Madhya Pradesh Court April 1982 Judgments
Gwalior Rayon Mfg. (Wvg.) Co. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-30-1982
Reported in: 1982(10)ELT844(MP)
J.S. Verma, J.1. The Petitioner is an existing company, within the meaning of the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at Birlagram, Nagda, in this State. The Petitioner is engaged in the manufacture of staple fibre of which sulphuric acid is an essential ingriedient. It also manufactures sulphuric acid and uses or consumes the entire quantity in the manufacture of staple fibre without selling any part of it. The dispute in this petition relates to the excise duty payable on the sulphuric acid so manufactured by the petitioner and used or consumed in its entirety in the manufacture of staple fibre at Nagda during the period between 10-11-1976 and 31-10-1978.2. Prior to 10-11-1976, excise duty on sulphuric acid was levied and collected on the basis of tariff value fixed by the Central Government from time to time under Section 3 of the Central Excises and Salt Act 1944 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act'). However, with effect from 10-11-1976, excise duty on sulphuric acid b...
Tag this Judgment!Central Provinces Manganese Ore Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-28-1982
Reported in: [1983]54STC147(MP)
G.P. Singh, C.J.1. The questions of law referred in this reference under Section 44(1) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958, are as follows :(1) Whether, in the circumstances and on the facts of the case, the sales made by the assessee to the local buyers were inter-State sales as defined in Section 3(a) of the Central Act ?(2) Whether, in the circumstances and on the facts of the case, the sale in question occasioned the movement of goods in pursuance of the covenant or incident of the contract ?2. The relevant period of assessment is calendar year 1960. The sales with which we are concerned in this reference were made to M/s. Cambata Ferro Manganese Private Ltd., The Ferro Alloys Corporation Ltd. and Jaipur Sugar Co. Ltd. The buyers have their factories for manufacture of ferro-manganese at places outside the State of Madhya Pradesh. The contracts specifically provided that the buyers were buying the manganese ore from the assessee 'for the sole purpose of consumption in...
Tag this Judgment!Ramesh Chandra and ors. Vs. Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corpor ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-26-1982
Reported in: AIR1982MP165
G.P. Singh, C.J.1. This is an appeal under Section 110D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, against an award dated 16th Feb., 1970 by which the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Hoshangabad, has allowed Rs. 9,000 to the appellants as compensation in respect of a motor accident. The appellants seek enhancement of compensation.2. The accident which led to the claim for compensation made by the appellants took place on 17th Dec., 1976. In this accident, Vijai Kumar who was aged 19 years died. Appellant No. 7 Smt. Rewabai is the mother of the deceased. She, at the time of the accident, was aged 50 years. Appellants 1 to 6 are brothers and sister of the deceased. It may be mentioned at the outset that appellants 1 to 6 are neither the dependents mentioned in Section 1A of the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855, nor legal representatives under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. Appellant No. 7 alone who is a dependent under the Fatal Accidents Act and also a legal representative in accordance with Section 8...
Tag this Judgment!Shaw Leiner Limited and anr. Vs. Sales Tax Officer and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-21-1982
Reported in: [1982]51STC169(MP)
ORDERG.P. Singh, C.J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of Constitution, the petitioners seek quashing of the order of assessment dated 27th February, 1978, passed by the Sales Tax Officer, Circle I, Jabalpur, for the period from 1st January, 1969, to 31st December, 1969, under Section 19(1) of the M. P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958. The petitioners also challenge the order dated 7th December, 1979, passed by the Deputy Commissioner in revision upholding the order of assessment and the demand notice issued for recoSectionery of Rs. 9,282 as sales tax.2. The order of assessment which was passed on 2nd May, 1974, treated bone sinews, crushed bones, bone grists and bone-meal as powdered bones falling within entry No. 9 in Part I of Schedule II to the Act. The sales of these commodies were taxed at 2 per cent. In the reassessment proceedings, it was held that bone sinews do not fall within the description of powdered bones under entry No. 9 in Part I of Schedule II and that sales of bone...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax M. P. Vs. Badri Prasad Agarwal.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-21-1982
Reported in: (1983)29CTR(MP)341; [1983]142ITR353(MP)
G. P. SINGH C.J. - This is a reference made under s, 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, referring for our answer the following question of law :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, and on a proper interpretation of section 64 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the share of loss incurred by the wife of the assessee in the firm in which he is also a partner by the treated as the loss of the assessee and set-off allowed against his income ?'The facts briefly stated are that the assessee and his wife, Smt. Raj Kunwar Rai, are partners in a firm carrying on business in the name of M/s. Ganpat Pannalal, Harda. In the assessment year 1974-75, the assessee claimed that the loss incurred by the wife in relation to her share in the said partnership be deducted from the total income of the assessee. This claim of the assessee was not accepted by the ITO. The view of the ITO was confirmed by the AAc. The Tribunal, however, in further appeal following the decision of the Mysore High Cou...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Dhannamal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-17-1982
Reported in: (1982)29CTR(MP)340; [1984]148ITR141(MP)
G.P. Singh, C.J. 1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2. The questions of law referred by the Tribunal are as follows: '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in observing that as a result of partial partition in an HUF the share income from the firm constituted by the erstwhile members of the HUF will be the income of the HUF consisting of the karta and his wife and not the income of an individual (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in coming to the conclusion that the share income of the minors could not be included under Section 64 of the I.T. Act, 1961, in the case of Shri Dhannamal?' 3. The reference relates to the assessment years 1971-72 and 1973-74. On October 26, 1965, there was a partial partition of the HUF consisting of the assessee, Dhannamal, his two minor sons and wife in which equal shares were allott...
