Madhya Pradesh Court February 1982 Judgments
Satish Minocha Vs. Punjab National Bank and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-27-1982
Reported in: AIR1983MP42
ORDERB.C. Varma, J.1. The non-applicant No. 1 Punjab National Bank, Branch Bilaspur, obtained a money-decree against the principal debtor non-applicant No. 2 and applicant the guarantor. The non-applicant, Punjab National Bank advanced certain loan to the non-applicant No. 2 who in turn hypothecated his tempo with it. The applicant was the guarantor. The loan could not be paid. The non-applicant No. 1, the Bank, had to file a suit for recovery of that loan joining the applicant also as one of the defendants. That suit was decreed against both of them. The decree makes the applicant and the non-applicant No. 2 jointly and severally liable and also creates a charge upon the tempo. The relevant term of the decree is as follows:'Ordered and decreed that the defendants - iq:'kkskejko vkSj 2- lrh'k feukspkdo pay to the plaintiff iatko us'kyu cSad] lnj cktkj] fcykliwj the sum of Rs. 165319.90 paise with interest thereon at the rate of 11 per cent per annum from 5-7-76 to the date of realizati...
Tag this Judgment!Jalam Chand Mangilal (No. 1) Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-27-1982
Reported in: (1982)28CTR(MP)35; [1982]138ITR343(MP)
Shukla, J.1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore, stating the case and referring the following questions for our opinion :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in holding that there would be one assessment of the firm for the period, Diwali 1972 to 5-6-73 and 6-6-73 to Diwali 1973, in terms of Section 187 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in disallowing the interest paid to the account of Gokulchand representing his HUF funds and Shantilal, Kantilal and Gajendrakumar, representing their individual funds, as creditors to the firm in terms of Section 40(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, when the partners of the firm are in a different capacity ' 2. Assessee is a registered firm. Assessment year in question is 1974-75 for which the accounting year ended on Diwali 1973. The assessee file...
Tag this Judgment!Rajkumar Oil Mills (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-26-1982
Reported in: (1982)28CTR(MP)48
ORDERG. P. Singh, C.J. - This order shall also dispose of M.C.C. No. 334 of 1978.2. The question of law referred in M.C.C. No. 39 of 1978 are as follows :(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the rental income accruing to the assessee was income from house property taxable u/s 22 of the IT Act and not its business income ?(2) Whether the expenditure of Rs. 3,000 incurred by the assessee for the upkeep and maintenance of its plant and machinery was a revenue expenditure allowable under the IT Act ?The question of law referred in M.C.C. No. 334 of 1978 is as follows :Whether, in the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the rental income accruing to the assessee from its godowns was not its business income and the losses incurred in the earlier years could not be carried forward and set off in asst. yr. 1966-67 ?3. M.C.C. No. 39 of 1978 relates to the asst. yr. 1974-75 and M.C.C....
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Mandsaur Electric Supply Co. Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-25-1982
Reported in: [1983]140ITR677(MP)
Sohani, 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, has referred the following questions of law to this court for its opinion : (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the amount of compensation became payable to the assessee on the promulgation of the Indian Electricity (Madhya Pradesh) Amendment Ordinance, 1974, published in the M.P. Gazette (Extraordinary) dated March 2, 1974, and the provisions of the Gwalior Electricity Act, and the Indian Electricity Act, 1910, were not applicable to the assessee's case (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of-the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that there was no case for interference under Section 263 with the assessment order of the ITO (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law i...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Smt. Geeta Sanghi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-25-1982
Reported in: [1983]142ITR834(MP)
Sohani, 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 question of law to this court for its opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the sum of Rs. 28,000 on account of the hire charges on dumpers did not accrue to the assessee and, therefore, was not liable to inclusion in the total income of the assessee for the assessment year 1976-77 '2. The material facts giving rise to this reference briefly are as follows :The assessee is an individual. The assessee filed her return of income for the assessment year 1976-77. In the balance-sheet, under the head 'Current Liabilities', the assessee bad shown a sum of Rs. 28,000 as dumper hire suspense account. The contention of the assessee was that two dumpers had been let on hire from 1st November, 1974, to one Shri Aji...
Tag this Judgment!Umashanker and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-25-1982
Reported in: 1982CriLJ1186
G.P. Singh, C.J.1. This revision is directed against the order dated 19th December, 1981 of the Judicial Magistrate First Class. Jabalpur, by which he dismissed the applicants' application for bail.2. This revision first came up for hearing before a learned single Judge (Seth, J.) who by his order dated 11th February, 1982, referred it to a Division Bench.3. The facts briefly stated are that the applicants Umashanker, Ramchandra and Raju alias Rajendra were arrested by the police of Lordganj Police Station, Jabalpur, on 18th September, 1981, for offences Under Sections 364, 365 and 302 of the Penal Code which were registered against them in the said Police station. They were produced from time to time before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Jabalpur, and were remanded to judicial custody. The last remand was granted on 8th December. 1981, which was to expire on 22nd December, 1981. An application for bail under Proviso (a) to Section 167(2) of the Criminal P.C. 1973, was made on b...
Tag this Judgment!Vijayanta Travels and anr. Vs. R.P. Ghatnekar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-24-1982
Reported in: 1987(11)LC396(MP); 1984(16)ELT73(MP)
ORDERK.N. Shukla, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. Petitioner No. 2 Babu Singh is the owner of Bus No. MNP-3907 and holds an All India permit for running it on hire. The Bus plies between Indore & Bombay. Video Cassette Recorder and Colour Television are installed in this Bus. According to the petitioners this Video Cassette Recorder and Colour T.V. were imported by one Marukh Mohammed on 25-10-1980 and he had paid the requisite import duty at the Bombay Customs Office vide Baggage Receipt No. 334651 dated 25th October, 1980. This Marukh Mohammed transferred the imported Colour T.V. and Video Cassette Recorder to petitioner No. 2, Babu Singh and the same were fitted in the Bus. On 17-11-1981, Officers of the Central Excise Department, headed by the respondent No. 1, Superintendent Central Excise (Preventive) visited the office of the petitioner and seized the said T.V. and Video Cassette Recorder along with the Baggage Receipt and T.V. Licence i...
Tag this Judgment!Harris Wilson Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-23-1982
Reported in: AIR1982MP171
Sohani, J. 1. The order in this petition shall also govern the disposal ofMiscellaneous Petitions Nos. 570, 578, 579, 580, 581, 582, 583 and 588 all of 1981, as common questions of law and facts arise in these petitions.2. All these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India are directed against the notices issued by the District Excise Officer demanding payment of entertainment duty under the provisions of the Madhya Pradesh Entertainments Duty and Advertisement Tax Act, 1936 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').3. The petitioners carry on business of running a Video Games Parlour. In the said parlour, machines have been installed, which have to be operated for playing games of various types. Persons are allowed free entry to the games parlour and a person desirous of playing any game puts a coin in the slot, whereby a knob is released. Thereafter, to play a game and score points to entitle one to get a replay without further charges, the player has to operate the give...
Tag this Judgment!Anadi Prakashan Vs. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, A ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-1982
Reported in: (1982)29CTR(MP)323; [1983]144ITR79(MP)
G.P. Singh, C.J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 269H of the I.T. Act, 1961, against the order of the Tribunal dated 31st August, 1976.2. The facts briefly stated are that the appellant purchased a house situated at Bhopal on 13th February, 1973, by a registered sale deed. The consideration mentioned in the sale deed was Rs. 49,000. The Valuation Officer of the I.T. Department valued the property at Rs. 85,600. Proceedings were then taken by the IAC (Acquisition) and he ordered acquisition of the property by his order dated 27th May, 1976. The appellant filed an appeal to the Tribunal under Section 269G, which was dismissed.3. We have already stated that the apparent consideration mentioned in the sale deed was Rs. 49,000. The fair market value of the property as found by the Valuation Officer was Rs. 85,600. It was also admitted by the parties, i.e., the transferor and the transferee both, before the 3AC that Rs. 90,000 in fact was paid as consideration by the appellant for the pur...
Tag this Judgment!Anshiram Vs. Tax Recovery Commissioner and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-1982
Reported in: [1983]142ITR6(MP)
G.P. Singh, C.J. 1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner seeks quashing of the auction sale of his house held on 14th February, 1972, for recovery of arrears of income-tax. 2. The facts briefly stated are that recovery proceedings under Schedule II of the I.T. Act, 1961, were started gainst the petitioner on a recovery certificate issued by the ITO (Collection) to the TRO. This certificate related to the income-tax dues of the assessment years 1964-65, 1965-66, 1967-68 and 1968-69. The amount to be recovered under this certificate was Rs. 15,654, The clues for the year 1964-65 were Rs. 13,206 and the remaining amount was for the other years. The petitioner's house was attached some time in November, 1971. Proclamation was issued on 16th December, 1971, for sale to be held on 19th January, 1972. On this datethe TRO adjourned the sale to 14th February, 1972, on the ground that the highest bid offered was inadequate to cover the amount of arrears. A procl...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »