Madhya Pradesh Court May 2004 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. Motilal Subhodh Kumar Jain
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-13-2004
Reported in: (2005)197CTR(MP)58; [2005]277ITR524(MP); 2004(3)MPLJ304
Arun Mishra, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the CIT, Jabalpur, under Section 260A of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), aggrieved by an order passed by the Tribunal, Jabalpur, in ITA No. 530/Jab/1995 on 9th Dec., 1998, relating to the asst. yr. 1990-91.2. For the asst. yr. 1990-91, the assessee was charged with the penalty for contravention of Section 269T of the Act. A show-cause notice was issued as to why the assessee be not levied with penalty for violation of Section 271E of the Act. Reply was filed by the assessee. AO passed an order (A.1) dt. 7th March, 1991, holding that case of the penalty was made out. Penalty of Rs. 31,200 was imposed. An appeal was filed by the assessee to the CIT(A). Appeal was dismissed. Imposition of the penalty was upheld. Order (A.2) was passed by the appellate authority on 23rd Aug., 1994. Aggrieved by the orders, assessee filed the appeal before the Tribunal. Appeal has been allowed and the order passed by the CIT(A) ha...
Kandhi and anr. Vs. Govind Singh Dhruve and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-13-2004
Reported in: 2006ACJ1747; 2004(3)MPLJ277
Arun Mishra and N.S. 'Azad', JJ.1. These appeals arise out of the same accident. Four appeals have been preferred by the owner and driver; M.A. Nos. 2457, 2459, 2458 and 2456 of 1999 aggrieved by the part of the award exonerating insurance company, National Insurance Co. Ltd., whereas M.A. Nos. 2498, 2499 and 2500 of 1999 have been filed on behalf of the claimants for enhancement of compensation and also to saddle the liability on the insurer.Injured/deceased were travelling in the vehicle Tata 407 which is a goods carrier vehicle along with their goods, grain, etc. On 16.3.1997 at about 1.30 p.m. at Bazar Road at village Bharra Tola, Tata 407 MP 20-G 2018 turned turtle as it was driven by Kandhi alias Kanhaiyalal Sahu in a rash and negligent manner, resultantly persons travelling suffered injuries, some of them died. The vehicle was owned by Neeraj Jain, insured with National Insurance Co. Ltd. Applications for compensation were preferred claiming compensation in each case.2. The driv...
Mainul Sheikh and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-13-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ2401
S.L. Jain, J.1. This judgment shall govern disposal of this appeal as well as Cr.A. Nos. 1295/2002, (Samser All v. State), 1937/2002, Samsul Haq v. State and 1320/ 2002, Mohimuddin v. State.2. All the aforesaid appeals under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 are directed against the common judgment and order dated 8-8-2002, passed by IVth Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Satna in S.T. No. 48/98, whereby appellants have been convicted for offence punishable under Section 395 read with Section 397 IPC and sentenced to R.I. for 10 years each and fine of Rs. 1,000.00 each, in default whereof, further R.I. for three months each.3. Prosecution case as portrayed during the trial is that on 5-12-1997, Bus No. MP-07-F-0541 of M.P. State Road Corporation was going from Allahabad to Nagpur. Kamta Nath (PW-4) was the driver and Shivnath Singh (PW-5) was the conductor. When the bus reached near village Nadan, appellant Abul Sheikh and other miscreants reached near ...
Suvas Estates (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-12-2004
Reported in: (2004)189CTR(MP)130; [2004]270ITR373(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 260A of the IT Act filed by an assesses against an order, dt. 17th Sept., 2002, passed by Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench at Indore (for short called Tribunal, infra) in ITA No. 228/Ind/1996.2. Heard Shri G.M. Chafekar, learned senior counsel with Shri S.K. Jain, learned counsel for the appellant on the question of admission.3. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant (assessee) and having perused record of the case, we are of the considered opinion that this appeal does not involve any question of law much less substantial question of law as is required to be made out under Section 260A of the Act. Since, the prerequisite, or we may say, sine qua non for entertaining the appeal under Section 260A of the Act being not present in the appeal, we dismiss the appeal in limine.4. The issue essentially centers around to proceedings initiated against the appellant (assessee) under Section 148 of the IT Act for the asst. yr. 1990...
Jitendra Kumar Gupta Vs. Rajeev Kumar Tripathi and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-12-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)MPHT23; 2004(3)MPLJ179
S.S. Jha, J. 1. Appellant has filed this appeal challenging the order of Single Bench, whereby Single Bench has interfered with the order passed by the Collector setting aside the selection.2. Brief facts of the case are as under :--Nagar Panchayat, Gormi held an interview for selection of Upper Division Teachers. Being aggrieved by the rejection appellant filed an appellant before the Collector, District Bhind under Section 308 of Madhya Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'an Act'). The appeal was filed on the following grounds :--(i) That in the Selection Committee there was no expert for the subject of Chemistry and in the absence of expert in the subject selection of respondent No. 1 Rajeev Kumar Tripathi is improper.(ii) The marks for interview were not divided properly. Total marks for interview were 15. Out of 15 marks subject experts, Chief Municipal Officer and Dy. Director Education were given right to award maximum 1/2 marks to the candidate, wherea...
Vishwanath and anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-12-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ1913; 2004(1)MPLJ514
S.L. Jain, J.1. Appellants Vishwanath and Bodibai @ Boddi Bai stand convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 304B and 498A, IPC and sentenced to R.I. for 7 years each under Section 304B, IPC and R.I. for one year with fine of Rs. 5,000.00 each under Section 498A, IPC by the Impugned judgment and order dated October 3, 2002, passed by Additional Sessions Judge Fast Track Court, Amarpatan, District Satna in Sessions Trial No. 226/2000.2. The prosecution case in brief is that the marriage of appellant Vishwanath was solemnized with deceased Sunita on 14-5-1995. Appellant Bodibai is the mother of appellant Vishwanath. Death of Sunita occurred on 10-7-2000. It is alleged by the prosecution that after the marriage of Sunita with Vishwanath and before her death, she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by the appellants for or in connection with demand for dowry. Whenever deceased Sunita used to visit her parental home, she used to inform her parents and other relatives regarding...
Sanjay Corporation Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-12-2004
Reported in: [2006]146STC552(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. This is a sale tax reference made at the instance of a dealer hereinafter called 'the assessee' Under Section 44(1) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (for short called 'the Act') to answer the following two questions referred by the Board:1. Whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in rejecting the claim of concessional rate of purchase tax Under Section 7(2) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 on the raw material used in galvanising nuts and bolts as job-work for another dealer on the ground that such manufactured goods were not sold by the registered dealer manufacturing the goods ?2. Whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in rejecting the claim of concessional rate of entry tax at half per cent on the ground that the material was not used as raw material by the assessee as it was only job-work and not manufacture ?2. The assessee deals in galvanising the nu...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Chemifine
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-11-2004
Reported in: (2004)189CTR(MP)132; [2004]270ITR305(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. The decision rendered in this case shall also govern disposal of other connected cases being MCC Nos. 65, 66, 67, 71, 72, 77, 78 and 88 of 1995, because all these cases arise between the same parties and secondly, seek to question the legality of one common order passed by the ITAT (Tribunal for short) the only difference being they arise out of different assessment years.2. This is an application made by the Revenue (IT Department) under Section 256(2) of the IT Act praying for calling for the reference on the questions proposed in the application from the Tribunal to this Court for being answered by this Court under Section 256(1) of the Act. In all these cases, the Tribunal declined to make the reference to this Court and rejected the applications made by the Revenue under Section 256(1) of the IT Act holding that the questions proposed by the Revenue do not or cannot be regarded as questions of law for being referred to this Court for answer on merits. Accordi...
Dhariwal Industries Limited and ors. Vs. M.S.S. Food Products
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-11-2004
Reported in: 2004(29)PTC45(MP)
P.C. Agarwal, J.1. By impugned order dated 06.04.2004, the learned District Judge, Mandleshwar in his Civil Suit No. 8-A/2004 (M.S.S. Food Products v. Dhariwal Industries Limited and Anr.) has allowed a temporary injunction application filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (Code for short) by the respondent and has dismissed in application under Order 39 Rule 4 of the said Code filed by the appellants.2. As per plaint the respondent manufacturers of gutkha, pan masala and supari mix under trade name of 'Malikchand' since 1959-60 and have been selling these goods at Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka, Gujarat and other parts of India. Ramprasad was father of Pabhudayal Choube who had started supari and ayurvedic pan masala medicine business in 1959-60 in the name of 'Malikchand' upto May, 1986. He assigned his trade mark on 26.04.1986 to Ashok Sharma who also assigned his trade mark to M/s. Tulsi Stores on 01.04.1992. Business was continued by him in the ...
Rajesh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-11-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)MPHT295; 2005(2)MPLJ17
1. Appellant Rajesh has been convicted under Section 302, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life for committing murder of his wife and daughter. He has also been convicted under Section 201, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three years for causing disappearance of the evidence of the commission of the offence.2. The prosecution case was that on 3-1-1996 accused Rajesh committed murder of his wife Sukhvati and his daughter Rinki, aged about 3 years in his house in Village Chunni Chougan. According to the prosecution accused Anil Kumar (who has been acquitted) had engaged accused Rajesh as a servant in the field and accused Anil Kumar was having an evil eye upon the wife of accused Rajesh. On 3-1-1996 also accused Anil Kumar was found cutting filthy jokes with Sukhvati and it was not to the liking of accused Rajesh. Therefore, after accused Anil Kumar left that place accused Rajesh assaulted his wife and caused her death. The daughter of accu...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »