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.
Km. Indu Mehta Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-1987
Reported in: AIR1987All309
D.S. Sinha, J.1. Km. Indu Mehta, an Advocate practising at District Court, Kanpur, feeling aggrieved by the order dt. 21st May, 1985 endorsed to her by the Additional District Magistrate, Kanpur Dehat vide communication dated 28th May, 1985, consequential orders of District Magistrate, Kanpur Dehat dt. 7th June, 1985 and 3rd April, 1986, true copies whereof have been appended to her petition as Annexures' II, 'IV and 'V has approached this Court for redressal under Article 226 of the Constitution.2. The facts, in brief, giving rise to the controversy raised in the instant petition ate as follows : --The petitioner was initially appointed as a panel lawyer (Criminal) in the year 1978. Thereafter in May, 1980 she was appointed as Assistant District Government Counsel (Criminal) for the district of Kanpur Dehat and took over the charge of the said assignment on 16th June, 1980. In the year 1982 the post of Assistant District Government Counsel (Criminal), formerly held by one Sri Brij Moh...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Agency Hamdard Waqf Limited
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-1987
Reported in: (1987)63CTR(All)345; [1987]166ITR698(All); [1987]31TAXMAN495(All)
R.K. Gulati, J.1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act'), at the instance of the Revenue, to answer the following question of law :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there should have been two separate assessments for the two periods as claimed by the assessee or one consolidated assessment as framed by the Income-tax Officer?'2. The assessee is a registered firm. The assessment year in dispute is 1980-81 and the relevant previous year ended on December 31, 1979.3. Originally the assessee-firm consisted of five partners. During the course of the accounting year relevant to the assessment year under reference, Mahboob Alam, one of the partners of the firm, died on June 10, 1979, and Smt. Quamarunnisa retired from the firm. The remaining three partners along with Saghir Ahmad and Athar Hussain entered into a new partnership to carry on business from June 11, 1979. The assessee-firm filed two...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Meerut Construction Company
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-1987
Reported in: (1987)62CTR(All)170; [1987]166ITR702(All)
K.C. Agrawal, J.1. As directed by the High Court in I. T. A. No. 1106 of 1976, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally justified in holding that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was right in cancelling the penalty of Rs. 10,000 imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 '2. The assessee, M/s. Meerut Construction Company, Meerut, was a firm of contractors. A return was filed declaring Rs. 12,826 as its income. TheIncome-tax Officer raised the income to Rs. 27,500 which was reduced in appeal to Rs. 22,000. As the returned income fell short of the assessed income by more than 20%, a penalty notice dated September 21, 1971, under Section 274 read with Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act was issued. The Income-tax Officer held that the petitioner wilfully concealed the particulars of his income and, therefore, levied a penalty of Rs. 10,000 under Sect...
Controller of Estate Duty Vs. Krishna Kumari Devi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-03-1987
Reported in: (1987)66CTR(All)80; [1988]173ITR561(All); [1987]34TAXMAN179(All)
K.C. Agrawal, J. 1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following question has been referred to the High Court for its opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, only 27/60 share of the lineal descendants was includible in the principal value of the estate left by the deceased or 3/5ths of share as was included by the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty '2. In order to appreciate the background in which the aforesaid question had been raised, we may give the family pedigree and interest in the joint family property of the lineal descendants of the deceased, Bhakt Sajjan Krishna, who died on August 3, 1979, as follows:Pedigree Table given below: BhaktSajjan KrislmaSatya Mohan Agrawal- Pushpa AgrawalShaeel Mohan Agrawal-Uma RaniDharam Mohan-Sushma AgarwalAnupam (S)Priti (D)Rupam(S)Poonam(S)Pankaj(S)Piyus(S)Rectu(S)Gagan(S)Gaurav(S)Per Assistant Controller ofEstate DutyPer accountable person Bhakt Sajjan1/5Bhakt Sajjan *Krishna Kumari(W)1/51/5'Krishna (W)1/5Saty...
Swadeshi Cotton Mills Company Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-03-1987
Reported in: (1987)63CTR(All)335; [1988]171ITR634(All); [1987]32TAXMAN271(All)
K.J. Shetty, C.J.1. Swadeshi Cotton Mills Company Limited (' the Company ') is the petitioner in this writ petition. The company has got branches at Kanpur, Naini, Pondicherry, Maunath Bhanjan, Rai Bareilly and Udaipur. Its registered office is at Kanpur. Each branch has been maintaining separate books of account. In December, 1975, the business premises and registered office of the company were searched by the Income-tax Department under Section 132(1) of the Income-tax Act (for short 'the Act'). The authorities seized voluminous records and account books and removed them in five almirahs and two steel trunks.2. The Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, D-Range, Kanpur, examined the account books seized. He found that the accounts were of a complicated nature. Accordingly, he submitted a report to the Commissioner of Income-tax, Kanpur, seeking approval for special audit as required under Section 142(2A) of the Act. He had suggested in his report that the chartered accounta...
Commissioner, Sales Tax Vs. Habib SkIn Corporation
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-03-1987
Reported in: [1987]67STC257a(All)
Om Prakash, J.1. This is a revision by the Revenue for the assessment year 1975-76 against the Tribunal's order dated 30th June, 1986.2. The book version of the assessee was rejected on the ground that from the books seized on the date of survey, suppression in the turnover of Rs. 15,227 was detected on 3rd August, 1975. On the basis of this suppression, the assessing officer estimated the turnover of the entire year. Keeping in view the suppression on a single day, the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) estimated the turnover at Rs. 20,000 only. The Tribunal affirmed the order of the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial).3. From a perusal of the order of the Tribunal, it appears that no question of law arises therefrom. The question as to how the turnover is to be estimated on the basis of suppression of a single day, discovered at the time of survey, is essentially a finding of fact.4. The revision is, therefore, dismissed. No order as to costs....
Amar Nath Vs. Janardan Prasad Ojha
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-02-1987
Reported in: AIR1988All116
ORDERV.K. Mehrotra, J. 1. Shyani Deurawa Assembly constituency No. 193, in District Gorakhpur went to polls on Mar. 2,1985. After counting of votes on Mar. 6, 1985 Janardan Prasad Ojha, one of the 17 contesting candidates, who was declared elected by the Assistant Returning Officer, is said to have received 28135 valid votes. Amar Nath, who has challenged his election through the present Election Petition, was a close second having received 28013 votes. The difference of votes between him and Janardan Prasad Ojha, who is the first respondent in the petition, was thus of 122 votes. 2. The e lection petition was presented in this Court on April 11, 1985. In it, the ground of challenge is contained in para. 5. The ground put forward is that the result of the election, in so for as it contained Janardan Prasad Ojha, was materially affected by improper acceptance of invalid ballot papers as valid in favour of Ojha, by improper rejection of valid votes cast in favour of petitioner Amar Nath ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›