Madhya Pradesh Court April 1970 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 Sales Tax Vs. Hindustan Steel Limited, Bhilai Steel Pr ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-28-1970
Reported in: 1971MPLJ54; [1971]27STC478(MP)
Bishambhar Dayal, C.J. 1. The judgment in this case shall also govern the disposal of the connected reference--Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 271 of 1968--made at the instance' of the assessee. Both these references are made under Section 44 of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958, and arise out of the same assessment.2. The assessee in these cases is M/s. Hindustan Steel Limited, Bhilai Steel Project, Bhilai (hereinafter referred to as 'the company'). While the said company were in the process of constructing their buildings and roads, etc., they employed contractors for the purpose of making constructions. Since the building materials were controlled, the contractors found it difficult to obtain them for the said construction work. The company, therefore, agreed to procure the materials themselves and supply the same to the contractors for building purposes. For these supplies they charged their cost price plus 10 per cent. for supervision and storage, etc. In the agreement C...
S.P. Srivastava Now Known as S. Prasanna Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-27-1970
Reported in: AIR1971MP20; (1972)ILLJ50MP; 1970MPLJ593
A.P. Sen, J. 1. This is a petition under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution filed by Shri S.P. Shrivastava, retired Tahsildar, for a writ of certiorarito quash an order of the State Government of Madhya Pradesh dated 6th November 1965, compulsorily retiring him from Government service, on invalid pension.2. The relevant facts, briefly stated, are as follows. The petitioner was in service of the Government as a Tahsildar. On 13th April 1960, he was involved in a bus accident and suffered a spinal injury. He had to remain on medical leave till 19th October 1961. Before resuming his duties, he was examined by the Divisional Medical Board, Jabalpur, on 13th September 1961 and certified fit to resume his duties in Government service. The Board, while certifying his fitness, however, recommended that he should be exempted from touring duties for a period of 6 months.While the petitioner was holding the office of Tahsildar, Pawai, the Commissioner, Rewa Division, wrote to the Government on...
Tikam Chand Lunia Vs. Rahim Khan Ishak Khan and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-22-1970
Reported in: AIR1971MP23; 1970MPLJ761
Bhargava, J.1. This judgment shall govern the disposal of First Appeal No. 33 of 1965 also which arises out of Civil Suit No. 1-A of 1962 filed by respondents 1, 2 and 3 against respondents 4, 5, 6 and 7 and the appellant Tikam Chand.2. The present appeal arises out of Civil Suit No. 2-A of 1962 filed by the appellant against the respondents. The appellant had purchased a house situated on plot No. 17/1, Jagdalpur town, from respondents 4 and 5 Gaffar Khan and Sahadat Khan on 15-4-1959 for Rs. 13000/-. The said house belonged to one Sardar Khan who was a Sunni Mahomedan. Sardar Khan admittedly died in the year 1933. At the time of his death, he left behind his three sons Ishak Khan, Gaffar Khan (defendant No, 4). Sahadat Khan (defendant No. 5) and his daughter Smt. Munir Bi (defendant No. 6). Ishak Khan died in the year 1953 leaving behind his two minor sons Rahim Khan (defendant No. 1) and Manjur Khan (defendant No. 2) and his widow Smt. Tazul Bi (defendant No. 3) as his heirs. It is ...
The Municipal Council, Raigarh Vs. Pahawa Trading Co., Raigarh and ors ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-21-1970
Reported in: AIR1971MP78; 1970MPLJ529
Singh, J. 1. This petition tinder Article 226 of the Constitution Involves the validity of imposition of octroi by the Municipal Council, Raigarh, the petitioner, on unhydrogenated oils at the rate of 75 paise per tin of four gallons. This imposition, which was in supersession of previously sanctioned rate, was sanctioned by the State Government under Notification No. 121-U-XVIII of 27th April, 1960. The notification which is exhibited as Annexure A-1 in so far as it is relevant reads as follows:'(Madhya Pradesh Gazette, dated 3 June 1960) Local Government (Urban) Department Bhopal, the 27th April 1960-Vaisakha 7, 1882 No. 121-U-XVIII -- In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-sections (5) and (7) of Section 67 of the Central Provinces and Berar Municipalities Act, 1922 (2 of 1922) and in supersession of the rules sanctioned under the Local Self-Government (Municipal) Department of the former Government of Madhya Pradesh Notification No. 893-226-M-XIII, dated the 22nd February 1951,...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Prakash General Stores
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-21-1970
Reported in: 1970MPLJ701; [1970]26STC539(MP)
Bishambhar Dayal, C.J.1. This is a reference under Section 44 of the Madhya Pradesh General 'Sales Tax Act, 1958. The first question has been referred at the instance of the department and is as follows :(1) Whether or not in an assessment under Section 18(4) a penalty under Section 43(1) of the Act could be imposed, treating the difference between the estimate made in best judgment and the amount disclosed by the assessee as the amount of concealed turnover, particularly when the assessment is related to suppression of purchases or sales ?The second question has been referred at the instance of the assessee and is as follows :(2) On the facts and circumstances of the case, whether the estimate of Rs. 1,00,000 was made on a reasonable basis 2. The assessee is a general merchant. He submitted a return showing a gross sale of Rs. 58,633 and 11 annas. The Sales Tax Officer got information that the gross sales returned by the assessee had been substantially minimised. A consignment of seve...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. New Bhopal Textile Limited
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-17-1970
Reported in: 1970MPLJ607; [1970]26STC306(MP)
ORDERShiv Dayal, J.1. This is a reference Under Section 44 of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter called the Act), at the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, M. P. The questions referred for our decision are:-(1) Whether hessian cloth is 'cloth' and is covered by entry No. 6 of Schedule I of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958? (2) Whether the penalty of Rs. 1,500 in the assessment under the State law and Rs. 500 in the assessment under the Central law for non-submission of returns was properly and legally imposed ?2. M/s. New Bhopal Textile Ltd., Bhopal (hereinafter referred to as the assessee) is a registered dealer engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of textiles. For the period 1st April, 1963, to 31st March, 1964, the gross turnover of the assessee was determined at Rs. 1,33,90,060.95 and the taxable turnover at Rs. 14,54,985.35. According to the assessment order of the Assistant Commissioner, Sales Tax, Bhopal, the total value of hessian...
Lalman Shivnath and anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-14-1970
Reported in: 1971CriLJ176; 1970MPLJ87
ORDERK.L. Pandey, J.1. Lalman and his brother Motilal were tried for murder in respect of the death of three person?, namely, Balmik, Mat, Kunki (who was living with Balmik as his wife) and their daughter Booti, They were also jointly tried for an attempt to commit murder of Munna, a son of Balmik and Mst. Kunki. They were convicted of murder of Balmik, Mst. Kunki and Booti and, for these offence3, each was sentenced Under Section 302 or Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code to a consecutive term of imprisonment for life. For the attack made on Munna, Lalman alone was convicted Under Section 323 of the Code and sentenced to a consecutive term of imprisonment for one year. Lalman and Motilal have filed this appeal against their conviction and the sentences awarded to them.2. The State Government have filed Criminal Revision No. 625 of 1967 for enhance. ' ment of the sentences awarded to Lalman and Motilal. This judgment shall, dispose of that revision also.3. The material f...
Bhaiyalal Girdharilal Shrivastava Vs. Tikaram Udaichand Jain
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-03-1970
Reported in: AIR1970MP237; 1970MPLJ622
Naik, J.1. The question which has been referred to the Full Bench for decision is whether the decisions of a Division Bench of this Court reported in Jagannath v. Harisingh, 1968 Jab LJ 566 = (AIR 1969 Madh Pra 56) and Poonamchand v. Ramprasad, 1968 Jab LJ 583 = (AIR 1969 Madh Pra 44) laid down the correct law. According to the aforesaid decisions, where a suit of a small cause nature is instituted and tried as a regular suit in contravention of the provisions of Section 16 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, the judgment so rendered In it is one which is without jurisdiction and nullity.2. The facts giving rise to the reference may shortly be stated as follows!The plaintiff-appellant Tikaram, on 6-5-1965, filed a civil suit in -the Court of Civil Judge, Class II, Narsimhapur, inter alia, for the recovery of Rs. 303.45 alleged to be due on account of the balance of unpaid consideration in respect of the sale of the plaintiff's Khasra No. 125, area 9.90 acres, situate in mouza Ram...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kamla Oil Mills
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-01-1970
Reported in: [1970]78ITR272(MP); 1970MPLJ559
Naik, J. 1. This is a reference under Sub-section (1) of Section 66 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Madhya Pradesh. 2. The assessee is an unregistered firm. Without being noticed under Section 22(2) of the Act, even though the. non-applicant was a regular assessee on the file of the department, the assessee filed a voluntary return for the assessment year 1955-56 showing a loss of Rs. 69,578. The Income-tax Officer, thereafter, issued to the assessee a notice under Section 23(2) of the Act, examined its accounts a number of times and passed an order inthe order sheet saying: 'The loss returned is out of time. The same is, therefore, filed.' 3. The assessee appealed to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, who allowed the appeal saying: 'The objection of the appellant is two-fold. Firstly, that the Income-tax Officer, having issued a notice under Section 23(2), had condoned the delay... I find ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›