Madhya Pradesh Court May 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. Mahavir Stores
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-07-1996
Reported in: [1998]232ITR300(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 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. 13,68,060 which had been made by the Income-tax Officer under Section 40A(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The brief facts giving rise to this reference are that the assessee deals on a semi-wholesale basis in grains, kirana and edible oils. Its total purchases during the year exceeded Rs. 13,50,000 and purchases were made on credit from dealers. The Income-tax Officer observed that the payments were made in cash and, therefore, he made an addition of Rs. 13,68,060 under Section 40A(3) of the Act of 1961. The assessee went in appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) who, after considering the facts of the case, allowed the claim of the assessee and held that ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Bharat Industrial Works
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-07-1996
Reported in: [1997]226ITR543(MP)
1. This is a reference at the instance of the Revenue under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 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 law in holding that for the purpose of working the disallowances under Section 37(3A), the expenditure incurred on maintenance of car was not includible in spite of clear and specific provisions in Section 37(3B)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The brief facts giving rise to this reference are that the assessee-firm declared its total income at Rs. 4,18,030. The business of the assessee was manufacture and sale of spare parts required in steel plants and other industries and also execution of the work of fabrication of steel structures and power equipments. During the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer found that an amount of Rs. 1,41,580 was incurred by the assessee on maintenance of cars. ...
MatadIn S/O DatadIn Vs. Manoramabai Ramlal Gattani and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-07-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)MPLJ241
J.G. Chitre, J.1. This appeal has been admitted on following substantial question of law :-'Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the judgment of the first appellate Court is vitiated on account of the Court having misdirected itself introducing the element of increase of business and requiring the same to be proved by the plaintiff, when the plaintiff had not come with such a case and on this account the judgment suffers from legal infirmity?'2. Shri A. K. Sethi for appellant and Shri S. H. Agrawal for respondents have been heard in context with the substantial question of law and the judgment and decree which are being assailed in view of the evidence on record.3. Shri Sethi, learned counsel for appellant argued that provision of section 12(1)(f) of M. P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for convenience) does not provide that the landlord, for the purpose of getting a decree for evicting the tenant is required to prove 'increase in the ...
Dharamsingh Govindsingh Vs. Sureshchandra Gupta and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-07-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)MPLJ347
J.G. Chitre, J.1. Shri M. L. Agarwal for the appellant.Shri S. S. Samvatsar with Shri Rajendra Sugandhi and Miss Vandana Kasrekar for the respondents.This appeal has been admitted on following substantial questions of law :-'(1) Whether the Almirah can be said to be accommodation as defined under section 2(a) of M. P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961?(2) Whether the ground of demolition of the wall in which the almirah in question is fitted, is covered by section 12(1)(f) of the Act?2. Both the learned counsel have been heard. Shri M. L. Agarwal argued that the almirah which in possession of the appellant is an 'accommodation' in view of provisions of M. P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) because it has been affixed to a wall which is part and parcel of a building which is owned by the respondents. Shri Samvatsar submitted that the said almirah is not an 'accommodation' in view of provisions of the Act and, therefore, the appeal needs to be dismissed...
Baldeo Kumar Agrawal Vs. Managing Director, M.P. Rajya Laghu Van Upaj ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-06-1996
Reported in: AIR1997MP147; 1997(2)MPLJ255
ORDERD.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. In this revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, preferred by the present applicant who is plaintiff in the trial Court, a pure question of jurisdiction of Civil Court has been raised which has been decided against the plaintiff by the trial Court. The learned trial Judge i.e. the District Judge, Balaghat by the impugned order dated 4-4-1995 held that the claim lodged by the plaintiff against the respondent-Co-operative Society (namely, M.P. Rajya Laghu Van Upaj Sahkari Sangh Maryadit) is exclusively referable as a dispute for decision to the Registrar of Co-operative Societies under Section 64 of the M.P. Co-operative Societies Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short) and the Civil Court's jurisdiction is expressly barred under Section 82(l)(c) of the said Act.2. Before considering the contentions advanced on behalf of the plaintiff by the learned Counsel Shri M.M. Agrawal, Advocate, it is necessary to examine the nature of t...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Smt. Gayatri Devi Birla
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-06-1996
Reported in: [1998]232ITR279(MP)
1. This is a reference under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax on the direction of the High Court. The Tribunal has referred the following question of law for answer by this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in law in holding that the interest paid to Gwalior Agencies should be deducted from interest received from the joint account maintained with Gwalior Agencies and only the net interest should be brought to tax ?'2. The facts giving rise to this reference are that the assessee is a partner in the firm, Gwalior Agencies. The assessment years involved are 1982-83 and 1983-84. Certain amounts were credited to the account of the asses-see in the books of the aforesaid firm for which she was entitled to interest. The books of account carried another account in her name in which her drawings were debited. The firm had been crediting interest to the first account which ha...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shiv Shakti Timbers
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-06-1996
Reported in: [1998]229ITR505(MP)
A.K. Mathur, C.J. 1. This is a reference at the instance of the Revenue under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the following two questions have been referred by the Tribunal for answer by this court : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law to hold that if a firm's books showed a cash credit in the name of a partner, it is Section 69 and not Section 68 which could be attracted in the case of partner only 2. Whether, the Tribunal was correct in law to hold that the provisions of Section 68 did not apply in the case of firm if the cash credit, even though unexplained or not satisfactorily explained, stood recorded in the name of a partner ?' 2. The brief facts giving rise to this reference are that the assessee is a firm and during the year under consideration, was dealing in timber, fuel, wood and bhusa. Books of account were maintained. The Assessing Officer found Rs. 45,000 recorded in the books in the names of seve...
Lakhan Das Vs. Punni Lal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-06-1996
Reported in: 1997ACJ1060
D.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. By this revision under Section 115, Civil Procedure Code, the applicant impugnes the order dated 16.2.1993 of the Claims Tribunal at Kawardha whereby his application for joinder as a party to the claim case has been rejected on the ground of limitation.2. It is not in dispute that the claim arises out of a motor accident which took place on 15.4.1988 prior to the coming into force of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which came into force on 1.7.1989. To the accident in question the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (now repealed) would apply.3. The applicant claims to be the husband of the deceased, although his status as husband has been denied by the other claimants who have preferred the claim. Whether there was a valid marriage or valid divorce between the applicant and deceased is a question which is yet to be decided. According to the learned Judge of the Claims Tribunal, on the date the application by the applicant to be added as one of the claimants was f...
Niranjan Singh Vs. Satya Wati and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-06-1996
Reported in: I(1997)ACC662
S.K. Kulshrestha, J.1 This appeal has been filed under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent by the owner of the truck bearing registration No. MPA 3078 against the order of the learned single Judge of this Court dated 11.4.1986 passed in M.A. No. 13 of 1982.2. On 18.3.1980, at about 8 p.m., while Ramkishore, a cultivator, was taking his crop in his bullock-cart to his village Umari, the truck No. MPA 3078 belonging to the appellant and driven by respondent Premlal came from behind and collided with the bullock-cart as a result whereof Ramkishore sustained severe injuries and died. The widow of Ramkishore, respondent No. 1, for herself and as the natural guardian of her children, respondent Nos. 2 and 3, filed a claim petition under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, against the present appellant, the driver of the vehicle and the insurance company, respondent No. 5, for compensation in the sum of Rs. 4,30,000/- on account of the death caused due to rash and negligent act of the ...
Smt. Pramila Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-02-1996
Reported in: [1998]232ITR262(MP)
N.K. Jain, J.1. The assessee has filed this application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), seeking a direction to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore, to state the case and refer the undernoted questions said to be of law, arising out of the order passed by the Tribunal on May 5, 1991, in I. T. A. No. 701/Ind. of 1985 and its refusal to refer the case vide order dated November 29, 1991, passed in R. A. No. 108/Ind. of 1991 :'(a) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in holding that the deduction under Section 80TT is admissible on the net-amount of prize money of Rs. 10,80,000 and not on the gross lottery-prize of Rs. 12 lakhs as per provision of Section 80TT read with Section 80B(5) of the Income-tax Act, which were in force in the assessment year 1978-79? (b) Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in relying upon the ratio of the Supreme Court's decision in Distributors (Baroda) P. Ltd. : [1985...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »