Madhya Pradesh Court September 1984 Judgments
Divisional Forest Officer Vs. Gotiya @ Gattiya and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-28-1984
Reported in: 1(1985)ACC277
K.L. Srivastava, J. 1. This appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' is directed against the award dated 30-7-1979 made by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mandleshwar in Claim Case No. 20 of 1978.2. It is not in dispute that the M.P. State Government's jeep bearing registration No. MPZ 4703 was under the control of the appellant, the Divisional Forest Officer, Barwani and was involved in an accident on 2-2-1976, resulting in the death of Shantilal aged 7 or 8 years. Respondent No. 1 aged 30 years is the father and the respondent No. 2 aged 25 years is the mother of the deceased. The respondent No. 3 Salim Khan was in the employment of the State Government and was driving the jeep in question at the relevant time.3. On a claim petition having been presented by the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 against the Government, the present appellant and the respondent No. 3, the driver, the Claims Tribunal on the appraisal of the evidence befor...
Tag this Judgment!Asharam Saboo and Sons Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-21-1984
Reported in: (1985)45CTR(MP)305; [1986]157ITR117(MP)
OZA, C.J. 1. This is an application filed by the assessee under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. The facts necessary for the disposal of this application are that the assessee sought registration of the firm for the assessment years 1974-75 and 1975-76 as it is stated that for the year 1976-77, registration was granted but for these two years the Income-tax Officer refused registration and the order was ultimately upheld by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal in its order dated February 12, 1981, found certain facts as stated in para. 2 of the order and on the basis of all these facts an inference was drawn that the firm is non-genuine and, therefore, refused registration. 3. Learned counsel for the assessee contended that the registration is sought under Section 184 of the Income-tax Act and the requirements which the authorities are expected to consider are stated in Section 185 of the Act. Reading these two sections, it does not appear that on the facts whi...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Jijeebai Shinde Vs. Commissioner of Gift-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-21-1984
Reported in: (1985)46CTR(MP)288; [1986]157ITR122(MP)
V.D. Gyani, J.1. This is a reference under Section 26 of Gift-tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore, at the instance of the assessee, referring the following question of law for answer of this court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the CGT had jurisdiction to set aside the alleged order of assessment even though it was not served on the assessee, when the order could not be said to exist unless communicated to the party ?'2. Facts necessary for answering this question are that late Smt. Lilabai Matkar made a gift of a house bearing municipal No. 5, Ramlaxman Bazar, Indore, to her married daughter, Smt. Jijeebai Shinde, by a registered gift deed dated April 28, 1971. The value of the property was declared at Rs. 22,000. By another gift deed dated April 28, 1971, the late Smt. Lilabai Matkar gifted a house at Sirpur to Shri Chandrakant Shinde and in the gif...
Tag this Judgment!Yeshwant Talkies Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-21-1984
Reported in: [1986]157ITR103(MP)
Oza, Actg. C.J.1. This is a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal referring for our answer the following questions of law :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the reassessment under Section 147(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was valid in law ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, when the original assessment was the subject-matter of an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, the action of the Income-tax Officer to initiate action under Section 147(b) subsequently could be legally justified ?'2. The facts stated in the statement of the case submitted by the Tribunal are that the assessee is a registered firm of two partners deriving income from film exhibition. The relevant assessment year is 1973-74 for which the accounting period ends on October 31, 1972. The assessee had filed return disclosing a total income of Rs. 1,08,870. The Inco...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Basantibai Vs. M.P. Electricity Board, Indore and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-1984
Reported in: AIR1985MP70
V.D. Gyani, J.1. The petitioner Basantibai is the proprietor of Santosh Industries, D-11 B. C Sector, Saver Road, Indore. She had obtained the service connection No. 192352 of 30 H. P. load for running an oil-mill. The Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board (respondent 1) who is a licensee, had installed a meter for ascertaining the amount of energy supplied and consumed by the petitioner under the aforesaid service connection. The meter so installed is the property of respondent 1.2. According to the petitioner on 18-2-1983 the meter got burnt and this fact was immediately reported to the respondent 4 an Assistant Engineer of the Zone in which the petitioner Industry is situated. On 1-3-1983 the petitioner was directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 433/- as the price of the meter and Rs. 44/-as connection charges. The petitioner deposited the aforesaid amounts on the same day. However, the respondent-Board failed to restore the electric connection by installing another meter even after the afores...
Tag this Judgment!Rehana Vs. Abdul Majeed and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-1984
Reported in: 1(1985)ACC182
P.D. Mulye, J. 1. This judgment shall also govern the disposal of L.P.A. No. 8 of 81 (Abdul Majeed and Anr. v. Rehana and Ors.) as both these appeals, though filed by different parties, arise out of the same accident and the same having been filed against the combined order dated 18-2-81 passed in M.A. No. 142 of 1976 (Abdul Mazeed and Anr. v. Rehana and Ors.) and M.A. No. 132 of 1976 (Rehana v. Abdul Mazeed and Ors.) arising out of Claims case No. 19 of 1974, by a single Judge of this Court.2. The Letters Patent Appeal No. 6 of 1981 is filed by the claimant for enhancement of compensation from Rs. 35,000/- to Rs. 50,000/- and also for fastening the liability on the owners & driver of tempo number MPO 9501 as also on the Insurance Company with which the said tempo was insured, for their negligence on the ground that this was a case of composite negligence. Letters Patent Appeal No. 8 of 81 is filed by the owner and driver of tempo number MPO-3983 for holding the owners and driver of th...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Kamlabai Gujri Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-19-1984
Reported in: (1985)47CTR(MP)62; [1986]157ITR33(MP)
Oza, Actg. C.J.1. This is a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to answer the following questions :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal has erred in concluding that Shri Ramlal, husband of the assessee, was not possessed of technical and professional qualification, which may be attributable solely to the earning of the income as per proviso to Section 64(1)(ii) despite evidence that he was already under employment of the firm, prior to the joining of Smt. Kamlabai, assessee, as a partner and whether the salary paid of Rs. 4,800 is liable to be added in the income of the assessee ?'2. The facts stated in the reference are that the assessee is one of the partners of the firm, Gopikishan Ghisalal Gujri. It is stated that in this case, original assessment was completed by September 5, 1977, on a total income of Rs. 10,980. Subsequently, the Income-tax Officer came to know that the husband of the assessee was an employee in the fi...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Deora Pu Canbeon Mfg. Co. Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-19-1984
Reported in: [1985]156ITR831(MP)
Oza, Actg. C.J.1. This reference has been made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, for answering the question:' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the refund of Rs. 2,53,185 is not taxable as a trading receipt in the hands of the assessee company ?' ,2. The facts stated in the reference are that the assessee is a private limited company engaged in the manufacture and sale of conductors, winding wire, armour taps, aluminium enamelled wires, etc. For the assessment year 1980-81, the previous year of the accounts of the company ended on June 30, 1979. The assessee company purchased aluminium from M/s. Hindustan Aluminium Corporation, Renukut, U.P., and supplied the products to the Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board during the period June 24, 1975, to February 23, 1978. Hindustan Aluminium Corporation charged Central sales t...
Tag this Judgment!DeepnaraIn Nagu and Company Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-19-1984
Reported in: (1985)46CTR(MP)294; [1986]157ITR37(MP)
Oza, Actg. C.J.1. This is a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal for answering the following questions :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and the material on record, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the return under Section 139(5) is not a valid return ?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and the material on record, the Tribunal was correct in law in ignoring the return under Section 139(5) as a return under Section 139(4) as in any case the return under Section 139(5) or Section 139(4) replaces the original return filed under Section 139(1) and has to be disposed of by assessment of the fresh return filed in place of the original return ?'2. The facts that emerge from the statement of case submitted by the Tribunal are that the assessment pertains to the year 1978-79. The accounting year ends on March 31, 1978. It is stated that on September 18, 1978, the assessee filed a return under Section 139(1)...
Tag this Judgment!Segan Plastics Vs. State of M.P. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-1984
Reported in: [1987]64STC345(MP)
G.L. Oza, Ag. C.J.1. This is a petition filed by the petitioner challenging an assessment made by the Assistant Sales Tax Officer and affirmed in revision by the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, Ujjain Range, Ujjain.2. The facts necessary for decision of this petition are that for the period 1st July, 1978, to 30th June, 1979, returns were filed by the petitioner and assessment was completed by the Assistant Sales Tax Officer. There is some dispute raised about the proper opportunity also but ultimately in this petition the main contention urged is about the jurisdiction of the Assistant Sales Tax Officer and, therefore, those matters are not relevant. Against the order passed by the Assistant Sales Tax Officer dated 28th August, 1981, the petitioner preferred a revision before the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, Ujjain Range, on 23rd October, 1981. This revision was filed under Section 39 of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act. It was contended before the Deputy Commissioner that earlie...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »