers and officers of an erstwhile textile mills, namely, Laxmirattan Cotton Mills as well as the orders passed by the Appellate Authority, namely, the Additional Labour Commissioner, constituted by the State Government under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972.2. The impugned orders have been challenged on a variety of grounds by the petitioner; but one ground, on which learned counsel mainly relied, is sufficient for the disposal of this group of cases. The contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner was that the factory, in which the contesting respondents were employed either as workmen or...
Tag this Judgment!Mahendra Singh Chaudhary and anr. Vs. Tej Ram Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-28-1986
Reported in: AIR1987All152
1. This first appeal from order has been filed by two of the defendants in a suit against an order dt. 11th April, 1986 passed by the III Addl. Civil Judge, Meerut, issuing a temporary injunction as prayed for by plaintiff-respondent 1.2. The case in a nutshell of plaintiff-respondent 1 was that he was a partner of a firm run under the name and style of M/s. Chaudhari and Company, 4 Civil Lines, Meerut. According to him the said firm existed prior to 31st Jan. 1984 with six partners under a partnership deed dt. 3rd April, 1982. The plaintiff was not a partner of that firm. His case further was that the old partnership was dissolved on 31st Jan. 1984. With effect from 1st Feb. 1984 the above firm was reconstituted whereby two old partners retired and six new partners including the plaintiff were included into the partnership. The case of the plaintiff-respondent further was that M/s. Chaudhari and Company had entered into a contract with the State Government for construction of a canal ...
Tag this Judgment!Trivikram NaraIn Singh and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-28-1986
Reported in: AIR1987All362
R.M. Sahai, J. 1. Worshippers of Hindu religion, eminent citizens of Varanasi having faith in Hinduism and Lord Shiva, Pujaris of Kashi Vishwanth temple and Shri AadiVisheshwar, the idol himself, approached this court, by separate petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution against take over of management of the temple by the State Government, first by Ordinances, replaced later by Act 29 of 1983, as ultra vires and invalid as it hurt not only their religious feelings and sentiments but of Hindus in general and was violative of contitutional guarantee of religion under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution. Although initially petitions were directed against Ordinances and it was claimed that they had been issued without any emergency or necessity as contemplated under Art 213, but after their replacement by Act, it became academic and petitioners were permitted to challenge provisions of Act, and amend the petition. As arguments proceeded, challenge founded on freedom to pra...
Tag this Judgment!Oudh Sugar Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-28-1986
Reported in: [1987]66STC274(All)
R.R. Misra, J.1. The present revision raises an interesting question with regard to the interpretation of provisions of Section 8(2A) of the Central Sales Tax Act read with the provisions of the U.P. Sales of Motor Spirit, Diesel Oil and Alcohol Taxation Act, 1939, hereinafter referred to as the Motor Spirit Act. Admittedly the assessee was manufacturer of alcohol. As regards the quantum, there is no dispute between the parties.2. The argument raised on behalf of the assessee is that since the assessee is a manufacturer of alcohol and the Motor Spirit Act attracts tax at the time of first purchase only there is no liability on the assessee to pay tax on the inter-State sale of alcohol. In this view of the matter for the purpose of Section 8(2A) of the Central Sales Tax Act the rate of tax under the Motor Spirit Act shall be nil and consequently there will be no liability under the Central Sales Tax Act also. The submission further proceeds to say that the Sales Tax Tribunal is in error...
Tag this Judgment!Ramsey Pharma Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Sant Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-27-1986
Reported in: [1987(54)FLR37]; (1993)IIILLJ577All
B.L. Yadav, J. 1. The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the award of the Labour Court, Allahabad made in adjudication Case No. 301 of 1972 published in the U.P. Gazette dated 1.6.74. Under Notification No. 1565 (HI) XXXVI-3-171 (SM)-72 dated 23.3.1974.2. Shorn of detail the facts of the case are these. The petitioner is a company registered under the Companies Act and carries on the business of manufacturing and selling Absorbent Cotton and Medicines. The works of the petitioner are situate in a portion of the building owned by M/s. Shri Baidya Nath Ayurved Bhavan Pvt. Ltd. The respondent No. 1 is a workman working in the petitioner's factory. On 18.11.1971 at the time of making a search at the main gate, the workman was suspected carrying some 'Dardona' tablets packed in a cellophane packet and the same was kept in a towel concealed in the under wear. He was stopped at the gate for search and was taken inside the room of the Security O...
Tag this Judgment!Phoolson Foundry Works Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-27-1986
Reported in: 1987(12)ECC332; 1987(27)ELT612(All)
ORDERK.J. Shetty, C.J. 1. The petitioner's appeal is pending before the Customs, Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal, the respondent No. 3. During the pendency of the appeal, a recovery certificate has been issued for the realisation of the disputed amount. The Collector of Central Excise, Meerut, respondent No. 2, has made attachment of the petitioner's goods worth Rs. 3,00,000/- which is more than the amount due against the petitioner.2. We also find that the Tribunal, at the request of the petitioner for stay, has disputed with pre-deposit of penalty and duty and did not, however, grant stay since the petitioner could not furnish bank guarantee.3. Petitioner's grievance is that the goods attached by the Collector may not be sold till the appeal is pending before the Tribunal and the Tribunal should decide the appeal expeditiously.4. Since the value of the attached goods is more than the amount due, we think it proper that the sale of attached goods shall not take place during...
Tag this Judgment!Kunwar Girwar Singh Vs. Wealth-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-24-1986
Reported in: (1987)20ITD587(All.)
1. This appeal is directed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 26-4-1984, whereby the assessment made by the WTO was set aside with the direction to make a fresh assessment, after invoking the provisions of Section 19 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ('the Act').2. The facts of the case lie in a short compass. Kunwar Girwar Singh, who is now dead, was a resident of Sadar Bazar, Mathura. He had expired on 4-5-1971. Prior to his death, the WTO had issued him a notice under Section 14(2) of the Act and the same was sent by registered post. That notice was returned undelivered by the postal authorities with the endorsement 'refused'. No return of wealth was filed by Shri Girwar Singh and as such, the WTO had completed the assessment under Section 16(5) of the Act. Subsequently that assessment was set aside and the fresh assessment under Section 16(5) was made describing the assessee as Kunwar Girwar Singh through Administrator General, Uttar Pradesh. It appears that at the in...
Tag this Judgment!State of U.P. Vs. Ram Dhani Pande Alias Dharni Dhar Pandey
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-24-1986
Reported in: 1987CriLJ933
ORDERO.P. Mehrotra, J.1. This is a government appeal against an order dt. 29-5-1974 passed by Shri D. N. Shukla llnd Additional Sessions Judge, Mirzapur convicting respondent Ramdhani Pandey alias Dharnidhar Pandey for the offence Under Section 471, I.P.C. and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months. However, as he had already been in custody for a longer period than three months, it was ordered that he will not be taken into custody for the purpose of serving out the sentence imposed on him,2. Besides Section 471, I.P.C, the respondent was also charged and prosecuted for the offences Under Sections 419, 420, 466, 467 and 468 I.P.C. The learned Sessions Judge, however, found that the said charges had not been proved and, accordingly, acquitted him of the said charges. This government appeal is directed against the acquittal of the respondent for the aforesaid offences in respect of which he was acquitted by the lower court.3. The occurrence relates ...
Tag this Judgment!Rati Lal J. Jani Vs. Assistant Controller of Estate
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-23-1986
Reported in: (1989)28ITD409(All.)
2. Shri Jaya Shanker D. Jani had expired on 30th December, 1979. The return of estate duty was filed by his legal representative, who is the appellant before us. The estate of the deceased includes a residential house situated at Morvi, in the State of Gujarat. Its value was determined at Rs. 47,000. The A.P. had claimed exemption in respect of that house under Section 33(l)(n) of the Estate Duty Act. The exemption claimed was denied by the Asstt. Controller of Estate Duty on the ground that the deceased was not residing at Morvi, but he was residing at Kanpur. The A.P. went up in appeal before the Appellate Controller of Estate Duty but remained unsuccessful. As such, he has come up in appeal before us.3. Shri K. K. Dixit, the learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the deceased was a native of Gujarat State and had shifted to Kanpur, that at Kanpur, he was residing in a rented accommodation and he was maintaining the residential house at Morvi for his exclusive residenc...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »