Madhya Pradesh Court January 1988 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.
Bhagwan Cloth Stores Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-12-1988
Reported in: (1988)70CTR(MP)37; [1988]173ITR539(MP)
C.P. Sen, J.1. At the instance of the assessee, the following question of law has been referred to this court for its opinion by the Tribunal under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1976-77:' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in upholding the orders of the authorities below refusing registration to the assessee-firm 'Originally, a business in cloth was done in the name and style of Bhagwan Cloth Stores, by the Hindu undivided family of which Girdharilal Bhagwandas was the karta. From November 14, 1974, Girdharilal took his son, Ashok Kumar, as a working partner and converted the business into a partnership, but no partition was effected in the family. The Income-tax Officer was of the opinion that the joint family business could not be converted into a partnership, unless there was a partition between the family members and that no genuine firm had come into existence. He, therefore, refused reg...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Ram Awatar.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-12-1988
Reported in: (1989)71CTR(MP)21; [1989]177ITR429(MP)
C. P. SEN J. - In pursuance of the direction of this court under section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, in Miscellaneous Civil Case No.522 of 1981, decided on November 19, 1982, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has stated the case and referred the following question of law for this courts opinion:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in cancelling the penalties of Rs. 3,000 and Rs. 16,500 as imposed by the Wealth-tax Officer under section 18(1)(a) of the Act for the assessment years 1971-72 and 1972-73, without taking into account the fact that the assessee was given opportunity by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to give his explanation on the question of delay and to substantiate the same ?'The assessee filed his returns of wealth for the two years in dispute on August 16, 1974, while the returns were due on June 30, 1971 and July 31, 1972. Penalty proceedings for filing the returns late were started and the asse...
The Indian Mills Stores Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-11-1988
Reported in: [1989]74STC193(MP)
N.D. Ojha, C.J.1. The Board of Revenue, M.P., Gwalior, which is the Tribunal 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:Whether in view of the fact that entry 5 in Part I of Schedule II (relating to iron and steel), was amended with effect from 1st April, 1973 by Act No. 35 of 1973, but the entry No. 56 of Part II of Schedule II relating to all types of pipes and pipe fittings, was not amended till 31st August, 1974 when amended so as to exclude pipes covered by entry 5(xi) of Part I and even this amendment of entry 56 being not given retrospective effect as in the case of entry 12 of Part III, the G.I. pipes and conduit pipes purchased from other registered dealers against payment of full rate of tax without any declaration in form XII are entitled to deduction under Section 2(r)(ii) or not ?Further, in view of the fact that vide General ...
Hind Syntex Ltd. Vs. Dewas Textile Mills (P.) Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-08-1988
Reported in: [1989]66CompCas927(MP)
P.D. Mulye, J.1. This order shall govern the disposal of I. A. No. 3121 of 1986 dated August 21. 1986, and LA. No., 2460 of 1987 dated August 13, 1987, which are filed under Rule 6 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, read with Sections 10, 151 and 141 to the Civil Procedure Code with a prayer that further procedings in the present winding-up petition filed on behalf of the petitioner against the respondent company be stayed till Criminal Case No. 93 of 1987, filed by the petitioner against Shri Jawaharlal Daga, managing director of the respondent company, for an alleged offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, which is pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Devas, is decided.2. The petitioner has filed the present winding-up petition on the ground that the respondent company is insolvent and unable to pay its debts. According to the petitioner, on the basis of a contract entered into between the petitioner and the respondent company, the petitioners who are manufactu...
Jagat NaraIn Tiwari Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-08-1988
Reported in: [1989(59)FLR517]; (1990)ILLJ561MP
B.C. Varma, J. 1. The petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Engineer. He was later promoted as Executive Engineer and then in the year 1973 further promoted as Superintending Engineer. In the gradation list of Superintending Engineers (Irrigation) as on August 22, 1979, the petitioner is shown at Serial No. 21 and the respondents No. 2 to 6 ranked lower. The petitioner, therefore, says that they are juniors to him. All those respondents are now Chief Engineers. Respondent No. 2 G.S. Jaspal, was so promoted in August, 1984 and the other respondents thereafter. Rules have been framed governing the services of gazetted officers in the Madhya Pradesh Irrigation Service. They are known as Madhya Pradesh Irrigation Engineering Services (Gazetted Recruitment) Rules, 1968. According to the Schedule 4, annexed to those rules the next higher post of promotion from Superintending Engineer is that of Chief Engineer. The posts of Chief Engineers can be filled in only by promotion. The cri...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ramdayal Ramcharan Purohit
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-08-1988
Reported in: [1988]173ITR527(MP)
N.D. Ojha, C.J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, to this court for its opinion :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in upholding the decision of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax directing the Income-tax Officer to allow continuation of registration for the first period ended on October 28, 1976?'The facts in brief necessary to answer the aforesaid question are that a few persons carried on business as partners in the name and style of M/s. Ramdayal Ramcharan Purohit, Chhatarpur. During the accounting period, Ramdayal, one of the partners, expired on October 28, 1976. The partnership was, however, continued even though the partners did not execute the partnership deed till the close of the accounting year. A question arose as to whether registration of the firm was permissible in the aforesaid circumstances. The App...
Mahaveerprasad JaIn Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-08-1988
Reported in: [1988]172ITR331(MP); [1989]72STC27(MP)
1. This is an application for restoration of Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 263 of 1985, which has been dismissed for default on March 11, 1987, and of Miscellaneous Petition No. 191 of 1981 dismissed for default.2. It was not disputed before us that a counsel was appearing for the petitioner in Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 263 of 1985 and in Miscellaneous Petition No. 191 of 1981 and that counsel failed to appear when the case was called on for hearing. Learned counsel for the applicant referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Rafiq v. Munshilal, AIR 1981 SC 1400, and contended that the application be allowed. The application was vehemently opposed by Shri Mukati, learned counsel for the non-applicants, who contended that no sufficient cause was made out for restoring Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 263 of 1985 and Miscellaneous Petition No. 191 of 1981.3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we have come to the conclusion that the application deserves to be allowed. The a...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Dr. N. Shrivastava
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-08-1988
Reported in: (1988)68CTR(MP)114; [1988]170ITR556(MP); 1988MPLJ440
N.D. Ojha, C.J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore Bench, Indore, 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 right in holding that the assessment order dated November 23, 1981, made by the Income-tax Officer, was made after the expiry of the period of limitation and was, therefore, invalid '2. The facts in brief necessary to answer the aforesaid question are that with regard to the assessment year 1978-79, the accounting year of which ended on March 31, 1978, the assessee filed his return under Section 139(4) of the Act on March 22, 1979, he not having filed a return under Section 139 (1) or (2), Subsequently, the assessee filed another return on March 11, 1981 purporting to be a revised return. The assessment order was passed on November 23, 1981, i.e., within one year from March 11, 1981...
Mangilal Vs. Pramod and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-08-1988
Reported in: 2(1988)ACC306
K.L. Shrivastava, J.1. This appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (for short 'the M.V. Act') is directed against the award dated 1-10-1984 made by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal West Nimar, Mandleshwar in Claim Case No. 96 of 1982.2. Facts not in dispute for the purposes of this appeal are these. The appellant Mangilal (AW 2) at the relevant time, was employed as first driver of the bus bearing registration number M.P.U. 5034 owned by the respondent No 1 Pramod Shah and insured with the respondent No. 3. On 5-5-82 at about 9 a.m. when it was being driven by its second driver, the respondent No. 2 Gulsher, it met with an accident on the Khetia-Pansemal road near Khetia. The appellant Mangilal in his capacity as the first driver of the bus was one of the occupants of the bus. As a result of the accident the bus bumped violently and turned on its left side In consequence, the appellant sustained multiple injuries including communited fracture of tibia of the left...
Rani Udayadevi Payagpur Dewas Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-1988
Reported in: [1989]180ITR375(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, the Tribunal was right in not allowing the assessee to claim the deduction of the cost of the asset to the donor, while computing the capital gains on the property sold under sections 48 and 49 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?(2) Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee was not entitled to change her option for deduction of value/cost for computation of capital gains from Section 55(2)(ii) to Section 49, when both the claims were made in the return itself ?'2. The material facts giving rise to this reference, briefly, are as follows :3. The assessee is assessed in the status of an individual. In the return filed by the assessee for the assessment year 1979-80, t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »