Madhya Pradesh Court April 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.
State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Garud Chaturvedi and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-27-1996
Reported in: 1996(0)MPLJ1064
ORDERT.S. Doabia, J.1. The State of Madhya Pradesh is invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. It is aggrieved against an order passed by the 2nd Addl. District Judge, Gwalior. A copy of this order has been placed on the record as annexure P-l. The brief facts for the purposes of this petition be noticed as under.2. The State of Madhya Pradesh acquired land for construction of Sind Mahua Canal. A notification was issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). This was issued on 4th March, 1989. Notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 12th September, 1989. The Collector gave its award on 30th October, 1991. The total amount which was payable under the award was determined as Rs. 5,61,190/-. The break up of this amount is as under :-(a) Market value Rs. 3,48,560/-(b) Interest @ 12% U/s 23-A (1) Rs. 1,08,062/-(c) Solatium @ 30% Rs. 1,04,568/-Total : Rs. 5,61,190/-3. The State deposi...
Salim S/O Majeed Khan Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-26-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ101
A.R. Tiwari, J.1. 'Bail' or 'Jail' is a point prone to produce perplexity at times in Bail-Court and obfuscation becomes more operative when it is a case under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'the Act') providing additional limitations under Section 37 of the Act. Eventually, the answer depends on judicial discretion which, as stated by Lord Mansfield in classic terms in John Wilkes Case (1970) 4 Burr 2527 (2528), should be governed by law and guided by rules, not by humour. In scheme of things there is nothing like unfettered discretion because, as observed by Benjamin Cardozo in elegant words 'The Judge, even when he is free, is still not wholly free. He is not to innovate at pleasure'.2. With this preludial point, I come to case on hand which has done full circle in that from one single Judge it is back to another single Judge. The applicant, lugged and locked in a case under Sections 8/18 and 21 of the Act, registered by Police Station Sanyogitaganj,...
Salim S/O Majeed Khan Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-26-1996
Reported in: 1996(0)MPLJ995
ORDER1. ON DIFFERENCE OF OPINION BETWEEN HON'BLE SHRI R.D. SHUKLA, J. AND HON'BLE SHRI N.K. JAIN, J. ON QUESTION OF SECTION 50 OF N.D.P.S. ACT AT THE STAGE OF BAIL PLEA.'BAIL' or 'JAIL' is a point prone to produce perplexity at times in Bail Court and obfuscation becomes more operative when it is a case under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'the Act') providing additional limitations under Section 37 of the Act. Eventually, the answer depends on judicial discretion which, as stated by Lord Mansfield in classic terms in John Wilkes case, (1770) 4 Burr 2528, should be governed by law and guided by rules, not by humour. In scheme of things there is nothing like unfettered discretion because, as observed by Benjamin Cardozo in elegant words 'The Judge, even when he is free, is still not wholly free. He is not to innovate at pleasure'.2. With this preludial point, I come to case on hand which has done full circle in that from one Single Judge it is back to an...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sal Udyog Limited
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-1996
Reported in: [1998]230ITR192(MP)
1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act at the instance of the Revenue and the following question of law has been referred by the Tribunal for the answer of this court :'Whether, on the facts and under the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in cancelling the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, holding that the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 1982-83 was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue ?'2. The brief facts giving rise to this reference are thus : The assessee-company is engaged in the manufacture of oil from sal seeds. It claimed depreciation on the machinery which was exposed to corrosive substance. The Assessing Officer held that the assessee will be entitled to the depreciation at the special rate of 15 per cent. Thereafter the Commissioner under Section 263(1) of the Income-tax Act, found that the order passed by the Assessin...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Noshirwan and Co. Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-1996
Reported in: [1997]227ITR914(MP)
A.R. Tiwari, J.1. At the instance of the Department, the Tribunal has stated the case and referred the undernoted question of law arising out of the order dated September 27,1993, passed in ITA No. 880/Ind. of 1993 on rejection of the application registered as RA No. 321/Ind. of 1993 for the assessment year 1986-87, for our consideration and 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 deduction should be allowed for the amount of the sales tax, which has been paid before the date prescribed for filing of the return under Section 139(1) of Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the Revenue authorities had made a disallowance of Rs. 1,59,360 by invoking the provisions of Section 43B of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The said amount represented the sales tax collected in the last quarter. The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim under Section 43B and added t...
Central Bank of India, Tirodi Branch Vs. Abdul Mujeeb Khan and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-1996
Reported in: 1996(0)MPLJ1110
S.K. Dubey, J.1. Appellant/Bank has filed this first appeal under Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code against the judgment and decree dt. 1-12 1987 whereby Civil Suit No. l-B/1987 filed by the appellant/plaintiff was dismissed by the IInd Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Balaghat.2. The facts which giving rise to this appeal are thus :The appellant/Bank advanced a loan of Rs. 1,90,000/- to the respondent No. 1 on 6-11-1980 for the purchase of new ford truck registered No. CPK-8497 for Rs. 2,55,000/-, on execution of necessary documents, i.e. demand prenote (Ex.P/1), agreement of loan (Ex.P/2), declaration of property (Ex.P/3). The respondents Nos. 2 and 3 as guarantors executed the deed of guarantee (Ex.P/4). The respondent No. 1, the borrower after depositing Rs. 65,000/- in the account, purchased the truck which was hypothecated with the Bank. On the terms and conditions mentioned in the loan of agreement, the loan amount carried interest at the rate of 12 l/2% per...
Kalibai and ors. Vs. M.P. Electricity Board
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-1996
Reported in: 1997ACJ791
R.D. Vyas, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree in Civil Suit No. 5-B of 1984, passed by A.D.J. to the Court of District Judge, Jhabua, on 9.10.1985, whereby he was pleased to dismiss the suit of the plaintiff-appellant.2. The suit of the appellant was for the damages for the death of Kal Singh, who died due to electrocution, by an electric line of 11 KV H.T. Power, on 1.10.1983 when the deceased Kal Singh along with two or three others was coming on foot from the village Nava Pada to Dedla. That during his walk, when he came near Mokhada Dedla, loose wires of high voltage power line were hovering over the road and current was passing. It is stated that a pole holding this line had fallen down two days prior to the date of incident and due to callousness and negligence on the part of the respondents, wires were lying on the road and since the officials of the defendant did not put off the line, caused danger to the public life. There was no board of caution, nor...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Noshirwan and Co. Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-1996
Reported in: (1998)146CTR(MP)648
A. R. TIWARI, J. :At the instance of the Department, the Tribunal has stated the case and referred the undernoted question of law arising out of the order dt. 27th September, 1993, passed in ITA No. 880/Ind./1993 on rejection of the application registered as RA No. 321/Ind./1993 for the asst. yr. 1986-87, for our consideration and opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the deduction should be allowed for the amount of the sales-tax, which has been paid before the date prescribed for filing of the return under s. 139(1) of IT Act, 1961 ?'2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the Revenue authorities had made a disallowance of Rs. 1,59,360 by invoking the provisions of s. 43B of the IT Act, 1961. The said amount represented the sales-tax collected in the last quarter. The AO disallowed the claim under s. 43B and added the said amount to the total income of the assessee-company. The addition was co...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Rajendra Rice Mill
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-24-1996
Reported in: [1998]232ITR217(MP)
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 by this court : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 8,72,130 which had been made by the Income-tax Officer under Section 40A(3) ?' 2. The brief facts giving rise to this reference application are that the assessee is a partnership firm deriving income from rice milling, purchase and sale of foodgrains and pulses. A return of income was filed on July 30, 1982, showing income of Rs. 49,356 and the assessment was completed on a total income of Rs. 10,72,440. The Income-tax Officer made a disallowance of Rs. 8,72,130 under Section 40A(3) represented by payments shown to have been made being purchase price of rice to 57 different parties. The Income-tax Officer observed that the managing partner of the assessee-firm, Shri Ka...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ganesh Prasad Badriprasad and Co.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-24-1996
Reported in: [1998]231ITR951(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 questions have been referred for answer by this court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that after amendment from April 1, 1976, unless and otherwise a positive evidence is found that the assessee's declared income is not true or accurate, no penalty is envisaged ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in confirming the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) who deleted the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer under Section 271(1)(c) read with Explanation 1 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The assessee was served with a notice of hearing, but it neither appeared nor filed any application for adjournment. Therefore, the Tribunal proceeded to dispose of the reference after hearing learned counsel for the Revenue.3. No detai...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »