Madhya Pradesh Court June 1987 Judgments
Mahphooj HussaIn and anr. Vs. Kiran Bano
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-29-1987
Reported in: AIR1987MP286
ORDERT.N. Singh, J.1. This application has been listed today for admission but with consent of counsel for the parties it has been heard and disposed of on merits.2. An application under Section 152, C.P.C., which was disposed of by the impugned order, provides the basis of challenge in this case. On the said application of the plaintiff the decree was corrected in two ways. Originally, in the decree in the schedule of costs counsel's fee shown was Rs. 937.50 which, by the impugned order, was corrected to read as Rs. 1,875.00. Nextly, in the decree as passed originally though there was a direction that 'the Court-fee which ought to have been affixed shall be recovered from the plaintiff the amount of Court-fee was not included in the schedule of costs and as such a further direction in the impugned order is made to the effect that the Court-fee shall be impleaded in the cost of plaintiff. However, what bears emphasis is that the learned Additional District Judge took care also to menti...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Anandilal Bhagchand
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-27-1987
Reported in: [1988]169ITR581(MP)
N.D. Ojha, C.J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench, Jabalpur, has referred the following question to this court for its opinion under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that two separate assessments should be made on the assessee-firm--one for the period up to April 9, 1974, and the other for the period from April 10, 1974, to November 13, 1974?' 2. The order of the Tribunal making the reference is dated September 1, 1982. 3. The facts in a nutshell giving rise to the aforesaid question are that there was a partnership having three partners, viz., Bhagchand, Rajkumar and Krantikumar. Besides, Arvindkumar, a minor, was also admitted to the benefits of the partnership. Bhagchand died on April 9, 1974, and a new deed of partnership was executed on April 15, 1974, whereby in place of the deceased, Bhagch...
Tag this Judgment!ishwardIn Mewalal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-27-1987
Reported in: [1988]169ITR584(MP)
N.D. Ojha, C.J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench, Jabalpur, has referred the following question to this court for its opinion under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ' the Act ') :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the income from money-lending business after the death of Ishwardin had to be assessed jointly in the hands of the assessee-Hindu undivided family ?'2. The necessary facts in a nutshell giving rise to the aforesaid question are that the assessee is a Hindu undivided family. A raid was conducted by the Central Excise Department at the business and residential premises of the assessee on October 25, 1975, wherein primary gold, gold ornaments and silver ornaments were seized. The case of the assessee was that there was a partition in the family of M/s. Ishwardin Mewalal consisting of late Ishwardin, Ramjiyawan Mewalal and Munnilal in the year 1942 in which ...
Tag this Judgment!Vimalchand Prakashchand Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-27-1987
Reported in: [1987]67STC74(MP)
ORDERP.D. Mulye, J.1. This order shall also govern the disposal of M. C. C. No. 101 of 1985 (Vimalchand Prakashchand v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, M.P.), M.C.C. No. 102 of 1985 (Vimalchand Prakashchand v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, M. P.) and M. C. C. No. 103 of 1985 (Vimalchand Prakashchand v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, M. P.) as all these references under Section 44 of the M. P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958, read with Section 9 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, at the instance of the assessee, are sent to this Court to answer the following question of law, propounded by the Sales Tax Tribunal :Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that carrying charges and other expenses (postage, telephone charges, telegrams, etc.) did form a part of the sale price.2. Two of the references are in respect of the assessment year 6th January, 1972 to 26th October, 1973 and the other two references are in respect of the year 27th October, 1973...
Tag this Judgment!Regal theatre and ors. Vs. M.P.E.B., Rampur and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-26-1987
Reported in: AIR1987MP276
P.D. Mulye, J.1. The petitioner No. 2, who is a partner of M/s. Regal Theatre are running a cinema show in that theatre known as Regal Talkies in which an electric connection is installed, supplied by M.P. Electricity Board which recovers the electricity charges on the basis of the meter reading.2. On 31st Mar. 1982 the petitioners received a bill for Rs. 47,600.27 p. as per Annexure 'A' on account of energy charges for the period July, 1980 to Dec. 1980(?) on the ground that the electric meter installed at the petitioners' theatre has recorded l/3rd consumption instead of full consumption. The petitioners by their reply dtd. 15-5-1982 Annexure 'B' disputed the said demand. Subsequently correspondence took place between the petitioners and the respondents on this point with the result that the respondents again sent a supplementary bill for Rs. 13,513/-, without disclosing as to how this figure was arrived at especially when initially the bill was sent for Rs. 47,600.27 p. mentioned ab...
Tag this Judgment!M.P. Shoe House Vs. State of M.P. and Three ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-26-1987
Reported in: [1987]67STC427(MP)
N.D. Ojha, C.J.1. This order shall govern the disposal of Miscellaneous Petition No. 3160 of 1985 (Lucky Boot House, Katni v. State of M. P. and Ors.) and Miscellaneous Petition No. 3291 of 1986 (Suresh Shoe Emporium, Satna v. State of M. P. and Ors.) also.2. A Notification F. No. A-3-16-81(12) ST-V, dated 7th April, 1981, was issued in exercise of the powers conferred by Clause (i) of Sub-section (1) of Section 12 of the M. P. General Sales Tax Act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), by the State Government exempting from payment of tax the sales of the class of goods specified in column (1) of the schedule given below the notification, to the extent specified in column (2), for the period specified in column (3) of the said schedule, subject to the restrictions and conditions specified in column (4) thereof. Item 1, mentioned in the schedule, in the category of class of goods, is shown as 'footwear made of rubber or plastic'. The whole of tax under Section 6 of the Act is s...
Tag this Judgment!Badri Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-26-1987
Reported in: 1988CriLJ1592
ORDERK.L. Shrivastava, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the appellate judgment and order dated 24-1-86 passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge) Ratlam in Criminal Appeal No. 117 of 1985 whereby the applicant's convictions under Sections 363, 323 and 342 IPC and the various sentences passed thereunder have been maintained.2. Circumstances giving rise to this petition are these. According to the prosecution on29-3-85 at about 7.00 a.m. Ku. Sharda(P.W. 2) aged about 12 years daughter of Babu (P.W. 1) was going to school. The Petitioner who was earlier in service of Babu (P.W.1) met her on way and told her that her father required her presence at home. On her refusal, he forcibly took her away on his bicycle. This he did in the presence of Basantilal (P.W. 3) aged 14 years. He took her to different places and ultimately brought her to Ratlam. There he was beating her. Her cries brought Gopal (P.W. 6) aged 14 years to the scene.3. The matter was reported to the Ratlam Pol...
Tag this Judgment!Gorakh Nath Singh Vs. Dr. Harisingh Gour University, Sagar and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-25-1987
Reported in: AIR1988MP66; 1988MPLJ159
Faizanuddin, J. 1. By this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari for quashing the orders dated 31-5-86 and 26-6-1986, Annes. P-4 & P-6 respectively, passed by the respondent University and conveyed by its Deputy Registrar, withholding M.A. (Final) result of the petitioner. The petitioner further seeks a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to declare the petitioner's result for M.A. (Final) linguistic examination, held is April/May 1986.2. The petitioner took admission in M.A. (Previous) linguistic in the year 1984, in the respondent-University and became a regular student of the said University, He appeared in M.A. (Previous) Examination held by the University in 1985 and as per his Mark-sheet (Ann. P-1) the petitioner was declared successful. However; for the final year the petitioner applied for permission to appear as a private candidate in the examination to be held in 1986. The petitioner wa...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Smt. Sobhagwantibai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-25-1987
Reported in: (1987)65CTR(MP)160; [1988]169ITR588(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 question of law to this court for its opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the interest earned by a minor on his capital invested in the firm to the benefits of which he has been admitted could not be clubbed along with the share income and taxed in the hands of the parent under Section 64(1)(iii) of the Income-tax Act ?' 2. The material facts giving rise to this reference, briefly, are as follows : The minor sons of the assessee were, during the relevant assessment year 1976-77, admitted to the benefits of the partnership firms carrying on business under the name and style as M/s. Gandhi Rajkumar Santoshkumar, M/s. Gandhi Nirmalkumar Vinodkumar and M/s. Dhannaji Dhulji & Sons. Certain funds were invested in these f...
Tag this Judgment!Additional Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Madanlal Rungta and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-25-1987
Reported in: [1988]169ITR579(MP)
N.D. Ojha, C.J.1. On a direction issued by this court on August 12, 1981, under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal 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 right in law in confirming the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner whereby he deleted the addition of Rs. 30,000 from the net wealth of the assessee ?'2. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that on the findings recorded by the Tribunal, the question referred to us deserves to be answered in the affirmative.3. After taking into consideration the material on record, the Tribunal has held that the voluntary disclosures on which emphasis has been placed were not made by the assessee and there was nothing to show that the declarants were benamidars of the assessee. The Tribunal further pointed out that there was no material at all to show that an...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »