Allahabad Court August 1986 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.
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. R.L. Virendra and Co.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-08-1986
Reported in: [1987]67STC434(All)
Anshuman Singh, J.1. This revision has been preferred by the Commissioner, Sales Tax, under Section 11(1) of the U. P. Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the judgment dated 13th September, 1985, passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Meerut, relating to assessment year 1967-68.2. Assessee carried on business in kerosene oil in the assessment year in question. Respondent-assessee's accounts were accepted under Rule 41(7) of the Rules. Subsequently on the basis of information received from the Indian Oil Corporation proceedings under Section 21 of the Act were initiated against the respondent-assessee and the Sales Tax Officer passed assessment order under Section 21 of the Act imposing tax liability of Rs. 14,192.64. In first appeal filed by the respondent-assessee the case was remanded by the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) for reassessment. The assessing authority after remand determined the tax liability at Rs. 14,192.64. again. First appeal filed by the responde...
Road Transport Corporation Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-07-1986
Reported in: [1987]66STC60(All)
N.D. Ojha, J.1. The petitioner carries on business of transporting goods from one State to another. On 18th July, 1986, at Srinagar Check Post certain goods loaded on the truck of the petitioner were seized on the ground that relevant documents had not been produced at the check post.2. The petitioner, thereupon, made a representation to the Assistant Commissioner, Sales Tax, Check Post, Jhansi Division, Jhansi, respondent No. 2, under Section 13-A(6) of the U. P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The petitioner sought permission to produce the relevant documents in regard to the consignment in question which could not be produced by the driver at the check post. The case of the petitioner was that these documents had by mistake been left by the driver at the Nagpur office of the petitioner and they had subsequently been received at the Kanpur office. The Assistant Commissioner refused to accept those documents and held that since those documents were not produc...
Lakhmir Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-07-1986
Reported in: 1987CriLJ421
ORDERV.K. Mehrotra, J.1. Indian Airlines Flight No. 251 was boarded by Lakhmir Singh son of Sri Mahan Singh on Aug. 25, 1985 at Kathmandu in Nepal. Little did he realise what lay in store for him. The flight was heading towards Delhi. It touched the, Babatpur Airport at Varanasi at about 12.30 in the day. Lakhmir Singh got out of the plane. He was called to counter No. 1 by the Customs Authorities and asked to give search. No contraband articles were recovered from the person of Lakhmir Singh nor from the two bags which he was carrying at that time. On enquiry, Lakhmir Singh declared that he had no other luggage and prayed that the formalities may be completed soon as he had to proceed to Delhi by the same flight. The Customs Authorities, however, took him back to the plane as they had been alerted through information given to them secretly that Lakhmh Singh was carrying some contraband goods which he was taking to Delhi for clandestine sale. They sought permission of the Engineer In-c...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. C. P. HandA.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-07-1986
Reported in: (1986)57CTR(All)236
R. R. Misra, J. - Aggrieved against the order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, the CIT has raised the following question in his application under s. 256(2) of the IT Act, praying for a direction to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to refer the following alleged to be a question of law for the opinion of this Court :'Whether the order of the Tribunal holding that the income of the assessee should be worked out by applying a net profit rate of 11.5% on gross receipts has not got vitiated for its failure to consider and duly appreciated the relevant facts on record ?'2. It has been urged by ld. counsel for the applicant that the finding of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal that it was a no accounts case is not correct. Firstly, the finding of the Tribunal in this behalf is essentially a finding of fact. Secondly, the question which is sought to be referred to this court is not a question that the aforesaid finding of the Tribunal perverse or arbitrary. In this view of the matter we find...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Modipan Limited.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-07-1986
Reported in: (1986)57CTR(All)300
N. D. Ojha, J. - The CIT, Delhi (Central)-1, New Delhi, has aggrieved by the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench D, Delhi, dismissing his application under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the Act, in regard to the assessment of the opposite party for the asst. yr. 1971-72, made this application under s. 256(2) of the Act with a prayer that the Tribunal may be directed to refer the twelve questions mentioned in the application to this Court for its opinion. Question No. 4 as stated in this application reads as under :'4. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the reopening of the case under s. 147(b) of the Act is not valid ?'Keeping in view the nature of the remaining eleven questions, it is apparent that only if it is held that question No. 4 is a question of law arising out of the appellate order of the Tribunal that the remaining question will need consideration. On the ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Premier Traders
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-1986
Reported in: (1987)63CTR(All)66; [1987]163ITR719(All)
N.D. Ojha, J.1. Aggrieved by the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, B-Bench, Allahabad, allowing an appeal filed by the assessee, opposite party, in regard to the assessment year 1975-76, the Commissioner of Income-tax, Allahabad, made an application under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), with a prayer that the following three questions may be referred to this court for its opinion :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that commission paid in India to HHEC and Banaras House Ltd. for securing orders is entitled for weighted deduction under Section 35B ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that a 'non-speaking' order is not 'erroneous'? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax ...
Mashooq and ors. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-1986
Reported in: 1987CriLJ462
ORDERO.P. Mehrotra, J.1. This appeal has been filed by Mashooq alias Baurey, Musaheb Ali alias Tunda, Imtiaz AH and Faiz Mohammad alias Lallu, all residents of Mohalla Babu Zai of Town Shahjahanpur against.the order dated 30-8-1977 passed by III Additional Sessions Judge, Shahjahanpur convicting all of them Under Sections 302/34 I.P.C., 307/34 1.P.C. and 324/34 1.P.C. for committing murder of Mohammad Shafi, for attempting to commit murder of Kallu and for causing knife and Gupti injuries to Niyaz Ali on 3-7-76 at 9.30 p.m. near the wood-stall on the road in Mohalla Babn Zai of town Shahjahanpur. For the offence Under Section 302/34 I.P.C. they were sentenced to undergo life imprisonment, while for the offences Under Sections 307/34 and 324/34 I.P.C. each of them was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and two years respectively. All the sentences were to run concurrently.2. Appellant Musaheb Ali is the brother-in-law (Sala) of appellant Faiz Mohammad alias Lallu,...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Rama Industries
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-05-1986
Reported in: [1987]67STC425(All)
Anshuman Singh, J.1. This revision under Section 11(1) of the U. P. Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) has been directed by the Commissioner of Sales Tax against the judgment dated 30th September, 1986, passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Ghaziabad, allowing the appeal of the assessee relating to assessment year 1972-73.2. The question raised on behalf of the Revenue in this revision is :Whether the transactions worth Rs. 2,26,000 disclosed by the assessee as branch transfers were inter-State sales and not branch transfers ?3. Assessee carried on the business of manufacture and sale of door fittings of aluminium and steel. It has its head office at Shahadra, Delhi, and its factory at 36, Government Industrial Estate, Loni, Ghaziabad. The present assessee feeling aggrieved against the order of the revising authority had come to this Court in revision being S.T.R. No. 444 of 1979 Rama Industries, Loni v. Commissioner of Sales Tax decided on 12th December, 1979. The said rev...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. U.P. Hotels
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-04-1986
Reported in: [1987]163ITR805(All)
N.D. Ojha, J.1. By means of this application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Commissioner of Income-tax, Allahabad, has made a prayer that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad, may be directed to refer the following three questions to this court for its opinion :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of, the Tribunal upholding the deletion of entertainment expenditure is vitiated as it has failed to appreciate the provisions of Section 37(2B) of the Act correctly ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of the Tribunal upholding the deletion of extra profit is correct when the Tribunal has ignored to consider that G. P. rate disclosed in the earlier year was better and that the proviso to Section 145(1) was applicable ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in upholding the relief allowed by the Commissioner of Inc...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Murti Devi Pradeep Kumar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-04-1986
Reported in: (1986)57CTR(All)237; [1987]163ITR803(All)
N.D. Ojha, J.1. In these six applications made by the Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the assessee is common and the six cases relate to the assessment years 1975-76, 1976-77, 1977-78, 1978-79, 1979-80 and 1980-81. In all these cases, the Income-tax Officer had allowed the relief of partial partition relying on a decision of this court in Daya Shanker Vijay Kumar v. CIT : [1980]124ITR691(All) . The Commissioner of Income-tax initiated proceedings for revising the aforesaid order under Section 263 of the Act on the ground that the Department had not accepted the decision of this court in the case of Daya Shanker Vijay Kumar : [1980]124ITR691(All) and had filed an appeal in the Supreme Court. The order of the Commissioner of Income-tax, however, was reversed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal on appeal. These applications have been made by the Commissioner of Income-tax with the prayer that the Tribunal may be required to refer the common qu...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »