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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Gorelal Dubey
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-24-1996
Reported in: (1997)143CTR(MP)130; [1998]232ITR246(MP)
1. This is an income-tax 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 right in law to hold that the provisions of Section 43B of the Income-tax Act were not applicable to the unpaid liability towards royalty payment of Rs. 76,956 since royalty was neither tax nor duty ?'2. The brief facts giving rise to this reference are that the assessee in its return for the assessment year 1984-85 had among others claimed a deduction of Rs. 76,956 towards its liability for payment of royalty. This claim was disallowed by the Assessing Officer in view of the provisions of Section 43B of the Income-tax Act, 1961. According to the Assessing Officer, the payment of royalty was a levy to which provisions of Section 43B were applicable. The appeal of the assessee against the order of the As...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ganesh Prasad Badriprasad and Co.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-24-1996
Reported in: (1997)140CTR(MP)548
A. K. MATHUR, C.J. :This is a reference under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 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 1st April, 1976, unless and otherwise a positive evidence is found that the assessees 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 CIT(A) who deleted the penalty levied by AO under s. 271(1)(c) r/w Expln. 1 of the IT Act, 1961 ?'2. The assessee was served with a notice of hearing, but neither it appeared nor did it file any application for adjournment. Therefore the Tribunal proceeded to dispose of the reference after hearing learned counsel for the Revenue.3. No detailed facts have been given. Neither the statement of the case nor the order passed speaks ...
Rajnibai and ors. Vs. Avtar Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-24-1996
Reported in: 2(1996)ACC197
S.K. Dubey, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by the claimants, aggrieved by the award passed in Claim Case No. 39/89 dated 1.11.1993 by the Fifth Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal are: The deceased Basant Kumar was employed as a conductor on the truck No. MBR 8756 owned by respondent No. 1 which at time of accident on 25.7.1988 at about 1.30 a.m. was driven by respondent No. 2 and insured by respondent No. 3. It is said that the deceased was sleeping near the rear wheel of the truck who was crushed while the respondent No. 2 since deceased reversed the truck. The claimants filed an application under Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, the 'Act') and claimed compensation for Rs. 3,10,000/-. The Tribunal after appreciation of evidence adduced by the parties held that the rash and negligent act of driver is not established, it was the deceased himself who was responsible for...
Sarat Chandra Nanda and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-23-1996
Reported in: 1998ACJ274; AIR1997MP70; 1997(1)MPLJ119
S.K. Dubey, J.1. These two appeals under Section 82F (2) of the Indian Railways Act, 1890 (for short 'the Act') arise out of common award dated 7-5-1987 passed by Ex officio Claims Commissioner, Jabalpur, whereby the two applications No. 6/ 84 and 7/84 (Saratchand Nanda v. Union of India) filed under Section 82C of the Act claiming compensation for death of one N. K. Nanda and his wife Tapaswani Nanda, were dismissed holding that the appellants do not fall within the meaning of 'dependant' as used under Section 82C of the Act.2. Facts giving rise to the appeals are these: The appellants/claimants are the sons and daughters of N. K. Nanada and Tapaswani Nanda who on 15-9-1984 were travelling in first-class compartment of 143 Dn Kalinga Express holding Ticket Nos. 6519 and 6518 respectively which collided with a goods train at New Katni Junction as a result of which both with other passengers were killed in the train accident.3. The appellants claimed compensation of Rs. 2,49,000/- for t...
Ridhkarandas Poonamchand Bhura Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-23-1996
Reported in: [1998]231ITR604(MP)
A. K. Mathur, C.J. 1. This is an income-tax reference at the instance of the assessee and the following question of law has been referred by the Tribunal for answer by this court :'Whether the Appellate Tribunal, in the facts and circumstances of the case, was justified in treating a part of the income declared as agricultural income by the assessee-Hindu undivided family as its income from undisclosed sources ?'2. The brief facts giving rise to this reference are these : The assessment years are 1978-79 and 1979-80. The assessee-Hindu undivided family had derived income from house properties and agricultural holdings and had declared an income of Rs. 5,000 and Rs. 10,000 for the years 1978-79 and 1979-80, respectively, which were subsequently revised to Rs. 35,000 in each of the two years. The Income-tax Officer accepted the agricultural income at Rs. 5,000 and Rs. 10,000, respectively, and treated the excess income of Rs. 30,000 and Rs. 25,000 for the accounting years 1978-79 and 197...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Durga Prasad Rajaram Adatiya
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-23-1996
Reported in: [1997]224ITR268(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 questions of law have been referred by the Tribunal for answer of this court :' (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the original deed dated November 14, 1955, together with the endorsement dated September 10, 1961, will constitute an instrument of partnership for purpose of registration ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that there was no change in the constitution of the firm and the assessee was entitled to continuation of registration of the firm for the assessment year 1962-63 ?' 2. The brief facts giving rise to this reference are thus : Under a deed of partnership dated November 14, 1955, the assessee-firm was constituted with the following three partners, namely :Shareinprofitin loss1.Rajaram Adatia0-2-33/7th0...
Hari Krishna Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-23-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)MPLJ322
ORDERT.S. Doabia, J.1. Shri R. C. Gupta, Counsel for the petitioner.On my asking Shri V. K. Sharma, Adv. appearing for respondents Nos. 1, 2 and 3.Heard.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the court below has erred in condoning the delay of seven days.2. In the matter of condoning the delay when litigation is resorted to by a governmental agency different parameters can be adopted. See, observation made in Writ Petition No. 1235 of 1993 decided on 8-1-1996 since reported as State of M. P. v. Smt. Bhoori, (1996) 1 Recent Revenue Reporter 747.3. See also the view expressed by the Supreme Court in the case reported as State of M. P. v. S. S. Akolkar, 1996(1) Recent Revenue Reporter 748. No doubt, the Supreme Court was dealing with the matter arising under Order 22, yet the court was of the view that the broad approach from public justice perspective is to be adopted. In para 7, it was observed as under :'It is settled law that the consideration for condonation of delay und...
Commissioner of Customs and C. Ex. Vs. Kesari Steels
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-23-1996
Reported in: 1997(57)ECC91; 1996(87)ELT34(MP)
ORDERA.R. Tiwari, J.1. The applicant (Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Indore) has filed this application Under Section 35G(3) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 seeking direction to the Tribunal to state the case and refer the question, labelled as substantial question of law as extracted below :-'Whether Modvat credit is admissible on the ramming mass and Oxygen/Acytelene gas and packing of ramming mass which are basically used as part of furnace, Cutting Tool respectively, keeping in view the scope of Rules 57A which allows Modvat credit on goods used in or in relation to the manufacture of final products.' * * *2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the non-applicant is the manufacturer of continuous cast Billets falling under Chapter Heading No. 72.06 of Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The non-applicant has been availing itself of the Modvat credits provided under Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. During 1986-87 the non-appli...
Surendra Dixit Vs. Smt. Seema Dixit
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-22-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)MPLJ78
ORDERD.P.S. Chauhan, J.1. The present appeal arises out of the judgment and decree dated 15th January, 1996 passed by the IInd Additional district Judge, Hoshangabad in Matrimonial Suit No. 31-A/95 whereby the trial Court granted a decree of divorce at the behest of the wife and simultaneously issued direction for return of the ornaments as presented to the girl by her father. The present appeal is directed at the instance of the husband i.e. Surendra Dixit.2. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that so far as the decree of divorce is concerned, the appellant has no objection rather he has accepted the decree of divorce but the grievance is only in regard to the part which requires the appellant for return of the ornaments given to the bride by her parents. Learned counsel further submitted that under section 27 of the Hindu Marriage Act (for brevity hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the CivilCourt while trying the matrimonial suit has no right or jurisdiction to direct fo...
Chamar Singh and 4 ors. Vs. Rohit Kumar and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-22-1996
Reported in: 2(1996)ACC244
S.K. Dubey, J.1. The appellants are the claimants who aggrieved of the award passed on 3.9.1990 in Claim Case No. 6/88 by the IInd Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raigarh, whereby the claim of the appellant has been dismissed, have filed this appeal.2. Circumstances giving rise to this appeal are thus: Deceased Megnath aged about 28 years, was earning Rs. 20/- per day by doing the job of Carpenter. On 24.3.1987 he was going on a bycycle by sitting at the back seat, of PW 2 Ghansai who was going from village Kudumkela towards Teram, a Bus No. CIN-642 driven by respondent No. 1, owned by respondent No. 2 was coming from the same direction in a speed of about 60 km., when it blew the horn the deceased to fumbled and save himself jumped on the road, who then was crushed by the rear wheel of the bus in the middle of the road. The driver of the bus applied brakes but bus could be stopped at about 50 paces from the place of the accident. The claimants No. 1 and 2. are the parents, while claim...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »