Madhya Pradesh Court February 1996 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.
Smt. Kusumbai JaIn Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-08-1996
Reported in: [1996]221ITR152(MP)
1. This is a wealth-tax reference under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, at the instance of the assessee and the following two questions of law have been referred by the Tribunal for answer of this court, which read as under :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in not admitting the claim of the adverse possession admitted by the learned Third Additional District Judge, Jabalpur ?2. If the answer to the above is in the affirmative, whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that Smt. Kusum Bai Jain was the owner of the property on the respective valuation dates under consideration and including the same in her net wealth ?'2. The brief facts giving rise to this petition are thus : The assessee disclosed the value of the property for the assessment years 1970-71 and 1971-72. There was no dispute about the ownership of this property in those two assessments...
Gajanan Motal Complex Vs. Gwalior Development Authority
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-1996
Reported in: AIR1996MP135
ORDERT.S. Doabia, J.1. It is high time that owners of commercial premises should make provision for providing space for parking, toilet facilities, approach roads and other basic ammenities to the public who come to their premises. The State burdened as it is finding it difficult to make provisions for everything which a citizen requires. This can be achieved either by Legislative mandate or by terms of contract under which transfer of rights is made. One such step taken in the right direction by Gwalior Development Authorities respondent No. 1, is being impugned in the present writ petition. The matter is purely contractual. It would have been appropriate for the petitioner to pursue the same in the civil court. As a matter of fact, some litigation is pending in Civil Court. However, as the present petition is pending in this Court for almost four years, it would be apt to deal with the same.2. A plot No. 38, was allotted to the petitioner. This allotment was made by the respondent No...
Alpaai Nagrik Grih Nirman Sahakari Sanstha and anr. Vs. State of Madhy ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-1996
Reported in: AIR1996MP133
ORDERT.S. Doabia, J.1. The petitioner-society applied for the sanction of a lay-out plan. This is required to be sanctioned under the Madhya Pradesh Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhini-yam, 1973, The requisite sanction has been placed on record as Annexure P/2. Tnis was for a period of one year. An application for extension was filed. This was done, after the expiry of the period of one year. This prayer has not been entertained. The reason given for this is that the petitioner society should see to it that 15% of the land is car-marked for special purposes. This special purposes is said to be to provide accommodation to a sector of population described as 'informal sector'. According to the State counsel, this sector represents that section of society which is either covered by the term 'Scheduled Castes or Schedule Tribes.'2. I am of the view that the requirement to ask the petitioner society to ear-mark the land of 15% for this purpose is not spelled out from any statutory provision. A c...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Satpal Vijay Kumar and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-1996
Reported in: [1997]226ITR449(MP)
A.R. Tiwari, J.1. The aforesaid miscellaneous civil cases, presented by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Bhopal, under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), contain the common question, as extracted below, and categorised by the applicant as one of law, for a direction to the Tribunal to state the cases and refer the same for our opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the amended provisions of Section 43B were applicable to the assessment year 1984-85 when the said amendment was effective from April 1, 1988 ?'2. Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 683 of 1992 was got listed for today. The other miscellaneous civil cases were listed for today. On request of counsel for the applicant this miscellaneous civil case, entailing an identical question, is also taken up for consideration along with the other miscellaneous civil cases.3. The aforesaid question of law is sough...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ratanchand Mehta
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-1996
Reported in: [1996]221ITR16(MP)
A.K. Mathur, C.J.1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the Revenue and the following question of law has been referred by the Tribunal for answer of this court ;'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in cancelling penalties imposed on the assessee under Section 271(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment years 1972-73 to 1975-76 ?'2. The brief facts giving rise to this reference are these : The matter relates to imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act. Returns for various years were filed belatedly. The following chart would show the delay in filing the returns and the penalties imposed by the Assessing Officer therefor :AssessmentyearReturndue onReturnfiled onDelayin monthsPenaltyimposed Rs.1971-7230-6-197125-11-1976701,440.001972-7330-6-197225-11-1976586,754.001973-7430-6-197325-11-1976467,650.001974-7530-6-197430-6-1978479,880.001975-76...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. S.U. Services
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-1996
Reported in: [1996]221ITR107(MP)
1. This is an income-tax reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 thereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), at the instance of the Revenue and the following question of law has been referred by the Tribunal for answer of this court, which reads as under :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the agreement dated November 6, 1981, between S.U. Pumps Pvt. Ltd. and its seven employees brought into existence a valid partnership entitled to registration under Section 185 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'This reference in question is for the assessment year 1982-83. The assessee-firm carried on similar business as was done in the earlier years and registration was granted by the Income-tax Officer. For the year 1982-83, there was a change in the constitution of the firm as one new partner was admitted to the partnership. The assessee filed Form No. 11-A. Though the registration was granted in the earlier years, the Income-tax Officer refused to grant regist...
Vijay Kumar Chaturvedi and ors. Vs. Ramashanker and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-1996
Reported in: 1996ACJ966
S.K. Dubey and Shambhoo Singh, JJ.1. The claimants have filed this appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded vide award dated 7.12.1988 passed in Claim Case No. 54 of 1987 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Tikamgarh.2. The facts are not in dispute. The deceased Mannulal was a teacher who on 14.10.1984 was going on his bicycle towards Baruasagar, when truck No. UTP 9721 owned by respondent No. 1, driven by respondent No. 2 and insured by respondent No. 3, dashed against him, causing him multiple injuries. He was shifted to Jhansi Hospital and then was taken to Medical College, Gwalior, where he succumbed to his injuries on 29.10.1984.3. The Tribunal held that at the time of the accident Mannulal was aged 63 years and was getting pension of Rs. 300/- per month, hence, determined the dependency at the rate of Rs. 200/- per month and by applying the multiplier of 7, calculated the compensation at Rs. 16,800/-. A further sum of Rs. 5,000/- was awarded towards pain and sufferi...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Satpal Vijay Kumar Etc. Etc.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-1996
Reported in: (1996)134CTR(MP)100
A. R. TIWARI, J. :The aforesaid Misc. Civil Cases, presented by the CIT, Bhopal under s. 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961 (for short the Act) contain the common question, as extracted below, and categorised by the applicant as one of law, for direction to the Tribunal to state the cases and refer the same for our opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the amended provisions of s. 43B were applicable to asst. yr. 1984-85 when the said amendment was effective from 1st April, 1988 ?'2. Misc. Civil Case No. 683 of 1992 was not listed for today. Other Misc. Civil Cases were listed for today. However, on request of the counsel for the applicant this Misc. Civil Case, entailing identical question is also taken up for consideration along with the other Misc. Civil Cases.3. The aforesaid question of law is sought to be supplemented and supported by the undernoted three common grounds contained in these applications :'(i)...
Dr. Khalil-ur-rehman Vs. Ahad Beg and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-06-1996
Reported in: II(1996)DMC4
Fakhruddin, J.1. This revision-petition has been filed under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the complainant/ applicant, against the order dated 10.10.1994 passed by Mr. R.B. Dixit, Sessions Judge, Shivpuri, in Bail Application No. 2116/94 for cancellation of bail, granted to respondent No. 1 Ahad Beg, for an offence under Section 304B, IPC, registered at Crime No. 502/94 by P.S. Shivpuri.2. The revision is filed mainly on the ground that the first bail application of respondent No. 1 Ahad Beg was decided by III Additional Sessions Judge, Shivpuri, thereafter he filed second bail application, which was heard and decided by Sessions Judge, Shivpuri.3. Initially, application No. 2079/94, under Section 438 Cr.P.C. was filed by respondent No.l for grant of bail before Sessions Judge, Shivpuri. On 24.9.1994, the same was transferred to III A.S.J., Shivpuri. The complainant-party had filed an objection. During the pendency of the application, the accused was arrested and an ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. S. Khushal Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-06-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)MPLJ530
ORDERA.R. Tiwari, J.1. On application under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), registered as RA No. 16/Ind/88, for the Assessment Year 1979-80, the Tribunal stated the case and referred the under noted question of law for our opinion with reference to the order passed in ITA No. 978/Ind/84 :-'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the Commissioner had no jurisdiction to revise under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 an assessment order passed by the ITO in accordance with the directions issued to him by the IAC of Income-tax under section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961?'2. Facts lie in a narrow compass. The year of assessment is 1979-80. The assessment was framed in the status of individual. It was framed in accordance with the directions of the IAC under section 144B of the Act. The Commissioner of Income Tax considered the said order erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the reve...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »