Allahabad Court September 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.
indo Lube Refineries Vs. Sales Tax Officer
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-23-1986
Reported in: [1987]66STC145(All)
K.C. Agarwal, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been filed by Indo Lube Refineries, G-21, Industrial Area, Gorakhpur, for quashing the notice issued by the Sales Tax Officer, Sector I, Gorakhpur, for passing assessment order for the year 1981-82 and for prohibition restraining the Sales Tax Officer from making assessment in respect of the years 1981-82, 1982-83 and 1983-84.2. For deciding the controversy involved in this petition, since it is not necessary for us to express our opinion on the merits, we confine ourselves to the facts notes for discussion to decide about the interpretation of Section 35 of the Sales Tax Act.3. The petitioner is a registered dealer under the U.P. Sales Tax Act, having been granted a provisional registration under Section 8-B of the Act with effect from 20th June, 1981. It was also granted a recognition certificate as a manufacturer to make purchases of raw materials. For the assessment year 1981-82, the petitioner filed return....
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Radha Swami Satsang.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-19-1986
Reported in: (1987)57CTR(All)298; [1987]167ITR121(All)
This is an application under section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for the following reliefs :'The respondent-applicant most respectfully prays that this Honble Court be pleased to :(a) Clarify and/or rectify and/or modify the judgment dated July 7, 1980, to the effect as set out in paragraphs 4, 5, 6, 7 and 11 hereinabove and give effect to the same by appropriately correcting the judgment referred to hereinabove; and(b) Pass such further and other orders as the nature and circumstances of the case may require.'The facts of this case have been mentioned in the judgment [See : [1981]132ITR647(All) of Income-tax Reference `No. 948 of 1975 in which this application has been made. The question referred before the High Court was :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that the income derived by the Radha Swami Satsang, a religious institution, is entitled to exemption under sections 11 and 12 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'The ...
Bishwanath Prasad and Sons Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-18-1986
Reported in: [1987]163ITR715(All)
1. Having heard, counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the following question is a question of law arising out of the order of the Tribunal :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in dismissing the application under Section 254(2) of the Act on the ground that it was virtually a review application ?'2. The Income tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad, is accordingly directed to draw up a statement of the case and refer the aforesaid question of law to this court for its opinion.3. The applicant shall be entitled to costs assessed at Rs. 125....
Sharma Trolly Manufacturers Vs. Customs, Central Excise and Gold (Cont ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-15-1986
Reported in: 1987(14)ECC63; 1987(13)LC427(Allahabad); 1987(30)ELT317(All)
1. An order was passed by the Collector Central Excise, Kanpur against the petitioner on 19th February, 1979. It preferred an appeal before the Central Board of Excise and Customs, New Delhi on 18th April, 1979. The appeal was dismissed on 31st December, 1979. Thereafter, the petitioner filed the revision under Section 36 of the Customs and Excise Act. After the revision had been filed by the petitioner, the Central Excise Act was amended. By this amendment, Section 35G was inserted under which the Tribunal could send a reference to the High Court if it was satisfied that the case involved question of law. Before the Tribunal, the petitioner raised a number of grounds which are enumerated in paragraph 10 of the writ petition. The application was rejected on 4th April, 1986. Thereafter, instead of filing an application under Sub-section (3) of Section 35G of the Central Excise and Salt Act, the petitioner filed the present writ petition and obtained a stay order. The petitioner's counse...
Commissioner, Sales Tax Vs. Puri Sons
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-15-1986
Reported in: [1987]67STC460(All)
A.P. Misra, J.1. The present revision is directed as against the order passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Bench I dated 3rd September, 1986.2. The opposite party carries on business in kirana goods. For the assessment year 1976-77 his book of account was accepted. The assessing authority disallowed certain exemption and fixed net turnover at Rs. 1,14,876 as against the disclosed turnover of Rs. 9,702. The dealer filed appeal which was also dismissed. The second appellate court allowed the exemption on the turnover of Rs. 66,600 on the ground that the dealer had made purchase in the course of import from Nepal and the same were accordingly exempted under Section 6(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act.3. It was urged on behalf of the department that the exemption granted by the Tribunal was unwarranted as the dealer did not file any evidence either before the assessing authority or before the first appellate court and thus the granting of exemption on the basis of copies of assessment order da...
Satya Pal Singh Brick Field Vs. Commissioner, Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-12-1986
Reported in: [1987]65STC23(All)
A.P. Misra, J.1. The present revision arises out of the proceeding under Section 15-A(1)(c) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act. The assessing authority imposed a penalty of Rs. 8,000 for the assessment year 1982-83.2. In appeal filed by the assessee, the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial), Sales Tax, allowed the appeal in part and reduced the amount of penalty to Rs. 1,000. Aggrieved, both the applicant and the department preferred second appeals before the Sales Tax Tribunal. The Tribunal by means of its order dated 10th October, 1985, dismissed the appeal filed by the applicant and allowed the appeal filed by the department. By virtue of the said order, the Tribunal restored the penalty as fixed by the assessing authority. The present revision is confined to the later part of the case by virtue of which the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the department. It is significant to mention here that the present proceeding was initiated on account of concealment detected when the (S.I.B.) seized the ac...
Dharmatma Saran Kothiwal Vs. Assistant Controller of Estate Duty
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-10-1986
Reported in: (1987)63CTR(All)248; [1988]172ITR122(All)
K.C. Agrawal, J.1. Sahu Shiva Shakti Saran Kothiwal, father of the petitioner and respondent No. 2 died on June 5, 1975. The petitioner filed the estate duty return on June 3, 1977. In between the death and the filing of the return, the petitioner has alleged that he had applied to the Assistant Controller, Lucknow, to supply to the petitioner an Estate Duty Return Form D.E.I, which was done on May 6, 1976.2. On receipt of the estate duty return, the Assistant Controller, Luck-now, respondent No. 1, made a provisional assessment under Section 57 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 ('the Act'), and created a demand of Rs. 2,12,872. The petitioner filed an objection dated June 21, 1977, against the provisional assessment showing various mistakes that had crept in it. The Assistant Controller completed the regular assessment under Section 58 of the Act on March 14, 1981. The petitioner again found certain mistakes in the final assessment order and, therefore, an application purporting to be unde...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Sriram Pistons and Rings
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-10-1986
Reported in: 1986(10)ECC279; 1992(61)ELT559(All)
ORDER1. Having heard counsel for the petitioner, we are of opinion that the following three grounds arise for decision by this Court :-1. Whether there has been miscarriage of justice vide Tribunal's said order inasmuch as while it has been held that the process carried out by the Appellant did not come within the scope of Rule 173H of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 inasmuch as it amounted to manufacture of the pistons in question, the Tribunal at the same time has held that the demand being beyond 6 months from the relevant date was barred by limitation ?2. Whether once contravention of Rule 173H is established then the period of limitation should be 5 years and not 6 months from the date of payment of duty? It is in view of the fact that under Rule 173H no time limit is fixed within which duty paid goods could be returned to the factory and within which such duty paid goods could be removed from the factory after reprocessing.3. Whether if the Tribunal's view is held to be correct th...
Chhotey Lal Gupta (Deceased by L.Rs.) Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-1986
Reported in: AIR1987All329
R.R. Misra, J. 1. This second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 14th April 1973 passed by the Second Additional District Judge, Allahabad. 2. The plaintiff Sri Chhotey Lal Gupta, who died during the pendency of this appeal and whose heirs and legal representatives have been brought on record, had filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 6450/- from the defendant Union of India on the allegations that the Union of India had invited tender for the supply of stone ballast through an advertisement which took place on 10th May, 1966. The plaintiff submitted his tender on 11th July 1966 and the said tender was to remain open up to 90 days. The plaintiff could not resile from the offer made in this tender within the aforesaid period of 90 days. The tender remained open till 9th Oct. 1966. By a letter dated 26th Sept 1966 the Divisional Superintendent, Lucknow, wrote to the plaintiff to provide basic labour amenities, qualified blaster and qualified manager as required under the...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Modi Pan Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-1986
Reported in: [1987]163ITR714(All)
1. Having heard, learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the following question is a question of law arising out of the appellate order of the Tribunal :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct both on facts and in law in holding that the sterling apartment and Pushpakunj flat at Bombay were not of the nature of guest house within the meaning of Section 37(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the expenditure in respect of them should be allowed as deduction ?'2. The application is accordingly allowed and the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench, New Delhi, is directed to draw up a statement of the case and refer the aforesaid question of law to this court for its opinion. There shall be no order as to costs....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »