Madhya Pradesh Court January 1984 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 Income Tax Vs. Parmanand Swaroopchand.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-13-1984
Reported in: (1985)46CTR(MP)72
ORDERG. L. Oza, C.J. - This is a reference made by the ITAT at the instance of the revenue for answering the question :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the order of the ITO under s. 184(7) is appealable and consequently in setting aside the AACs order and directing him to dispose of the case on merits ?'2. The facts stated in the order of reference are that the assessee filed its return of income on 2-1-1974 in the status of a registered firm. The assessees previous year ended on Diwali, 1971. Along with the return of income, Form No. 12 was also filed on 2-1-1974. The ITO held that Form No. 12 filed by the assessee was filed late. He, therefore, refused to give effect to the registration of the firm u/s. 184(7). On appeal, the AAC held that the appeal against the order of ITO under s. 184(7) was not maintainable. He, therefore, maintained the order passed by the ITO.3. The Appellate Tribunal, follo...
The State Vs. Harishankar Goyal and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-13-1984
Reported in: 1985CriLJ1714
ORDERN.K. Singh, J.1. This revision by the State is directed against the Order D/- 20-7-83, passed by Sessions Judge, Gwalior, discharging the respondents from the various offences alleged against them in a charge-sheet submitted by the Police.2. The sum and substance- of the allegations made against the respondents is, that they were 'Colonigers' and had established a Housing Colony, known as 'Friends Colony, Harishankar Puram' at village Mahalgaon, in the vicinity of Gwalior city, by diverting agricultural land to residential purpose, without obtaining requisite legal sanction therefor, and had divided this land into residential plots, which had been sold to the members of the Housing Society, which acts amounted to offences Under Sections 25, 26, 27, 28 and 29 of the M.P. Vinirdishta Bhrasta Acharan Nivaran Adhyadesh (Ordinance XV of 1980 hereinafter described as the 'Ordinance'), and Under Section 420 of the Penal Code.3. The learned Sessions Judge, Gwalior, under the impugned orde...
Suresh Kumar Vs. Pradeep Kumar and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-12-1984
Reported in: AIR1984MP155
Vijayvargiya, J.1. This order shall also dispose of the Misc. Appeal No. 199 of 1981 (M. P. State Road Transport Corporation and another v. Suresh Kumar and others), as both these appeals are directed against the award dated 9-5-81 passed by the 3rd Addl. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Indore in Claim case No. 210 of 1979.2. The facts giving rise to these appeals are as follows : Passenger Bus No. MPN 7311 is owned by Pradipkumar son of Tajkaran. On the date of incident it was being driven by the non-applicant Babulal son of Banshilal in the course of his employment with the non-applicant No. 1. It was insured with the non-applicant No. 3 the United India Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd.. Passenger Bus No. C.P.H. 8338 is owned by the non-applicant No. 4 M. P. State Road Transport Corporation and on the date of the incident it was being driven by the non-applicant No. 5 Patiram Sharma in the course of his employment with the non-applicant No. 4. The claimant was travelling in Bus N...
Suresh Kumar Vs. Pradeep Kumar and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-1984
Reported in: II(1984)ACC105
R.K. Vijayavargiya, J.1. This order shall also dispose of Misc. Appeal No. 199 of 1981 (M.P. State Road Transport Corporation and Anr. v. Suresh Kumar and Ors.) as both these appeals are directed against the award dated 9-5-1981 passed by the 3rd Addl. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Indore, in claim case No. 210 of 1979.2. The facts giving rise to these appeals are as follows: Passenger No. MPN 7311 is owned by Pradeep Kumar son of Tejkaran. On the date of incident it was being driven by the non-applicant Babulal son of Banshilal in the course of his employment with the non-applicant No. 1. It was insured with the non-applicant No. 3 the United India Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. Passenger bus No. CPH 8338 is owned by the non-applicant No. 4 M. P. State Road Transport Corporation and on the date of the incident it was being driven by the non-applicant No. 5 Patiram Sharma in the course of his employment with the non-applicant No. 4. The claimant was travelling in bus No. MPN 73...
Dashrath Prasad Dube Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-09-1984
Reported in: [1986]159ITR147(MP)
G.G. Sohani, J. 1. By this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax 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 holding that the order of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax imposing a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was not bad in law for want of jurisdiction ?'2. The material facts giving rise to this reference, briefly, are as follows :The assessee is assessed in the status of an individual. While framing the assessment for the assessment year 1973-74, the Income-tax Officer made certain additions to the income disclosed by the assessee in his return. For concealment of income, the Income-tax Officer initiated penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act and referred the matter to the Inspecting Assistant Com...
Parshotam Lal Sood and Brothers Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-06-1984
Reported in: [1984]147ITR739(MP)
J.S. Verma, J.1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the. I.T. Act, 1961, to answer the following question, namely :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee's claim for partial partition of the property situated at 18, Golf Links, New Delhi, was neither covered under Clause (a)(i) nor under Clause (a)(ii) of the Explanation to Section 171 '2. The material facts are these. The assessee is a HUF, in which the three brothers, namely, Parshotam Lal Sood, Pritamlal Sood and Brij Bhushan Lal Sood, are coparceners. The HUF owns three immovable properties, of which one is a house property at 18, Golf Links, New Delhi. It also has a deposit of Rs. 3,07,294 with M/s. Saling Ram & Co., Jabalpur. The relevant assessment year is 1974-75 for which the accounting year ended on March 31, 1974. It was claimed in the assessment proceedings that: a partial partition had been effected in respect of the afores...
Veerbhandas Purswani Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-05-1984
Reported in: [1985]154ITR128(MP)
Sen, J.1. This is a reference under Section 27(1) of the W.T. Act, 1957. In compliance with the direction of this court in M.C.C. No. 92 of 1975 dated July 8, 1980, the following two questions of law have been referred to this court for opinion : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Wealth-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that thepenalty order did not suffer from the defect that no proper opportunity was allowed to the assessce to rebut the material collected behind the back of the assessee (2) Whether the Wealth-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the order passed by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner under Section 18(1)(c) is not barred by limitation ?' 2. For the assessment year 1968-69, the assessee filed a return of net wealth on November 5, 1969, disclosing a net wealth of Rs. 1,28,024. In declaring the above net wealth, the assessee had shown the amount of money in circulation in a money-lending business carried ...
Mrs. Sarojini Gehlot Vs. State of M.P. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-04-1984
Reported in: 1986CriLJ1708
G.S. Sohani, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issuance of a writ of Habeas Corpus for the release of the petitioner's husband Raghuvirsingh, who has been detained by an order of detention passed by the District Magistrate, Indore, on 3rd Dec. 1983 (Annexure 'A'), under Section 3 of the Prevention of Black Marketing & Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. The material facts giving rise to this petition, briefly, are as follows:The detenu carries on business as a transport agent at Indore. On 26th Nov. 1983, a truck bearing registration No. M. P. N. 5866 parked at 'Vandana Petrol Pump', Indore, was searched by the Food Inspector. Amongst the goods found in the truck were 6 barrels containing 200 litres of kerosene in each barrel. On enquiry by the Food Inspector, it was found that the goods in the truck were loaded by the detenu, who failed to produce the relevant record in that behalf. O...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›