Madhya Pradesh Court February 1984 Judgments
Sahastra Pal Singh and ors. Vs. Vyavasayik Pathyakram Pravesh Pareeksh ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-1984
Reported in: AIR1984MP98
C.P. Sen, J.1. In this petition, the three petitioners challenge the declaration of the result, the valuation made for the Pre Medical Test Examinations held in the year 1983 by the respondents and also challenge the constitution of the Madhya Pradesh Vvavasavik Pathvakram Pravesh Pareeksha Mandal, respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Mandal') and Rule No. 1.8.10 framed by it, barring any application for revaluation of the papers.2. The respondent No. 1 Mandal is a body constituted under the executive powers of the State Government to hold entrance examinations for professional courses in Medical and Engineering Colleges in the State of Madhya Pradesh. For this purpose the Mandal framed certain rules and is conduction annual examinations for admission to these colleges every year. These three petitioners -- Sahastra Pal Singh, Kumari Anita Tiwari and Saniay Kumar -- appeared in the 1983 Pre-Medical Test Examination but none of them were declared successful. The petitioners...
Tag this Judgment!State of Madhya Pradesh and ors. Vs. Martandsingh Joodeo
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-27-1984
Reported in: AIR1984MP92
Oza, Ag. C.J.1. This is a reference made by the Chief Revenue Authority to this Court under Section 57(1), Stamp Act. It was a revision petition filed before the Chief Revenue Authority against an order passed by the Collector of Stamps (Sub-Divisional Officer), reference being made to him by the Sub-Registrar to the effect that the stamp duty which was paid by the petitioner was less than what should have been paid and that extra stamps worth Rupees 62,470/- together with the deficit of Rupees 12,494/- should be made good by the petitioner. The reference which was made by the Sub-Registrar was under the provisions of Article 45, Schedule I-A, Stamp Act, after an audit objection having been raised. It appears that no objection was taken at the time of registration but an objection was taken when the audit objection was raised and the Sub-Registrar made a reference, to the Collector of Stamps (Sub-Divisional Officer) and the Sub-Divisional Officer passed an order against which a revisio...
Tag this Judgment!Gorelal Gupta and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-20-1984
Reported in: 1984CriLJ975
ORDERC.P. Sen, J.1. Under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioners are seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing the order of the District Magistrate. Chhatarpur, dated 7-12-1981 attaching the properties of the petitioners under Section 14 of M.P. Dakaiti Aur Vyapaharan Pra-bhavit Kshetra Adhiniyam, 1981, (hereinafter referred to as the Adhiniyam).2. Petitioner No. 1 Gorelal is the husband of petitioner No. 2 Mannubai and father of petitioners Nos. 3 and 4 Laxmiprasad and Deviprasad. They constitute a joint Hindu family and residing in house No. 25 on Gandhi Road, Chhatarpur. They own Gupta Lodge and New Gupta Lodge near bus-stand, Chhatarpur. They also own some agricultural land. Gupta Lodge is run in partnership between petitioners 1 and 3 while New Gupta Lodge is in partnership between petitioners 2 and 4. The petitioners 1 and 2 settled down at Chhatarpur in the year 1948-49 and they had a modest beginning by running a grocery shop in the year 1951 and then they started a sw...
Tag this Judgment!Nav Nirman Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-1984
Reported in: [1984]148ITR703(MP)
K.N. Shukla, J.1. In compliance with the direction of this court by order dated December 10, 1980, under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Nagpur, has referred the following question for opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in maintaining the penalty of Rs. 75,000 under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. Facts as found and stated by the Tribunal are as follows : The assessee is a partnership firm carrying on the business of executing civil contracts. It was constituted by a deed of partnership, dated October 22, 1963. The first accounting year of the assessee ended on Diwali, i.e., 4th November, 1964, which was the previous year for the assessment year in question, i.e., 1965-66.3. In the relevant previous year, the assessee executed certain contracts as a Sub-contractor of M/s. Raipur Provincial Engineering Company (hereafter referred to as the 'principal contractors'). Some...
Tag this Judgment!Sagar Automotives P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-13-1984
Reported in: [1984]56CompCas141(MP); [1984]148ITR492(MP)
Oza, Actg. C.J. 1. This is a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal at the instance of the assessee for answering the following question:' Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in confirming the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax passed under s, 263 of the I.T. Act, 1961, directing the disallowance of the directors' remuneration of Rs. 38/188 '2. The year of assessment is 1976-77 ending on September 30, 1975. The ITO framed the assessment under Section 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961, on February 16, 1979. While completing the assessment he had allowed the claim for directors' remuneration to the tune of Rs. 38,188 paid to them for the period between February 1, 1975 to September 30, 1975. This amount included the remuneration paid to the directors to the tune of Rs. 14,800, house rent Rs. 3,300 and travelling expenses of the directors Rs. 20,088. The Commissioner of Income-tax exercising jurisdiction under Section 263 issued a n...
Tag this Judgment!Bhilai Motors Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-02-1984
Reported in: (1984)41CTR(MP)125
C.P. Sen, J.1. At the instance of the assessee, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur, has referred the following questions of law for the opinion of this court under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961:' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in sustaining the disallowance of Rs. 24,110 under Section 40A(3) of the Act ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in sustaining the disallowance of the motor car expenses to the extent of Rs. 15,621 ?3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in vacating the orders of the authorities below with reference to the addition of Rs. 50,000 and in issuing a direction to the Income-tax Officer as detailed in para. 12 of the Tribunal's order?'2. The assessee, M/s. Bhilai Motors, is a partnership firm dealing in Tata Mercedez Benz chassis vehicles and spare parts having its head off...
Tag this Judgment!V.B. Gadkari Vs. the Sales Tax Officer and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-02-1984
Reported in: [1985]59STC362(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 : The petitioner carries on business of manufacture and sale of paints and varnish under the name and style, M/s. Indian Paints Industries, Indore. The petitioner is a registered dealer under the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). For the assessment year 1976-77, the petitioner filed a return disclosing a taxable turnover of Rs. 76,559 but respondent No. 1 rejected the books of account maintained by the petitioner and made a best judgment assessment by his order annexure A dated 17th November, 1980 estimating the taxable turnover at Rs. 1,05,000. Aggrieved by the order passed by respondent No. 1, the petitioner preferred a revision petition but that was dismissed. Hence the petitioner has filed this petition.3. Though a number of grounds were raised in the petition, at the ti...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›