Allahabad Court August 1992 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 Wealth-tax Vs. Mahmooda Ashraf and Arif Ashraf
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-31-1992
Reported in: [1993]201ITR750(All)
Om Prakash, J. 1. At the instance of the Revenue, two following common questions relating to the assessment year 1974-75 have been referred by the Appellate Tribunal to this court under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, for its opinion :' 1. Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that fabrication of leather boots be regarded as manufacturing or processing of goods within the meaning of Section 5(1)(xxxii) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ? 2. In case the answer to question No. 1 is in the affirmative, whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holdingthat M/s. H. Maula Buksh Sons and Co. was an industrial undertaking within the meaning of Section 5(1)(xxxii) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, even though the firm did not manufacture the leather boots itself ?' 3. The assessees in both the cases are partners in the firm, M/s. H. Maula Buksh Sons and Co., which claims to be engaged in the manufacture of leather boots. In short, the clai...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Onkar Nath Agarwal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-31-1992
Reported in: [1993]201ITR1061(All)
1. The following question has been referred to this court by the Appellate Tribunal at the instance of the Revenue under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in cancelling the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act ?' 2. The Central excise authorities conducted a raid on the business and residential premises of the assessee on March 28/29, 1970, and during the course of search allegedly recovered the following items : Value in Rs.1. Gold biscuits12,8402. Primary gold3,6003. New ornaments12,8004. Old ornaments3,500 32,7403. Of these items, items Nos. 3 and 4, admittedly, belonged to the assessee. So far as items Nos. 1 and 2 are concerned, the assessee, from the very beginning, denied having owned them and the assessee also denied the recovery of these items having been made from his premises. The Appellate Tribunal recorded a finding of fact that, in view of the a...
L.H. Sugar Factories Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-31-1992
Reported in: [1993]200ITR410(All)
1. At the instance of the assessee, the following question has been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the provisions of Section 37(2) were applicable to the expenses incurred for serving ordinary meals to the assessee company's customers and constituents?'2. In Phool Chand Gajanand v. CIT [1989] 177 ITR 265, a Full Bench of this court has held that any expenditure incurred by an assessee for the messing of its customers falls within the purview of the words 'expenditure in the nature of entertainment expenditure' within the meaning of Section 37(2A) and (2B) of the Act and the asscssee is, therefore, not entitled to claim the same as a deduction.3. Following the said authority, we find no infirmity in the order of the Appellate Tribunal which held that the provisions of Section 3...
Amar Nath Onkar Nath Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-31-1992
Reported in: [1993]200ITR452(All)
1. At the instance of the Revenue, the Income tax Appellate Tribunal has referred under Section 256(1) of the Income tax Act, 1961, the following question relating to the assessment year 1974-75 to this court for its opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a proper interpretation of Section 40(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the interest of Rs. 4,054 paid to Sri Amar Nath Agarwal and Rs. 4,075 paid to Sri Onkar Nath Agarwal on amounts brought in by them in their individual capacity was not an admissible deduction even though the partners of the assessee's firm were not these persons in their individual capacity but the Hindu undivided families of which they were karta ?'2. In CIT v. Nitro Phosphetic Fertilizer : [1988]174ITR269(All) , which completely answered the aforesaid question, the Full Bench held that where a karta of a Hindu undivided family was a partner in a representative capacity and mo...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Cawnpore Textiles Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-31-1992
Reported in: (1992)108CTR(All)53
BY THE COURTAt the instances of Revenue, the Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question, for the opinion of this Court :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is correct in holding that extra shift allowanced should be regulated with reference to the number of days the concern worked as whole and not the number of days each machinery worked ?'2. The Tribunal relying on the order of the Allahabad Bench B of the Appellate Tribunal in the case of J. K. Cotton Spinnining and Weaving Mills Co. Ltd. (I.T.A. No. 1539/Alld/1972-73) dt. 12th June, 1975, held that it was the number of days the concern worked as a whole which is to be taken into consideration for extra shift allowance and not the number of days each machinery has worked. To reinforce its view the Tribunal also adverted to Appendix 'I 5 and a Circular of the CBDT issued in this behalf and then concluded that the assessees claim is allowable for the extra shift allo...
Bhola Nath Dubey Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-28-1992
Reported in: (1994)IILLJ323All
M.L. Bhat, J.1. The State Government has refused to refer the dispute raised by the petitioner for adjudication by its order dated April 20, 1987. The said order is impugned in this writ petition.2. Facts relevant for the decision of this writ petition are briefly summarised.3. The petitioner claims that he was appointed as Accounts Clerk on the consolidated salary of Rs. 250/- per month, on April 5, 1965. The petitioner, after his appointment, was deputed to perform the duties of Stenographer and on October 1, 1965 he was confirmed on the post of Stenographer. One Mrs. I.P. Shepherd is said to have been promoted as Senior Stenographer in the year 1966. She was junior to the petitioner. In 1976 she was further promoted to the post of Secretary to General Manager. The petitioner's salary also was not fixed for which he was trying hard and without fixing the petitioner's salary he was ignored from consideration for higher post, in 1976. The stenographers working with the respondent No. 3...
Gaya Prasad Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-28-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ2425
Surya Prasad, J.1. This is a criminal appeal against the judgment and order dated 1st June, 1983 passed by the then learned V Additional Sessions Judge (Special Judge), Varanasi, in Criminal Case No. 3 of 1981 convicting the appellant under Section 161, I.P.C. and Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentencing him to two years Rigorous Imprisonment on each count.2. The prosecution case briefly stated is as under:The complainant Shyam Narain Singh is a resident of village Gaura Uperwar, police station Chaubeypur, district Varanasi. The consolidation proceedings were undertaken in the village of the complainant Shyam Narain Singh and his brother Dashrath Singh. Chaks were allotted to them in place of their old plot No. 302 during consolidation proceedings. The complainant moved an application to the consolidation authorities on 11th August, 1980 for making measurement of his chak. The accused-appellant Gaya Prasad was Lekhpal during that period of that village. He was di...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Hayat Singh Bhandari and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-1992
Reported in: 1993ACJ716
Palok Basu, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by United India Insurance Company Ltd. through its Branch Manager at Pithoragrah claiming that a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari be issued quashing the order dated 8.6.1992 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), allow the application dated 7.5.1992 moved by the petitioner and direct the said Tribunal to try all the fifty claim petitions together by issuing a writ of mandamus.2. It appears that bus No. USZ 9411 owned by one Hayat Singh Bhandari met with an accident. The said bus was insured with the petitioner insurance company. As a result of death or injuries- sustained by the passengers travelling in the bus, the following 50 claim petitions were filed by several respective claimants before the Tribunal:91/90, 83/90 to 89/90, 90/90, 92/90, 94/90,95/90,96/90, 98/90,99/90,100/90, 101/90, 102/90, 103/90, 104/90, 1/91, 2/91, 8/91, 14/91, 15/91, 16/91, 17/91, 21/91, ...
Shushil Kumar Pandey Vs. Director, Bal Vikas Seva Evam Pausht Ahar and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-26-1992
Reported in: (1998)IIILLJ141All
ORDERM.L. Bhat. J. 1. The petitioner's services have been terminated by an order dated June 16, 1990 and he has been asked to hand over charge by another order dated June 21, 1990. Both these orders are impugned in this writ petition. 2. The petitioner's case is that he was appointed as a Junior clerk on daily wage basis bythe respondent No. 3 vide an appointment letter dated August 1, 1989. The petitioner is said to have joined on August 3, 1989 and since then he had worked upto June 21, 1990. He contends that his work was satisfactory. He was not paid salary from December, 1989 till his services were terminated in June, 1990. He says that he hasworked for 240 days. He is said to have made a request to the respondents to regularise his services but instead of regularising his services, his services were terminated. The order of termination is challenged as being bad because no notice was given to him nor were the provisions of Section 25-F of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act complied ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Bhartiya Khatri Sewa Trust
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-25-1992
Reported in: [1994]205ITR96(All)
Om Prakash, J. 1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following question has been referred to this court by the Appellate Tribunal, relating to the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75, for its opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is correct in holding that the assessee-trust was a charitable trust for the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75 ?'2. The facts as gleaned from the order of the Appellate Tribunal are that a trust was created by a deed dated December 1, 1959, which was executed by Sri Damodar Das Khanna and Smt. Uma Shankar Mehrotra. Before the assessing authority, the assessee claimed that the objects of the trust were charitable in nature in entirety. One of the objects of the trustwas to spend money on the marriages of girls belonging to Khatri community. Taking exception to such object of the trust, the Income-tax Officer held that the trust was not charitable and, therefore, exemption for both the years ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »