Allahabad Court March 1987 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.
Waqf Haji Sheikh Karim Bux Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-11-1987
Reported in: (1987)63CTR(All)350; [1987]32TAXMAN133(All)
R.K. Gulati, J. 1. The present reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), arises out of the assessment of net wealth of the applicant, Haji Sheikh Karim Bux Trust (hereinafter referred to as 'the waqf'). The statement of the case relates to the assessment year 1973-74. The corresponding valuation date is March 31, 1973. Two questions of law have been referred by the Tribunal for the opinion of this court. These questions are as under : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, a mutawalli can be treated as a trustee in a valid deed of waqf and can be assessed to tax under Section 21 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that the shares of the mutawallis were indeterminate and, therefore, they were assessable in terms of Clause (iv) of Sub-section (1) of Section 21 of the Wealth-t...
Commissioner, Sales Tax Vs. Bhagwan Das Hari Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-11-1987
Reported in: [1988]69STC246(All)
R.R. Misra, J.1. This revision has been filed by the Commissioner . of Sales Tax, against the order dated 4th June, 1986 passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Varanasi, relating to the assessment year 1975-76. During the said year, the assessee carried on the business in jute goods, newar, etc. The goods dealt with by the assessee were purchased both within Uttar Pradesh and outside Uttar Pradesh. Originally, vide assessment order dated 16th August, 1979, the assessment was framed for the above assessment year by the Sales Tax Officer under Rule 41(7) of the U. P. Sales Tax Rules, hereinafter referred to as the Rules. Subsequently, proceedings under Section 21 of the U. P. Sales Tax Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act, were initiated against the assessee for the above assessment year on the ground that tax on coir matting has been assessed at a lower rate and proper tax payable on the same was as unclassified item. The assessee disputed both the initiation of the aforesaid proceedings ...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Pradeep Kumar Sanjeev Kumar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-10-1987
Reported in: [1987]67STC146(All)
Om Prakash, J.1. This is a revision for the assessment year 1978-79, by the Revenue against the Tribunal's order dated 14th March, 1986.2. The assessee deals in scrap and utensils. There is no dispute regarding the turnover of scrap. The facts are that a diary was seized at the time of survey dated 10th September, 1980. From the diary, it was discovered that the assessee made certain transactions of utensils relating to the assessment year 1978-79, the assessing officer drew the inference that the transactions related to purchases of utensils from outside the State, he therefore, initiated the proceedings under Section 21 of the U. P. Act, 1948 and brought such purchases of utensils treating them as purchases from outside the State to tax.3. The assessee's contention was that the purchases were made locally and not from outside the State. The assessee also furnished the addresses and the names of some sellers and only names of other sellers. No enquiry was conducted by the assessing of...
Phoolson Agricultural Industries Vs. Commissioner, Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-10-1987
Reported in: [1988]68STC32(All)
R.R. Misra, J.1. These two revisions filed by the assessee arise out of a consolidated order dated 24th September, 1986 passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Bench II, Meerut, in respect of the liability of the assessee to sales tax both under the U. P. Sales Tax Act as well as under the Central Sales Tax Act for the assessment years 1977-78 and 1978-79 in so far as liability under the U. P. Sales Tax Act is concerned and for the assessment year 1976-77 for liability under the Central Sales Tax Act.2. The assessee during the said years carried on the business of manufacture and sale of 'double plated rims' used in vehicles needed for agricultural purposes. The Sales Tax Officer held that the aforesaid 'double plated rims' are taxable as unclassified items and not as agricultural implements as claimed by the assessee. Aggrieved against the same, the assessee preferred appeals and the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) allowed the appeals of the assessee for both the years in respect of the l...
Radha Kishan Ram Saran Vs. Beni Ram Fakir Chand and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-06-1987
Reported in: AIR1988All5
ORDERB.N. Sapru, J.1. This is a revision under section 75(1) of the Provincial Insolvency Act.2. The applicant filed an insolvencypetition in the court of Insolvency Judge foradjudging the respondents as insolvents onthe ground that the respondents did not pay asum of Rs. 48,522/- which became due andalso had committed various acts of insolvencyincluding, making fictitious entries in theiraccount. 3. The petition was presented on 28-7-1986 before notice could be issued on the petition, the respondents put in appearance and opposed the application for appointment of interim receiver. The said application was rejected on 12-8-1986 by the Insolvency Judge with the consent of the parties. The respondents also deposited in court fixed deposit receipts of Rs. 50,000/- in order to show that they possessed sufficient assets and money to pay off the debt of the applicant and did not commit any act of insolvency.4. Thereafter, an application was presented by the respondents, being application No...
Commissioner, Sales Tax Vs. Ram Chandra Ram Sheo Shankar Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-06-1987
Reported in: [1987]67STC261(All)
Om Prakash, J.1. This is a revision for the assessment year 1977-78, against the Tribunal's order dated 10th August, 1982, by the Revenue.2. None has appeared on behalf of the dealer and, therefore, I have heard only learned Standing Counsel. Undisputedly, the foodgrain was declared commodity under Section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act. As the sales were effected to unregistered dealers, the department sought to impose tax under Section 3-D(2) of the U. P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 (for short the Act, 1948). Before the Tribunal, it was contended on behalf of the dealer that the assessee had made purchases without form 3-Ka from the arhtias and, therefore, the inference could be drawn that the tax was paid by the selling dealer as the tax was on the point of sale to consumer. The submission of the learned Standing Counsel is that the declared goods cannot be subjected to tax at a second stage and unless there is a categorical finding of the Tribunal that the goods already suffered tax befor...
Umrao Lal Sheo Ratan Das Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-06-1987
Reported in: [1987]67STC362(All)
Om Prakash, J.1. This is a revision for the assessment year 1972-73 by the assessee against the Tribunal's order dated 8th July, 1985.2. The facts are that according to the assessing officer, the assessee failed to pay the admitted tax in time and therefore, interest amounting to Rs. 6,957.70 was imposed in the assessment order. The assessee filed appeal before the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) and before the Tribunal, but, failed at both the stages.3. Before the Tribunal, the assessee contended that an amount aggregating to Rs. 8,349.43 had become refundable to the assessee on account of the excess payment made over the years 1965-66 to 1971-72 and that if the amount refundable is adjusted first, then there would be no interest liability. The Tribunal rejected the contention of the assessee on the ground that no doeumentary evidence was shown by the assessee to support the contention that a sum of Rs. 8,349.43 became refundable prior to the date of the assessment and that if no re...
Commissioner, Sales Tax Vs. Luniyal Engineering Company
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-06-1987
Reported in: [1988]69STC275(All)
Om Prakash, J. 1. This is a revision for the assessment year 1972-73 by the Revenue against the Tribunal's order dated 14th March, 1986.2. None has appeared for the dealer and, therefore, I have heard only learned Standing Counsel. I have carefully gone through the order of the Tribunal. The question for consideration is whether the steel pipes, manufactured by the assessee, are declared goods within the meaning of Clause (iv) of Section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act as it stood prior to the amendment made by the Central Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1972. Prior to the amendment, Clause (iv) of Section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act stood as follows :(iv) Iron and steel, that is to say,-(a) pig iron and iron scrap;(b) iron plates sold in the same form in which they are directly produced by the rolling mill;(c) steel scrap, steel ingots, steel billets, steel bars and rods;(d) (i) steel plates, sold in the same form in (ii) steel sheets, which they are directly (iii) sheet bars and tin b...
Ashok Kumar Dixit Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-05-1987
Reported in: AIR1987All235
K.C. Agarwal, J.1. Out of the writ petitions challenging the validity of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (U.P. Act No. 7 of 1986) three cases, which were argued by Sri Jagdish Swarup, Sri Ravi Kiran Jain, and Sri Rakesh Dwivedi, are Writ Petition No. 4562 of 1986, Ashok Kumar Dixit v. State of U.P. Writ Petition No. 2545 of 1986, Hari Singh Thakur v. State of U.P., and Writ Petition No. 6096 of 1986 Bramha Din v. State of U.P. Apart from these Advocates, others who made their submissions before us were Sri A.N. Srivastava and Sri D.S. Misra. The remaining Advocates did not advance any argument in addition to what bad been argued challenging the validity of the Act by the Advocates aforesaid and they adopted the arguments made by them. We must record our appreciation for the valuable assistance received by the Court from the learned counsel on many issues arising in these cases.2. For the decision of the points urged, it is not necessary to mention t...
Dwarka Prasad Vs. Jwala Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-05-1987
Reported in: I(1987)ACC451
K.C. Agrawal, J.1. In an accident which took place on 7-2-1984 Rajendra Kumar alias Rajju, son of Dwarka Prasad died and the other person who was involved in the accident and received injuries was Bhagwan Das.2. Two claim petitions were filed before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal on 27-8-1984 by Dwarka Prasad on account of death of Rajendra Kumar alias Rajju claiming compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- and Rs. 60,000/- as compensation in respect of injuries received by Bhagwan Das. Both the petitions were barred by time by 20 days. The claimants also applied for condonation of delay but unfortunately the delay has not been condoned. The applications for condonation of delay were dismissed and the claim petitions were rejected as time barred. Hence these two connected appeals.3. We have heard the learned Counsel for the appellants as well as Sri V.P. Srivastava, counsel for respondents Nos. 1 and 2. Notice to respondent No. 3 was served by the appellant in respect of which an affidavit h...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »