Madhya Pradesh Court September 1982 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Aich Kay Farm
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-30-1982
Reported in: [1983]141ITR928(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 question of law to this court for its opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessment order passed by the ITO on August 23, 1978, was barred by limitation ?'2. The material facts giving rise to this reference briefly are as follows:The assessee is a firm owning agricultural land. Prior to the assessment year 1973-74, no return of income in respect of its income was filed by the assessee. However, for the assessment year 1974-75, the assessee filed a voluntary return on 4th March, 1977, declaring net agricultural income of Rs. 1,23,830. The ITO, after scrutiny, came to the conclusion that the net agricultural income of the assessee could only be to the extent of Rs. 25,000 and he, therefore, completed the assessment on...
Tag this Judgment!Synpro Industries and anr. Vs. Collector of Central Excise and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-29-1982
Reported in: 1984(2)ECC347; 1987(11)LC147(MP); 1983(12)ELT203(MP)
ORDERG.G. Sohani, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. The material facts giving rise to this petition briefly are as follows :-Petitioner No. 2 is the Managing Director of petitioner No. 1, a Private Limited Company, registered under Indian Companies Act 1956, which carries on business of manufacture of paints, synthetics and allied products at Indore. Excise Duty is payable on the products manufactured by the petitioner Company, in accordance with the provisions of the Central Excises and Salt Act, J 944 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). In accordance with the provisions of Sub-rule (1) of Rule 173C of the Central Excise Rules (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') the petitioner Company filed a list showing the price of the goods manufactured by it. According to the petitioners, under a mistaken belief, they had showed price which included expenditure incurred in connection with sale and paid duty assessed on the goods accordingly. The pe...
Tag this Judgment!Mahakoshal Ceramics Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-27-1982
Reported in: [1983]143ITR969(MP)
Oza, J.1. This is a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to this court for answering the question :' Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that there was no mistake apparent on record in the order passed by the Tribunal dismissing the appeal as withdrawn '2. The facts as stated by the Appellate Tribunal are that the assessee is a firm and was granted registration in the assessment year 1969-70 but for the assessment year under appeal, i. e., 1971-72, the assessee filed a declaration in Form No. 12 seeking continuation of registration under Section 184(7) of the I.T. Act. This declaration was not filed within the prescribed time and an application explaining the reasons for the delay and seeking condonation was filed. The ITO refused to condone the delay and completed the assessment taking the status of the assessee as an unregistered firm. The assessee, in its appeal against the order of assessment, raised the ground of status as well. The AA...
Tag this Judgment!Jiyajeerao Cotton Mills Ltd. and anr. Vs. the Madhya Pradesh Electrici ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-1982
Reported in: AIR1983MP93
J.S. Verma, J.1. The petitioner No.1, Jiyajeerao Cotton Mills Ltd. is an existing company within the meaning of the Companies Act. 1956, and having its registered office at Birlanagar, Gwalior, in the State of Madhya Pradesh. Petitioner No. 2, Jai Narain Somani, is a shareholder of this company, The petitioner No. 1 (hereinafter called 'the Company') has a composite textile mill at Birlangar, Gwalior, wherein it manufactures yarn and textiles. For running its mill, the company requires electricity and had entered into a contract with respondent No. 1, M. P. Electricity Board (hereinafter called 'the Board') for supply of electricity to it in accordance with the specified terms and conditions. Under the agreement dated 27-10-1971, between the company and the Board, 1500 K.W. power as an H.T. consumer, wag to be supplied by the Board to the Company and the agreement was to commence from the date reckoned according to the stipulation therein. Supply of 1590 K.W. power under this agreement...