Tag this Judgment!Umashankar Mishra Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-17-1982
Reported in: (1982)29CTR(MP)71; [1982]136ITR330(MP)
Sohani, J. 1. By this reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as V the Act'), the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore Bench, Indore, has referred the following questions of law to thiscourt for its opinion : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in law, the Tribunal was right in holding that the show-cause notice issued under Section 271(1)(a), though unsigned, is a valid notice in the eye of law ? (2) Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the absence of signature on the notice simply constitutes a mistake or omission within the meaning of Section 292B of the Income-tax Act ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(a) is valid in law ?' 2. The material facts giving rise to this reference, as set out in the statement of the case, are as follows :3. The assessee is a partner of a firm carrying on business in the name and style of M/s. Umashankar Mishra. For the assessment year 1972-7...
Tag this Judgment!Lakhmi Chand Rathore Vs. the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Gwali ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-16-1982
Reported in: AIR1982MP156
Faizan Uddin, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner seeks the quashing of the order dated 16-12-1981 (Annexure 'D') passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal. Gwalior (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') cancelling the national permit granted to the petitioner by the Regional Transport Authority, Sagar.2. The facts giving rise to this petition are that by a letler dated 28-1-1977 of the Deputy Secretary, Government of Madhya Pradesh (Home Department), a quota of 7 public carrier national permits was allotted to Sagar region. Consequently, applications were invited by a notification dated 15-2-1977. After receipt of the applications, extracts thereof were published in the M. P. Rajpatra dated 6-5-1977 inviting objections, but no objections were received. The Government of India had issued guidelines for grant of national permits according tc which, 50% of the national permits were to be given to persons holding inter-statal permits, 25...
Tag this Judgment!Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Motisingh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-16-1982
Reported in: [1983]144ITR133(MP)
G.P. Singh, C.J.1. The questions of Jaw referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, on the direction of this court, are as follows :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that there was no gross or wilful neglect on the part of the assessee and that the Explanation to Section 271(1)(c) is not attracted ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in cancelling the penalty of Rs. 19,200 levied under Section 271(1)(c) by invoking the Explanation to Section 271(1)(c) ' 2. The reference arises out of penalty proceedings for the assessment year 1964-65. The assessee is an HUF doing the business in civil engineering contracts. The income was returned at Rs. 21,571. The income was assessed finally in appeal at Rs. 40,733. The assessee did not maintain any books of account. The IAC in penalty, proceedings held that the assessee had concealed the income within the meaning of the Ex...
Tag this Judgment!Jalam Chand Mangilal (No. 2) Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-16-1982
Reported in: (1983)33CTR(MP)29; [1982]138ITR347(MP)
Shukla, J.1. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore, has made this reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act stating the case and seeking our opinion on the following question : ' Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in terms of Section 40(b) of the Act, the Tribunal is correct in holding that the interest payment made to Gokulchand (HUF), Shantilal (IND), Kantilal (IND) and Gajendrakumar (IND) is disallowable, as it is made by the firm to the partner of the firm '2. Assessee is a partnership firm consisting of the following partners :-- 1. Shri Gokulchand (Individual). 2. Shri Shantilal (karta of his HUF). 3. Shri Kantilal (karta of his HUF). 4. Shri Gajendrakumar (karta of his HUF). 5. Shri Mansukhlal. 3. These partners contributed capital to the firm which was credited in their separate accounts. Besides, they advanced loans to the firms purporting to be in their individual capacities and credited separately. In this behalf they were paid interest in accountin...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »