Madhya Pradesh Court November 1987 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.
Gwalior Rayon Silk Manufacturing (Weaving) Company Ltd. Vs. Commission ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-11-1987
Reported in: (1988)72CTR(MP)57; [1988]172ITR131(MP)
G. G. SOHANI J. - As directed by this court, the Tribunal 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, the Tribunal was justifies in holding that the amount of Rs. 1 lakh contributed by the assessee to the Government of Kerala for construction of a road in each of the assessment years 1964-65 and 1965-66 was in the nature of capital expenditure and in not allowing deduction of such expenditure on that ground ?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Tribunal was justifies in holding that the amount of Rs. 5,125 and Rs. 3,481 contributed by the assessee to the Government of Kerala towards the cost of construction of tubewells in the assessment year 1965-66 was in the nature of capital expenditure and in not allowing the deduction of such expenditure on that ground ?'The material facts giving rise to this reference, briefly, are as follows :The assessee is a public limite...
Kaluram Ganeshram (Huf) Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-10-1987
Reported in: 1988MPLJ433
N.D. Ojha C.J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur, has referred the following question to this court for its opinion, under Section 256 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ' the Act ').' Whether the Tribunal was justified in imposing a penalty of Rs. 9,000 when the additional tax was only on the income of Rs. 2,200 '2. The facts in a nutshell which are necessary for answering the aforesaid question are that during the assessment year 1969-70, it was discovered that the assessee had concealed the particulars of capital gains received by it in the sum of Rs. 9,000, consequent upon the sale of certain immovable properties. On its basis, proceedings for imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act were initiated against the assessee. Clause (iii) of Section 271(1) of the Act as it stood at the relevant time contemplated imposition of penalty ' in the cases referred to in Clause (c), in addition to any tax payable by him a sum which sha...
M.P. State Co-operative Press Ltd. Vs. Additional Commissioner of Sale ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-10-1987
Reported in: [1988]68STC245(MP)
N.D. Ojha, C.J. 1. The petitioner is a co-operative press and, according to it, provides service of printing and supply of printed material to cooperative societies. A perusal of the record before the taxing authorities under the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') indicates that various articles which the petitioner prints and supplies to the co-operative societies fall under the following categories:(1) Cheque books for several co-operative banks.(2) Printed registers to be maintained by banks and co-operative societies.(3) Letter pads on the orders of the customers.(4) Bonds of securities, captioned in Hindi Rin Patra.(5) Various types of forms to be used by co-operative societies and banks.(6) Share certificates for co-operative societies captioned in Hindi Ansh Praman Patra.(7) Ration cards.(8) Annual audit reports and financial statements in book form to be circulated to the members.It further appears from the said record that at one point of t...
Pathik Products Vs. General Manager, District Industries Centre and Tw ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-10-1987
Reported in: [1988]70STC21(MP)
N.D. Ojha, C.J.1. This order shall also govern the disposal of M. P. Nos. 569 of 1986 and 1906 of 1987.2. The petitioners of these writ petitions were registered as small-scale industrial units by the Industries Department on various dates and made applications for grant of eligibility certificates in order to enable them to claim exemption from sales tax in view of the notification dated 23rd October, 1981 issued under Section 12 of the M. P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').3. The case of the petitioners is that they were registered as small-scale industrial units for carrying out the business of blending tea and since they fulfilled the requirement of the notification dated 23rd October, 1981, they were entitled to exemption from sales tax subject of course to production of eligibility certificates as contemplated by the said notification, from the Industries Department. According to them it is for this purpose that they applied for grant of eligibi...
Steel Tubes of India Limited Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-07-1987
Reported in: [1988]172ITR54(MP)
G.G. Sohani, J.1. By this application under Section 256(2) of theIncome-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the applicant has prayed that the following questions of law be referred to thiscourt for its opinion : '(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amount of Rs. 50,000 incurred towards garden expenses in the factory compound of the company are allowable as revenue expenditure in terms of Sub-section (1) of Section 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?(ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amount of Rs. 5,000 incurred towards garden expenses in the factory compound of the company forms part of the 'actual cost' of an asset to the assessee for the purpose of grant of depreciation allowable under Section 32 of the Income-tax Act, 1961? '2. The material facts giving rise to this application, briefly, are as follows:The assessee filed its return for the assessment year 1976-77 claiming a sum of Rs. 86,023 as garden e...
Lalchand Choithram Sindhi Vs. Laxman Das NaraIn Das Sindhi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-07-1987
Reported in: 1992(0)MPLJ352
Gulab C. Gupta, J.1. This is defendant's second appeal under Section 100, Civil Procedure Code and is directed against the judgment and decree, dated 5-10-1981, passed by III Addl. Judge to the Court of District Judge, Raipur in Civil Appeal No. 9-A of 1979, arising out of the judgment and decree, dated 23-9-1979 passed by Civil Judge, Class II, Dhamtari in Civil Suit No. 1- A of 1979. The effect of the impugned judgment and decree is to order eviction of the appellant from the suit premises under Section 12(l)(a) and (e) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. That there exists the relationship of the landlord and tenant between the parties is not in dispute. The respondent by a notice dated 28-8-1978 (Ex.P-1) terminated the tenancy of the appellant w.e.f. midnight of 30 September, 1978, as he was alleged to be in arrears of rent amounting to Rs. 420/- and also because the house had become dilapidated and unsafe for human habitation. The a...
Rakesh Kumar Sharma Vs. Central Bank of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-07-1987
Reported in: 1990(0)MPLJ121
ORDERP.C. Pathak, J.1. Non-applicant Central Bank of India through its Branch Manager filed a complaint against the applicant and one Avinash Sengar, under sections 447, 448 and 454, Indian Penal Code.2. The learned trial Court without examining the complainant under section 200, Criminal Procedure Code or his witnesses under section 202, Criminal Procedure Code registered the complaint and issued process to the applicant and another. Aggrieved by issue of process, the applicant has filed this petition under section 482, Criminal Procedure Code.3. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the learned trial Court committed error in issuing of process without examining the complainant and his witnesses. He invited my attention to section 200, Criminal Procedure Code under which the Magistrate is bound to examine the complaint. Such examination is not necessary only if the complainant is a 'public servant' and the complaint is filed acting or purporting to act in the discharge ...
Balchand Malaiya, Managing Trustee, Singhai Karelal Kundanlal Trust Vs ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-07-1987
Reported in: [1988]69STC110(MP)
N.D. Ojha, C.J.1. This judgment shall govern the disposal of Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 138 of 1984 (Commissioner of Sales Tax, M.P. v. Singhai Karelal Kundanlal Trust, Sagar) also inasmuch as common questions arise in both these cases and the assessee in both these cases is the same.2. The Board of Revenue which is the Tribunal constituted under the M. P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') has referred under Section 44(1) of the Act the following two questions to this Court for its opinion :(1) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the transaction of Rs. 49,68,044 represents the katchi adhat transaction not taxable in the hands of the dealers ?(2) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the order of the Deputy Commissioner remanding the case to the assessing authority was lawful and justified ?3. The facts in a nutshell necessary for answering the aforesaid two questions are that t...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. State Bank of Indore
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-06-1987
Reported in: (1988)69CTR(MP)147; [1988]172ITR24(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 certain questions of law to this court for its opinion.2. The material facts giving rise to this reference, briefly, are as follows ;The assessee is a subsidiary of the State Bank of India and assessed under the Interest-tax Act, 1974, for the assessment years 1975-76 to 1979-80 and 1981-82. During these assessment years, the assessee had, in its ordinary course of business, purchased bills of exchange drawn by its constituents and in some cases, on account of delay in payment beyond the days of grace, the assessee received liquidated damages by way of compensation. This amount, it was claimed by the assessee in the assessment proceedings under the Interest-tax Act, was not interest on loans and advances and was not, therefore, exigible to tax under the Interest-tax Act. The assessee further contend...
Chimanlal Voerchand Vs. Additional Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-06-1987
Reported in: [1988]68STC278(MP)
N.D. Ojha, C.J.1. The petitioner is a dealer registered under the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958, and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. It carries on business of inter-State trade in grains. For the Diwali years 1968-69, 1969-70 and 1970-71, it claimed exemption from sales tax in respect of subsequent sales, as contemplated by Sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the Central Sales Tax Act. In regard to some of these transactions, the petitioner produced only declaration in form No. E-I and not the declaration in form No.C, whereas in regard to others, neither declaration in form No. E-I, nor the declaration in form No.C was produced. The Additional Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Raipur (respondent No.1) refused exemption in respect of both these transactions by his orders dated 23rd August, 1974, 8th April, 1975 and 26th May, 1975.2. Aggrieved by these orders, the petitioner preferred revisions before the Commissioner of Sales Tax, Madhya Pradesh, Indore (respondent No.2). A consolid...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »