Madhya Pradesh Court July 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.
K.N. Oil Industries Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-09-1996
Reported in: [1996]232ITR479(MP)
A.K. Mathur, C.J. 1. This is an income-tax reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the assessee and the following question has been referred for answer by this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the disallowance for the purposes of Section 37(3A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, should be made out of total specified expenses of the assessee and not from such expenses for separate business and/or separate offices computed separately under Section 37(3A) as claimed by the assessee ?'2. The assessee is a registered firm engaged in the business of supply of different commodities at head office and branches. The accounts of the following branches are separately maintained :(i) Swastik Industries, Mahasamund. (ii) Shri Ganesh Twins Mills, Raipur. (iii) Swastik Soaps and Detergents, Mahasamund. 3. The assessee was maintaining separate accounts. The specified expenditure covered in...
Nandlal Jaiswal and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-09-1996
Reported in: [1998]232ITR540(MP)
A.K. Mathur, C.J. 1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the following question of law has been referred by the Tribunal for answer by this court : 'Whether the Tribunal, in the facts and under the circumstances of the case, was justified in restoring the penalty ?' 2. The assessee-firm derived its income from truck plying, flour mill and timber business. The assessee failed to comply with the terms of the notices under Sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act. Therefore, the assessment was completed under Section 144 of the Act, determining the total income at Rs. 63,160 as against the returned income of Rs. 16,000. The income from truck plying was estimated at Rs. 25,000 and income from timber business was also estimated at Rs 35,710. The net income from flour mill was estimated at Rs. 4,000. As no books of account were produced, genuineness of the shares could not be verified. Registration was, therefore refused. Since the assessed income was more ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Steel Tubes of India Ltd. (No. 2)
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-09-1996
Reported in: [1997]228ITR418(MP)
A.R. Tiwari, J.1. The Commissioner of Income-tax has filed this application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short the 'Act'), seeking a direction to the Tribunal to state the case and refer the undernoted questions, labelled as of law, arising out of the order dated September 27, 1993, passed by the Tribunal in ITA No. 354/Ind. of 1989 for the assessment year 1984-85 after rejection of the application presented under Section 256(1) of the Act and registered as R. A. No. 313/Ind of 1993 on August 30, 1994 :' (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,05,960 spent on repairs of car which was clearly disallowable under Section 37(3A) ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in confirming the orders of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), deleting the addition of Rs. 12,70,338 even when the assessee diverted its profit to th...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shelly Products and Mukesh Kumar Agrawa ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-09-1996
Reported in: [1997]225ITR882(MP)
A.K. Mathur, C.J.1. All the aforesaid cases involve common question of law and facts. Therefore, they are disposed of by this common judgment.2. The aforesaid two references (M. C. C. Nos. 368 and 369 both of 1993) at the instance of the Revenue filed under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, have been referred by the Tribunal to this court on the question of law for answer, which reads as under :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in directing the Assessing Officer to refund the tax with interest paid by the assessee on the incomereturned ?'3. Both the aforesaid writ petitions (M. P. Nos. 2750 of 1984 and M. P. No. 3773 of 1987) have also been filed by the assessee(s)/petitioner(s) claiming that the amount of tax paid by them may be refunded. By order dated August 13, 1984 (annexure 'E' filed in M. P. No. 2750 of 1984), the assessee/petitioner was informed that 'the refund may be given for taxes paid on ...
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Sudha Devi Wd/O Gopal Singh and or ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-09-1996
Reported in: I(1997)ACC127; 1998ACJ818; (1997)IILLJ1006MP
ORDERS.K. Dubey, J. 1. The appellant is the Insurance Company who has field this appeal under Section 173, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 aggrieved of the award dated December 15, 1995 in Claim Case No. 28/93, passed by III Additional Claims Tribunal, Bhopal. 2. It is not disputed that deceased Gopal was employed as a driver on truck No. CIC 0552 owned by Respondent No. 6, driven by the Respondent No. 7 at the relevant time and insured by the appellant company. 3. The manner and the circumstances in which the accident occurred are stated in para 2 of the award. The findings of the Tribunal that the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the Respondent No. 7 as a result of which the deceased Gopal who was employed as a second driver died, are also not under challenge. 4. The Tribunal after appreciation of the evidence adduced by the parties recorded a finding that the deceased was getting salary of Rs. 2,000/- per month wherein a deduction of Rs. 500/- per month was given fo...