Tag this Judgment!Gwalior Rayon Silk Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-22-1982
Reported in: (1983)37CTR(MP)351; [1983]140ITR832(MP)
Sohani, J.1. This order shall govern the disposal of Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 262 of 1980 as both these references arise out of a common order.2. By these references 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 right in law in holding that the ITO, SC (TDS), Bhopal, had jurisdiction over the assessee-company under Section 201 of the I.T. Act, 1961 ?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITO, SC (TDS), Bhopal, had the powers to adjudicate and determine the correctness of the estimated chargeable income of each employee for whom the return was filed under Section 206 of the Act ?(3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the order of the ITO, SC(TDS), Bhop...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Bharat Stores
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-22-1982
Reported in: [1983]53STC100(MP)
K.N. Shukla, J.1. This is a reference by the Board of Revenue, Madhya Pradesh, under Section 44(1) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, for our opinion on the following questions of law :(1) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, G.I. pipes, hose pipes and rubber pipes are taxable ?(2) Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that reopening under Section 19(1) was not warranted ?2. Brief facts, as stated by the Board of Revenue, are as follows : The assessee deals in hardware goods, including G.I. pipes, hose and rubber pipes. For the accounting years 1965-66 and 1966-67 pipes and pipe fittings were assessed to tax at 7 per cent under entry 1, Part VI, of Schedule II, appended to the M.P. General Sales Tax Act. The assessing authority had noted that these pipes did not fall under the category of sanitary pipes and pipe fittings.3. The case was reopened by the assessing authority under Section 19(1) of the Act on the ground that the sale had been under-assesse...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Hirji Bharmal.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-16-1982
Reported in: (1983)34CTR(MP)312
ORDERINDORE BENCHShukla, J. - This is an application by the CIT, Bhopal u/s 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961, seeking a direction from this court to the Appellate Tribunal, Indore to refer the following questions for decision of this court :(1) Whether, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the CIT (A)s order deleting the addition of Rs. 1,17,505 on the ground that the tax effect in the subsequent years after set off of enhanced value of closing stock of this year would off set the tax liability of this year on account of revaluation of stocks ?(2) Whether, the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the CIT (A)s order deleting the addition of Rs. 1,17,505 made by the ITO to the disclosed profits for under-valuation of closing stock of cotton especially when it (the Tribunal) observed that the matter required further probe and revaluation of the closing stock after ascertaining its correct market value ?2. Assessee, a partnership firm, filed its return for asst. yr. 1974-75. The assessee de...
Tag this Judgment!Omprakash Premchand and Company Vs. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-14-1982
Reported in: [1984]147ITR46(MP)
1. Shri G. M. Chaphekar, heard on admission. The petitioner is a partnership firm and is assessed to income-tax.2. For the assessment year 1979-80, the petitioner had returned an income of Rs. 4,37,049. The ITO, acting under Section 144B of the I.T. Act, 1961 ('the Act'), passed a draft assessment order determining the income of the petitioner at Rs. 5,25,020. Since, according to the ITO, the variation in the income returned and proposed in the draft order exceeded Rs. 1,00,000, he referred the case to the IAC along with the assessee's objections. Notice of hearing was issued by the IAC to the petitioner, who raised an objection about his jurisdiction on the ground that the variation between the returned and proposed incomes did not exceed Rs. 1,00,000.3. In the meantime, the ITO after notice to the petitioner, rectified the earlier order on June 29, 1982 (vide annex. I). In the rectification order the ITO noted that there was a typographical error in mentioning the amount, which shoul...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Smt. Sharda Devi Mittal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-14-1982
Reported in: [1984]146ITR510(MP)
Shukla, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore, has referred the following question for our opinion in pursuance of the direction of this court in that behalf:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that even if the provisions of Section 5(1)(viii) as amended by the Finance Act No, 2 of 1971, are retrospective in operation, the inclusion of value of gold ornaments and jewellery could not be made by invoking the provisions of Section 35 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ?'Facts as stated by the Tribunal are as follows : The assessee in her return of wealth for assessment year 1968-69 claimed that jewellery and ornaments valued at Rs. 89,201 were exempt under Section 5 of the W.T. Act. The WTO rejected this submission and added the value of jewellery and ornaments in the net wealth of the assessee. In appeal before the AAC the point was reiterated by the assessee and exemption was claimed under Section 5(1)(viii) of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Kekatpure Ginning and Pressing Factory
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-13-1982
Reported in: (1982)31CTR(MP)287; [1984]145ITR813(MP)
Oza, Actg. C.J.1. This is a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jabalpur, for answering the following question :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that an appeal before the AAC was maintainable against the WTO's penalty order under Section 18(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, irrespective of the fact that the Commissioner of Wealth-tax had dismissed the petition filed by the assessee for waiver or reduction of penalty under Section 18(2A) of the Wealth-tax Act?'2. Facts stated in this reference are that the assessee had submitted returns for the years 1964-65 to 1971-72, on March 27, 1973, and had also submitted a petition to the Commissioner, Wealth-tax, for waiver of the penalty. The WTO imposed penalty with regard to the assessment for delay in filing the returns and the Commissioner rejected the application filed by the assessee under Section 18(2A) of the Act for waiver of the penalty. The ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »