Madhya Pradesh Court August 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.
Dr. Ashish Dixit and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-14-1987
Reported in: AIR1988MP271; 1988MPLJ113
S. Awasthy, J. 1. The petitioners passed their M.B.B.S. Examination in May,1984, from the Government Medical College, Jabalpur, and after completing one year's Compulsory Rotating Internship on 31st May,1985, obtained 5th and 28th position, respectively, in the Final Fooled Merit List, 1985. The petitioners are registered with the State Medical Council Madhaya Pradesh, and continue to be enrolled with Rani Durgawati Vishwavidyalaya, Jabalpur. The petitioner 1 completed his house job in Moolchand Khairatiram Hospital, New Delhi, with effect from 11-11-1985 to 10-11-1986 in Pediatrics, while the petitioner 2 completed his house-job in General Surgery from Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital, New Delhi, in the calendar year 1986. Both the Institutions are recognized by the Medical Council of India, but are not attached to any Medical College. 2. The petitioner 1 before joining housemanship at Delhi, was appointed as House Officer in Surgery in the Medical College, Jabalpur, on 15-6-1985. He wo...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Late Jawaharlal Nagpal. (Through Legal ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-14-1987
Reported in: (1988)65CTR(MP)227; [1988]171ITR136(MP)
ORDER--Jurisdiction of ITO--ITO cannot tax new sources of incomeHELD:The AAC cannot, while setting aside the assessment, empower the ITO to go into points which he himself could not have investigated in exercise of his power of enhancement. The ITO could not, therefore, assume jurisdiction to tax that new source of income while making a fresh assessment in pursuance of an order of remand by the AAC. -CIT v. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria (1967) 66 ITR 443 (SC) relied on. Income Tax Act 1961 s.144A ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Laxmi Development Co.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-1987
Reported in: [1988]171ITR124(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 justified in holding that the profit derived by the assessee on the sale of agricultural land is agricultural income within the meaning of Section 2(1) of the Income-tax Act and is not liable to tax as capital gains under the provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The material facts giving rise to this reference, briefly, are as follows :The assessee is a registered partnership firm. The assessment year in question is 1977-78 for which the accounting year ended on October 31, 1976. During the relevant accounting year, the assessee made a profit of Rs. 97,988 by selling a parcel of agricultural land situated within the limits of the Indore Municipal Corporation....
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Prem Kumar Sethia
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-1987
Reported in: [1988]171ITR66(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 is justified in holding that since penalty proceedings were not initiated during the course of the regular assessment proceedings but were initiated while revising the assessment under Section 155(1) of the Income-tax Act, the levy of penalty under Section 273(b) of the Income-tax Act is bad in law ?'2. The material facts giving rise to this reference, briefly, are as follows :The assessee, who is a partner in a registered firm, filed returns of income for the assessment years 1974-75 to 1976-77 declaring his share income from the firm. The Income-tax Officer completed the assessment and did not initiate any action against the assessee under Section 273 of the Act. Lat...
Chhaganlal Panchulal Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-12-1987
Reported in: [1988]171ITR93(MP)
G.G. Sohani, J.1. By this reference under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (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 value of plant and machinery shall be taken at the written down value thereof as on the first day of the valuation period irrespective of the depreciation allowed during the year and thevalue of the addition, if any, made during the year shall be added thereto ?'2. The material facts giving rise to this reference, briefly, are as follows:3. The assessee is assessed in the status of a Hindu undivided family and the assessment year in question is 1976-77, for which the accounting year ended on Diwali 1975. While framing the assessment for the assessment year in question, the Wealth-tax Officer assessed the value of the plant and machinery at R...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Dr. Manoranjan Mohanty
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-12-1987
Reported in: (1988)67CTR(MP)104
N.D. Ojha, C.J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench, Jabalpur, has referred the following questions to this court for its opinion under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ' the Act ') :'(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was, in law, right in holding that the penalty order dated January 30, 1979, made by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner under section 271(1)(c) of the Act was bad in law ? (ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the penalty order passed by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on January 30, 1979, was bad in law as having been made after six years of the order of remand ?' 2. The facts in a nutshell, necessary for answering the aforesaid questions, may be stated as under : An order of assessment was passed against the assessee on August 12, 1969. Sub...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Princess Sarla Kumari and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-07-1987
Reported in: (1988)67CTR(MP)19; [1988]171ITR14(MP)
N.D. Ojha, C.J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jabalpur, has referred the following three questions to this court for its opinion under section 256(1)of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ' the Act');'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal overstepped its jurisdiction as available under Section 254(1) in entertaining-the appeals ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in freshly enquiring into the matter of assessment having been completed without the service of notices under Section 143(2) when such point did not arise out of the orders of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner ?3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in directing that the taxes already paid should be refunded to the assessees in the absence of any claim by the assessees or order on the point by the lower authorities ?'2. The fa...
Munna Singh Tomar and ors. Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-06-1987
Reported in: 1989CriLJ580
T.N. Singh, J.1. Petitioners are threesome, brothers, who complain that they have been framed up to resemble mythical figures, Three Musketeers of Alexandra Dumas. But, the question to be decided by us in these two petitions is of direction, if any, to be made on the writ side to ensure fair investigation of the crime allegedly authorised by them because they have claimed enforcement of their fundamental right to a fair trial grounded on such investigation.2. On 2-4-1987, an under-trial prisoner and a Police constable were shot dead and petitioners have been booked for that offence. A notorious criminal, Ravi Pande, with goriest of track-record, it is admitted, was one of the victims. It is also admitted that the occurrence look place when he was being escorted back from the Court with co-prisoner Bhagwandas Kamaria, of almost equal notoriety. It has also come on record, that Head Constable Ramnand Singh was the other member of the escort party - who was injured in the shoot-out. It is...
Uttamchand JaIn Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-04-1987
Reported in: [1988]173ITR298(MP)
N.D. Ojha, C.J. 1. On being required to do so by this court, the Tribunal, Nagpur, has referred the following question to this court for its opinion :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that Shri Bhagchand was a benami-dar for the assessee '2. It has been urged by learned counsel for the assessee that the burden to prove that Bhagchand was a benamidar for the assessee lay on the Department which had set up the plea of benamidar and since the Department had failed to produce any satisfactory evidence in support of the said plea, the finding recorded by the Tribunal is apparently illegal.3. Having heard learned counsel for the applicant, we find it difficult to agree with this submission. From a perusal of the order of the Income-tax Officer who was the assessing authority, it appears that he has recorded the finding that Bhagchand was the benamidar of the assessee in view of the fact that Bhagchand was suffering from men...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Modern Hardware
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-04-1987
Reported in: [1987]67STC405(MP)
N.D. Ojha, C.J.1. This judgment shall also govern the disposal of M. C. C. No. 399 of 1983.2. The Tribuual constituted under the M. P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), has referred the following question to this Court for its opinion under Section 44(1) of the Act in each of these two cases :Whether, the Board was justified in concluding that hose pipes and fittings were covered by entry No. 1 of Part VI to Schedule II and not under entry No. 56(ii) of Part II of Schedule II of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act ?3. Entry No. 1 of Part VI to Schedule II of the Act is a residuary entry. It provides the rate of tax in respect of 'All other goods not included in Schedule I or any other part of this Schedule'. It is thus apparent that this entry would apply only if the goods sought to be taxed are not included either in Schedule I or any other part of this Schedule II. The goods in the instant case are hose pipes and fittings. Entry 66(ii) of Part II ...