Kamlabai and anr. Vs. Narayan
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-09-1996
Reported in: I(1997)DMC282
J.G. Chitre, J.1. The petitioner is challenging an order which has been passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Shajapur in the matter of Cr. Revision No. 49/90 wherein the learned A.S.J. has set aside the order which was passed by Judicial Magistrate. First Class, Sarangpur in MCC No. 44/84 wherein he granted alimony ofRs.200/- per month payable from present opponent-Narayan S/o Siddhanath.2. The petitioner Kamlabai had filed an application for getting alimony from her husband Narayan in view of provisions of Section 125, Cr. P.C. 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Code for convenience) on the ground of neglect and refusal to maintain herself and Ramlatabai, the daughter begotten from Narayan. She had also averred that Narayan has kept a mistress named as Bhagwanti bai treating her as his wife. The learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sarangpur held that Kamlabai was able to prove that having sufficient means, Narayan had neglected and refused to maintain both Kamlabai and Ramlatabai. ...
Khersingh Vs. State Bank of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-09-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)MPLJ16
T.S. Doabia, J.The petitioner preferred a petition under Order 36, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. This was based on the ground that loan amount which was received from the State Bank of India has been paid back with interest. Accordingly a verdict was sought in terms of Order 36, Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure. The provisions of Order 36, Rule 1 reads as under:'Power to state case for Court's opinion - (1) Parties claiming to be interested in the decision of any question of fact or law may enter into an agreement in writing stating such question in the form of a case for the opinion of the Court, and providing that, upon the finding of the Court with respect to such question : (a) a sum of money fixed by the parties or to be determined by the Court shall be paid by one of the parties to the other of them; or (b) some property, movable or immovable, specified in the agreement, shall be delivered by one of the parties to the other of them; or (c) one or more of the parti...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Malthuram Rajendra Kumar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-08-1996
Reported in: [1998]232ITR453(MP)
1. This is an income-tax reference at the instance of the Revenue 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 to hold that statutory notice of 14 days was required to be given to the assessee when the order refusing continuation of registration was under Section 185(5) and not under Section 186 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 2. Whether the Tribunal was right in law to hold in the facts and circumstances of the case that it was a case of mere passing of assessment order under Section 144 and not a case where there was deliberate default on the part of the assessee's compelling Assessing Officer to make best judgment assessment order ?' 2. The brief facts giving rise to this case are that the Income-tax Officer refused to grant continuation of registration to the assessee-firm for the assessment year 1983-84 despite the assessee's applying in Form No. 12 ...
State of M.P. Vs. Baburam and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-08-1996
Reported in: I(1997)DMC558
R.D. Shukla, J.1. This judgment shall also dispose of Criminal Appeal No. 53/90 (Ram Kumar and Anr. v. State of M.P.) as both the appeals arise out of the same judgment.2. Both these appeals are directed against the Judgment and Order dated 22.11.1990 of lind Additional Sessions Judge, Jhabua (Alirajpur), passed in S.T. No. 255/88, whereby while acquitting accused Baburam and Ramkumar under Sections 302 & 201 r/w Section 34, IPC for having committed murder of Bhagwandevi, convicted them under Sections 306 and 498A of the IPC for a beting suicide and for having committed cruelty on Bhagwandevi and sentenced each of them to imprisonment for 7 years and 3 years.3. It-is not in dispute that deceased Bhagwandevi was married to Ramkumar 10 years prior to the incident. They were having no issue. A dowry of nearly Rs. 20,000/- was given to Ramkumar and Bhagwanbai during marriage. Bhagwandevi died of bum injuries on 27.2.88 in Village Bhabra. Accused persons were residing in the same house. Acc...
Om Prakash S/O Puranchandra Vs. Nandkishore
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-08-1996
Reported in: 1997(2)MPLJ327
ORDERT.S. Doabia, J.Heard.1. A suit was filed Under Section 12(1)(f) of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1%1. This suit was filed by Kastoori Devi. She has since died. An application was moved by Omprakash during the life time of Kastoori Devi. The learned Counsel appearing for the applicant states that applicant had acquired the property on account of family partition. This application is said to have been allowed. After this application was allowed a further prayer was made. This was under Order 6, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The plea taken was that premises are required for bona fide need of Omprakash. This prayer has been rejected. Against this order, the present petition has been preferred. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that no error has been committed by the trial Court. According to him, if the original landlord dies then the question of deciding the plea of bona fide need of original landlord would not arise. Reliance is place...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »