Skip to content

Madhya Pradesh Court December 1985 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.

Dec 05 1985

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Rajkumar Mills Ltd.

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Decided on: Dec-05-1985

Reported in: [1987]163ITR547(MP)

Sohani, J. 1. The order in this case will also govern the disposal of Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 192 of 1984 (CIT v. Rajkumar Mills) and Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 251 of 1984 (CIT v. Rajkuntar Mills Ltd.). 2. These are applications under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 3. The material facts giving rise to these applications, briefly, are as follows : The assessee is a company and was assessed to surtax for the assessment years 1973-74, 1974-75 and 1975-76. While computing the liability of the assessee under the provisions of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, the assessing authority did not take into consideration the reserve for leave with wages for the purpose of calculating the capital under the provisions of that Act. Aggrieved by that order, the assessee preferred an appeal which was decided bythe Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in favour of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (...


Dec 05 1985

Suneeta Laboratories Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Decided on: Dec-05-1985

Reported in: [1986]162ITR883(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 questions of law to this court for its opinion : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, theTribunal was right in upholding the disallowance of Rs. 13,714, beingpenalty for late payment of provident fund (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in disallowing a sum of Rs. 25,960 being penalties of sales tax for filing the delayed returns, which were in the nature of interest (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in upholding the disallowance of Rs. 11,973, being the payment of penalty on estate duty (4) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the disallowance of Rs. 55,679, being the bank charges debited by ...


Dec 05 1985

Sadhana Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Decided on: Dec-05-1985

Reported in: [1987]64STC172(MP)

G.G. Sohani, J.1. The order in this case will also govern the disposal of Miscellaneous Civil Case Nos. 174 of 1984, 176 of 1984, 175 of 1984, 167 of 1984 and 166 of 1984. 2. By these references under Section 44 of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the Board of Revenue has referred the following questions of law to this Court for its opinion :(1) Whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the appeal was considered for admission by the Deputy Commissioner on 30th April, 1982 and his summary dismissal of the appeal on 30th June, 1982, was in order ?(2) Whether; under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the payment of sums due under Section 38(3) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958, was to be made with the memorandum of appeal and in absence, therefore, the appeal could be summarily rejected ?3. The material facts giving rise to these refer...


Dec 05 1985

The United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Rukmabai and ors.

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Decided on: Dec-05-1985

Reported in: 1(1986)ACC361

K.L. Shrivastava, J.1. This order shall also dispose of the Misc. Appeal No. 55 of 1981 filed by the Insurer against the one and the same award dated 17.11.1980 passed by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal Ratlam in Claim Case No. 16 of 1977.2. It may be stated at the out set that the appeal No. 26 of 1981 is by the owners of the accident vehicle and the other appeal is by the insurer. The claimants have filed cross-objections.3. For the purpose of these appeals it is no longer in controversy that the tractor bearing Registration No. MPU 5571 belonging to Shivlal Kanhaiyalal (the appellants in appeal No. 26/81) was involved in an accident and had turned turtle at about 11.30 a.m. on 24.4.77 on the road between Bibded and Ratlam ahead of the culvert from Sagod. At the time of the accident the vehicle was being driven by Shivlal and was insured (vide Ex. P/3) with the appallant in M.A. No. 55/81. Laxminaryan an agriculturist aged about 50 years who was travelling by the tractor which had ...


Dec 04 1985

Suresh Kumar Chowkse Vs. State of M.P. and anr.

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Decided on: Dec-04-1985

Reported in: AIR1986MP130

Rampal Singh, J. 1. The appellant has challenged that part of the order passed by the Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Shivpuri, in Civil Appeal No. 30-A of 1983 dated 25-3-1985, by which he has been refused the refund of the Court-fees, as provided in Section 13 of the M.P. Court-fees Act, 1870. 2. The short facts out of which this appeal arises, are that the appellant filed a suit against the respondents in the Court of Second Civil Judge Class II, Shivpuri, being Civil Suit No. 104A of 1982. On 5-1-1983 this suit was dismissed. The appellant preferred an appeal in the Court of the Additional District Judge, Shivpuri. That appeal was disposed of by the first appellate Court and in paras 10 and 11 of the impugned judgment, the appellate Court framed 3 issues, quashed the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court and passed a wholesome remand order directing the trial Court to record the evidence of the parties on the issues according to law. It was also directed th...


Dec 04 1985

Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Bheraji Ramlal

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Decided on: Dec-04-1985

Reported in: [1986]63STC140(MP)

ORDERG.G. Sohani, J.1. By this reference under Section 44 of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the Board of Revenue 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 justified in holding that seeds of dhania and matar are seeds of vegetable and, therefore, subject to exemption from tax in terms of separate Revenue Department's Notification No. 1057-537-V-ST dated 7th April, 1967, as extended from time to time 2. The material facts giving rise to this reference, as set out in the order of reference, briefly, are as follows:The assessee, who at the material time was carrying on business in seeds of vegetables and pesticides, was assessed to tax by the Assistant Sales Tax Officer for the period from 1st April, 1976, to 31st March, 1977. The assessee claimed exemption in respect of chillies, 'matar', 'moong' and 'dhania' under the following Notifica...


Dec 04 1985

Cement Marketing Company of India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Decided on: Dec-04-1985

Reported in: [1987]66STC381(MP)

ORDERG.G. Sohani, J.1. This is an application under Section 44(2) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958.2. The material facts giving rise to this application, briefly, are as follows : The applicant is a dealer under the M.P. General Sales Tax Act; 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') and is engaged in the business of sale of cement. The applicant was assessed to sales tax on its turnover for the period 1st August, 1969 to 31st July, 1970. In the course of its business, the applicant had effected sales to the Railways as also to the Posts & Telegraphs Department charging sales tax at the concessional rate of 3 per cent, under Notification No. 958-655-V-ST dated 28th March, 1969, on the ground that these sales were covered by the said notification and were liable to be taxed at the concessional rate of 3 per cent. The assessing authority by its order dated 19th January, 1976 rejected the claim of the applicant for levy of sales tax at the concessional rate of 3 per cent on the ...


  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial