Madhya Pradesh Court September 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Nagpal Gulati and Co.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-12-1985
Reported in: [1985]156ITR567(MP)
J.S. Verma, J. 1. This reference under Section 256(1) of Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the Revenue, is for the decision of the following question of law, namely : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in confirming the order of the CIT (Appeals) directing the ITO to pass two separate orders for the two periods, i.e., before and after the death of the partner?' 2. The assessee is a partnership firm. It was constituted by a deed of partnership dated January 1, 1970. It consisted of four partners, one of whom, Shri K.L. Arora, died on January 28, 1973, and a fresh deed was executed on January 29, 1973, and two new persons were inducted as partners. The accounts of the deceased partner were closed and the profit and loss account and balance-sheet till the date of death of the partner were prepared separately. The assessee filed two returns of income for the two periods, prior and subsequent to the date of death o...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Sharma Brothers
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-12-1985
Reported in: [1987]66STC32(MP)
ORDERJ.S. Verma, J.1. This is a reference under Section 44(1) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act at the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax for decision of the following questions of law, namely :(i) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the sale of the stock of motor spirit which has suffered tax under the M.P. Sales of Motor Spirit and Lubricants Taxation Act, 1957 (Act No. 4 of 1958) will be exempt from levy of tax under the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958, on and after 1st August, 1972 (i.e., the date from which the Motor Spirit Act was repealed) taking support from the provisions of Section 8(1) of the M.P. Vitta Adhiniyam, 1972 and Section 10 of the M.P. General Clauses Act, 1957 ?(ii) Whether provisions of Section 54 of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958, will be applicable for claiming exemption on sales of the stock of motor spirit on and after 1st August, 1972 ?2. The dealer carries on retail business in motor spirit and lubricants. It had purchased the...
Maihar Cement Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-12-1985
Reported in: [1985]60STC210(MP)
J.S. Verma, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner challenges imposition of the tax, known as 'entry tax' under the M. P. Sthaniya Kshetra Me Mal Ke Pravesh Par Kar Adhiniyam, 1976 (hereafter referred as the 'Entry Tax Act') for the calendar years 1977 and 1978, on the purchase of iron and steel required by the petitioner for construction of its buildings. The short question for decision in this petition is whether the purchase of iron and steel by the petitioner during this period for this purpose was in the course of its business of manufacturing cement, when the petitioner's factory commenced production of cement only from November, 1980. By orders (annexures C and D) dated 28th December, 1981 pertaining to the two calendar years 1977 and 1978, the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Satna (M. P.), has held that the petitioner is liable to pay entry tax on this material to the extent specified therein. It is the quashing of these two orders of as...
Vinod Kumar Vs. the District Magistrate and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-12-1985
Reported in: 1986CriLJ151
R.K. Vijayvargiya, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner Vinod Kumar has challenged the detention of his father Gopaldas Nagori who has been ordered to be detained vide order No. Q/Ps/Det 85 dated 27-7-85 (Ann 'A') passed by the District Magistrate, Indore the respondent No. 1 in exercise of the powers conferred upon him by Sub-section (1)(b)(2)(a) of Section 3 of the Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980 (for short 'the Act').2. The facts disclosed by the grounds of detention communicated to the detenu and the particulars mentioned in the schedule annexed thereto may be summarised as follows:The detenu is the proprietor of M/s Agrawal Industries Indore, Manager of M/s Usha Enterprises Indore and Attorney of Nagori Cement Private Ltd. Bagh district Dhar. M/s. Agrawal Industries are manufacturing Sagol and Murrum powder while Usha Enterprises are manufacturing Murrum powder.Sagol and Murrum are b...
Mansur and ors. Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-10-1985
Reported in: 1986CriLJ57
ORDERV.D. Gyani, J.1. The petitioners in this Miscellaneous case made a grievance that in spite of an order of being released on bail for offences under Sections 307, 147, 148 and 149, IPC, they were still detained in jail at Kannod, in pursuance to an order passed by the Executive Magistrate, Hatpipliya, in Criminal Case No. 148 of 1985, under Sections 151 and 107, Cr. P. C. In fact the present petitioners had moved the Court of Sessions at Dewas, bringing all facts to the notice of the learned Sessions Judge, in Criminal Revision No. 5 of 1985. As the petitioners were not released the learned Sessions Judge was requested to send for the record, which in fact was sent for and the requisition was received by the Executive Magistrate, Hatpipliya on 18-8-1985. The criminal revision before the Sessions Judge was listed for hearing on 20-8-1985. On this date of hearing the petitioners again made a grievance about their being detained in jail under Sections 107, 116(3) and 151, Cr. P. C. an...
Gopal Sahai Vs. Thakur Sahab Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-09-1985
Reported in: 1986MPLJ163
ORDERT.N. Singh, J.1. Tenant's application for leave to defend was refused under the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961. He is, therefore, before me in this revision.2. On 7-3-1984, the tenant-petitioner was served with summons in terms of Sub-section (1) of Section 23-C of the aforesaid Act and within fifteen days, namely, on 15-3-1984, he did file his application, expressing his intention to defend landlord's application for eviction. The only lacuna by which he was hit by the trial Court was absence of the affidavit. The Rent Controlling Authority did not allow any opportunity to the tenant to fill up the lacuna and dismissed the application summarily on the ground that the application was not accompanied by an affidavit.3. Shri Vijay Yogi, learned Counsel, appearing for the non-petitioner-landlord, vocally submits that the provisions of Sub-section (1) of Section 23-C are mandatory. Indeed, they are so, but to what extent. The intention of the Legislature, making provis...
Mahila Lila and ors. Vs. Vimlabai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-09-1985
Reported in: AIR1986MP236; 1986MPLJ148
ORDERT.N. Singh, J. 1. Lachi Tewari, AIR 1984 SC 41 has infused life into this lis in the instant case. Counsel for the petitioners vehemently disputes this position, but I feel disinclined to agree with him. 2. On 4-1-1981, the sole-defendant died. An application was prepared and signed by the plaintiff on 4-4-1981 for substitution of the legal representatives of the deceased defendant. However, unfortunately, it could be filed in the Court by the counsel only on 9-4-1981. The short point, therefore, is, who will suffer for counsel's default? Lachi Tewari (supra) is the right and complete answer to the question. The plaintiff shall not suffer and her case shall not fail. Indeed, this view was rightly taken by the trial Court as the period of limitation was computed not from the date on which it was prepared and signed for being filed. No fault can be found with the Court in accepting the position and the impugned order is immune to challenge. Petitioner's counsel, Shri K.S. Agrawal, h...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Firestone Tyre and Rubber Co. of India P ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-05-1985
Reported in: [1986]61STC105(MP)
J.S. Verma, J.1. This reference is under Section 44(1) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958, at the instance of the department to answer the following question of law, namely :Whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case, the sale of tyres and tubes worth Rs. 18,072 to the Gun Carriage Factory, Jabalpur, was in the course of import of goods into the territory of India from a foreign country and hence not liable to tax under Article 286(1)(b) of the Constitution of India Initially, this question arose for decision as a result of the reference made by the Tribunal in M. C. C. No. 115 of 1978. However, at the time of hearing, it was considered necessary to call for a further statement of case from the Tribunal and, therefore, order dated 17th July, 1981, was passed in M. C. C. No. 115 of 1978 giving such a direction to the Tribunal which has then submitted a supplementary statement of case dated 17th August, 1982, and this has been registered as M. C. C. No. 322 of 1982.2. Th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›