Madhya Pradesh Court April 1968 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.
Miss Mamie Bhagwandas Ahuja Vs. Controller of Estate Duty. ([1968) 69 ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-16-1968
Reported in: [1968]70ITR439(MP)
DIXIT C.J. - This a reference under section 64(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 (hereinafter called the Act), at the instance of the accountable person, Miss Mamie Ahuja. The question, which the Appellate Tribunal (Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi), has referred to this court for decision, is :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the value of the shares amounting to Rs. 1,00,000 should have been deducted from the sum of Rs. 1,14,256 in computing the value of the estate under rule 11(3) of the Estate Duty (Controlled Companies) Rules, 1953 ?'The material facts are that Shri Bhagwandas Ahuja, father of the accountable person, Miss Mamie Ahuja, died on 6th January, 1954. The assets of the deceased consisted, amongst others, of ten shares in Motors (India) Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the company) of the face value of Rs. 10,000 each. The subscribed and paid up capital of the company, which was originally Rs. 1,50,000 divided into fifteen share of Rs. 10,...
Vimalchand Prakashchand Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-10-1968
Reported in: 1968MPLJ665; [1968]22STC22(MP)
P.V. Dixit, C.J.1. In this reference under Section 44 of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958, read with Section 9 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, at the instance of the assessee, M/s. Vimalchand Prakashchand, Sarafa, Ujjain, the questions propounded by the Sales Tax Tribunal for our decision are-(1) Whether in the facts and the circumstances of this case charges in respect of adat, dalali, bank commission, charity and insurance incurred by the assessee can be included in the sale price and be taxed at the hands of the assessee ?(2) Whether in the facts and the circumstances of the case an inference can be drawn that an implied contract existed for the sale of packing materials, i.e., bardana and iron hoops, along with pressed cotton bales and the estimated price of the bardana could be included in the taxable turnover of the assessee holding that there was a sale of bardana ?2. The assessee is a dealer in cotton. During the period from 1st April, 1959, to 31st October, 1...
National Traders (India) Vs. Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax and ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-08-1968
Reported in: 1968MPLJ688; [1968]22STC86(MP)
ORDERG.P. Singh, J.1. This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution is by a dealer and is directed against an order passed in revision by the Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax, Indore, by which he confirmed an order of assessment of sales tax for the year 1962-63 made by the Sales Tax Officer, Indore. In the assessment proceedings, the petitioner claimed deduction of a part of the turnover amounting to Rs. 2,97,033 which pertained to sales of chemicals such as alum, chlorine etc. to the Public Health Department. According to the petitioner these sales were sales of medicines to the department within Rule 24(ii) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Rules, 1959, and were duly certified. Rule 24(ii) permits deduction of turnover in respect of sales of 'medicines, instruments and other equipments' to certain hospitals and dispensaries, the Indian Red Cross Society and Public Health Department. By a proviso to the rule the deduction is allowable only when it is certifie...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Kapoor Dori Niwar and Co.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-08-1968
Reported in: 1968MPLJ625; [1968]22STC152(MP)
P.V. Dixit, C.J.1. This is a consolidated reference under Section 44(1) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958, at the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax. The question, which the Sales Tax Tribunal has referred for decision, is-Whether or not, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the sale of niwar by the assessee in this case, which is exempt from tax under the State law by virtue of Notification No. 738/3694/V-SR dated 1st April, 1959, under the State Act as the assessee is a registered dealer, is also exempt in the hands of the assessee under the Central Sales Tax Act 2. The assessee, M/s. Kapoor Dori Niwar & Co., Gwalior, is a registered dealer engaged in the manufacture and sale of niwar. In assessment proceedings of sales tax under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, (hereinafter referred to as the Act), for each of the periods, namely, from 1st April, 1959, to 31st August, 1959, from 1st September, 1959, to 18th August, 1960, and from 19th August, 1960, to 5...
Municipal Council, Pandhurna Vs. R.P. Dube and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-04-1968
Reported in: AIR1969MP1
Dixit, C.J.1. By this application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution the petitioner, Municipal Council, Pandhurna, seeks a writ of certiorari for quashing an order passed in appeal by the sub-divisional Officer, Sausar setting aside a notice issued by the Municipal Council to the respondent No. 2 Abdul Rashid Khan asking the said respondentto pay double octroi duty in respect of a motor bus belonging to him. 2. This petition first came up for hearing before a Division Bench. At the time of the hearing of the petition before the Division Bench, one of the points raised on behalf of the respondent Abdul Rashid Khan was that the Municipal Council hati no power to impose octroi tax on motor vehicles inasmuch as motor vehicles did not fall within the meaning of the word 'motors' as used in item No. 87 (Class VIII) of the Schedule to the Rules framed by the Municipal Council for imposition of octroi tax. The Division Bench made this reference to a larger Bench as in its opinion t...
Jagannath Bheraji Vs. Harisingh Kishanji and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-03-1968
Reported in: AIR1969MP56
P.V. Dixit, C.J. 1. This revision petition has come up before us on a reference made by Newaskar J., before whom it first came up for hearing. The question, which has been referred to us for decision, is-'Where a Civil Judge Second Class having only limited power to try Small Cause suits tries a suit of Small Cause nature on the regular side without objection as to his jurisdiction by the defendant, is the decision a nullity when the suit could have been tried as a Small Cause suit by another Court namely the Court of Additional District Judge?'The learned Single Judge thought it necessary to make this reference because of a conflict in the decisions of this Court in Mukund v. Firm Kashilal, CR No. 178 of 1965 D/- 29-9-1965 (MP) and Manakchand v. Rajmal, CR No. 377 of 1966 D/- 29-3-1967 (MP). In Mukund's case, CR No. 178 of 1965 D/- 29-9-1965 (MP) (Supra) one of us (Sen J.) expressed the view that 'if there exists a Court who has power to hear the suit under Small Cause Courts Act and ...
Piarelal Khuman Vs. Bhagwati Prasad Kanhayalal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-02-1968
Reported in: AIR1969MP35
Shrivastava, J.1. This judgment governs the disposal of twelve Letters Patent Appeals Nos. 8, 9, 11,12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 19, 20, 21 and 22 of 1963 which have all been filed against the order of Sheodayal, J. allowing the several appeals filed by the respondents.2. In order to appreciate the points raised in support of the appeals, it is necessary to state the facts in some detail. Chaturbhuj and Sewaram executed two simple mortgage deeds on 4-9-1924 and 30-6-1927 in favour of Pyarelal, Ramlal and Motilal mortgaging their proprietary rights in village Jerwans along with the homefarm (sir and khudkasht) lands. In the second mortgage bond, they had agreed to the condition that they would not lease out the homefarm lands. In spite of this agreement, they leased out the khudkasht lands to several persons. The mortgagors and mortgagees have been succeeded by their legal representatives but it is not necessary to give details. We shall refer to the mortgagees as creditors, the mortgagors as pr...
M.L. Jinesh Vs. the Union of India (Uoi), New Delhi Through the Secret ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-02-1968
Reported in: AIR1970MP82; 1969MPLJ657
A. P. Sen, J.1. The petitioner, M.L. Jinesh, an Assistant Superintendent in the Printing and Stationery Department of the Government of Madhya Pradesh, has filed this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution for an appropriate writ, direction or order, including writs of certiorari for quashing the Madhya Pradesh General Administration (Integration) Department Notification No. 1946-500-Integ., dated 26th May 1960 publishing the Final Gradation List of the establishment of Printing and Stationery Department, and Notification No. 9525-4817-VII-Estt-64 dated 8th September 1964, integrating Assistant Superintendents of Bhopal Region in an Isolated category, below in the list of Assistant Superintendents, for a writ of mandamus directing the Government to revise its list by equating him with other Assistant Superintendents drawn from other units and placing him at his appropriate place in the said list, keeping in view of the length of his service.2. The material facts are th...
Shyam Sunder Govindram Vs. Income-tax Officer, Raigarh Circle, Raigarh ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-02-1968
Reported in: [1969]71ITR333(MP)
SHRIVASTAVA J. - By this petition under article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner challenges the validity of the notice dated March 14, 1962, issued by the income-tax authorities under section 34(1)(a) of the India Income-tax Act, 1922, and prays for a writ of certiorari to quash the notice and for a writ of prohibition to restrain the respondents from taking any proceedings pursuant to that notice.The assessee was a partnership firm which carried n business in the Sarguja State. The firm was dissolved on July 25, 1947. It was assessed for the assessment year 1946-47 on December 30, 1947 (annexure 'B'). On March 26, 1952, a notice was issued to the assessee under section 34(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act for reassessment of escaped income as it was discovered that the firm had made a declaration of high denomination notes to the extent of Rs. 4,75,000 on January 23, 1946. The income was ultimately assessed to income-tax. The assessee went up in appeal before the Assistant Commission...
Madhya Pradesh State Industries Corporation Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of I ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-02-1968
Reported in: [1968]69ITR824(MP)
DIXIT C.J. - In this reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the assessee, the question which has been referred for decision is :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the sum of Rs. 20,856 received by way of interest by the assessee should be taxed under section 28 as business income or under section 56 as income from other sources ?'The material facts are that the assessee, the Madhya Pradesh State Industries Corporation Ltd., is a Government private limited company. It was incorporated on 11th April, 1961, for taking over and running certain concerns of the Government of Madhya Pradesh, namely, the Ratlam Power Alcohol Project, Spinning Mill, Sanawad, and the Cottonseed Solvent Extraction Project, Ujjain. The shares in the company are held by the Government of Madhya Pradesh, the Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board, and the Director of Industries, M.P. Government. During the period covered by the assessment year 1962-63, of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›