Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1982MP14
ORDERH.G. Mishra, J. 1. This revision has been filed by the plaintiff against the order dated 31-3-1979, passed by the learned District Judge, Dewas, whereby he remanded the case to the trial Court for deciding the application for issuance of a temporary injunction, which was allowed by the trial Court by order dated 11-7-1978 and against which the appeal was preferred by the defendant-non-ap-plicants under Order 43, Rule 1 (r), C. P. C.2. Facts essential for decision of this revision are as under : In a suit brought by the plaintiff-applicant for declaration of title and issuance of a permanent injunction against the defendant-non-applicant he (the plaintiff) submitted an application for issuance of a temporary injunction, whereby issuance oE temporary injunction restraining the defen-dant-non-applicants from interfering with the possession of the plaintiff over the plot in dispute, was claimed. This application was opposed by the defendant-non-applicants-herein on the ground that ihe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : [1983]141ITR297(MP)
U.N. Bhachawat, J. 1. This is a reference tinder Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (for short hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') at the instance of the Department. 2. The material facts giving rise to the present reference are these : The relevant assessment year is 1973-74. The assessee is a registered firm and derives income from the adhatiya business. It had claimed messing expenses at Rs. 16,400 as an allowable expense. The claim was disallowed by the ITO on two grounds-- (i) that the expenditure was not proved ; and (ii) that the expenditure was in the nature of entertainment expenditure which could not be allowed in view of Section 37(2B) of the Act. 3. The assessee had also claimed bad debts amounting to Rs. 27,000. This deduction regarding the bad debts was claimed on the ground that the debtor, who owed the above sum to the assessee, had filed insolvency petition and was adjudicated as insolvent. The claim was disallowed by the ITO on the ground that no dividend was ye...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : [1983]143ITR325(MP)
U.N. Bhachawat, J.1. This is an application on behalf of the Department under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for framing the following question :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, therewas any material or evidence before the Appellate Tribunal to come tothe conclusion that 70% of the value of goods was covered by the loanadvanced by the bank itself and thereby reducing the addition of unexplained investment to 30% of the unaccounted for stocks of the value ofRs. 11,48,375?'2. After having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusing the order of the Tribunal, we are of the opinion that the proposed question of law does arise. We, therefore, frame the aforesaid question and direct the Tribunal to state the case, for answer, to this court. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : [1983]143ITR178(MP)
U.N. Bhachawat, J. 1. This is a reference under Section 27(1) of the W.T. Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), by the Tribunal at the instance of the Department for answer to the following questions by this court:'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the IAC had no jurisdiction when he imposed the penalty under Section 18(1)(c) in 1977 and that he ceased to exercise such jurisdiction with effect from 1st April, 1976 ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on the basis of the material available on record, the Tribunal was right in holding that there was no concealment of wealth and that no penalty under Section 18(1)(c) was attracted in this case ?' 2. The short facts material for answering the aforesaid questions arethese: 3. The relevant assessment year is 1974-75.4. The assessee returned his ' net wealth ' at Rs. 84,211. In his return the assessee showed a debit balanc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : [1982]133ITR48(MP)
Vijayvaegiya, J. 1. By this reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore Bench, Indore, has referred the following questions of law for the opinion of this court:'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the income received by the assessee from the hiring of the air-conditioning plant should be assessed under the head 'Business income' (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to claim development rebate in respect of the air-conditioning plant under Section 33 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. The facts giving rise to this reference as set out in the statement of the case are as follows: The assessee, an individual, derives income from house property, insurance commission and hire charges in respect of air-conditioning equipment. The assessment year involved is 1974-75 for which the accounting period is the financial year endi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : [1981]131ITR445(MP)
Sohani, J. 1. This order shall also govern the disposal of M.C.C. 14 of 1981. 2. M.C.C. No. 411 of 1976 is a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal referring the following questions of law to this court for its opinion : ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that,-- (a) the assessee paid the excess over the market price for the shares of the Empire Dyeing and . in order to acquire the controlling interest in the company and that such controlling interest was a 'property' Under Section 2(14) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (b) the controlling interest was not merely a side-effect of a block holding of shares and (c) hence the 'cost' for computing capital loss or capital gains was Rs. 76 per share and not Rs. 100 per share as claimed by the assessee ' 3. M.C.C. No. 14 of 1981 is a reference made at the instance of this court requiring the Tribunal to state the case and refer the following questions of law to this court...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1982CriLJ478; 1981MPLJ689
ORDERA.R. Navkar, J.1. This is an application Under Section 482 of the Criminal P. C. against the order dated 28-8-1979, passed by the Third Additional Sessions Judge, Gwalior, in Criminal Revision No, 49 of 1979, by which an order dated 22-2-1971, passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gwalior, in Criminal Case No. 401 of 1978 has been confirmed, in which the complaint of the petitioner was dismissed for want of necessary sanction Under Section 197, Cr. P. C.2. The complaint of the petitioner against the non-petitioner was that the non-petitioner has committed an offence of giving false evidence, fabricating false evidence, cheating, mischief and defamation which is punishable under Sees. 193, 418, 427 and 500 of the Penal Code. The offence was committed by the non-petitioner at the time when he was posted at Gwalior on the post of the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax and the petitioner was posted under him when he was suspended from the service. The petitioner was occupying t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : [1982]133ITR43(MP)
VIJAYVARGIYA, J. - By this reference under s. 256(1) of the I. T. Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay Bench has referred the following question of law for the opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the heirloom jewellery constituted personal effects within the meaning of section 2(14) of the income-tax Act, 1961, therfore, the sale thereof did not give rise to any taxable capital gain ?'The facts giving rise to this reference, as set out in the statement of the case, are as follows :The assessee is the ex-Ruler of the erstwhile Holkar State. The assessee was assessed as an individual and the assessment year involved is 1972-73, for which the previous year ended on March 31, 1972. During the accounting year relating to the assessment year in question, the assessee sold two items of heirloom jewellery for Rs. 13,80,001. The assessee claimed that the heirloom jewellery was exempted from t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1982MP158; 1981MPLJ575
ORDERM.D. Bhatt, J.1. This is a defendants' revision against the lower appellate Court's order affirming the trial Court's order granting temporary injunction in the plaintiffs-non-applicants' favour under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2, C.P.C.2. The plaintiffs-non-applicants, claiming themselves in possession of certain agricultural lands by virtue of a sale deed executed in favour of their grandfather by the present applicant-defendant No. 1 Ramdeen, had filed the suit for permanent injunction against Ramdeen and another. The application for temporary injunction had also been filed. The trial Court after considering the documents on record and so also the affidavits of both the sides, granted the temporary injunction. The defendants preferred an appeal but the same was dismissed. Hence, now, the present revision.3. Learned counsel for the applicants-defendants has urged before me that both the Courts below have not properly appreciated the fact that the possession regarding the lands in que...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : [1983]140ITR138(MP)
Vijayvargiya, J.1. By this reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore Bench, Indore, has referred the following questions of law for the opinion of this court:'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the Commissioner of Income-tax had the power to revise the order of the ITO on the particular issue in question as the same was not the subject-matter of decision by the AAC in the appeal filed by the assessee ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the CIT was competent to pass the order under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, even though the assessee's appeal against the order of the ITO was already disposed of by the AAC and the ITO's order stood merged with the AAC's order ? (3) Whether, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed...
Tag this Judgment!