Madhya Pradesh Court March 2005 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. Sunder Lal Chaturbhuj
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-22-2005
Reported in: (2005)196CTR(MP)102; [2006]284ITR574(MP)
ORDERAM. Sapre, J.1. This is an income-tax reference made at the instance of CIT under Section 256(1) of IT Act to this Court in RA No. 147/Ind/1998 which arises out of an appellate order of the Tribunal, dt. 21st July, 2003, passed in ITA No. 5 of 2000 to answer following questions of law :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in annulling the assessment ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the return filed by the assessee in the status of HUF on 13th April, 1989, was invalid and non est in the eyes of law ?'2. In short the case of the assessee as one can notice from the facts stated in the statement of case drawn by the Tribunal is that since the notice of reassessment under Section 148 of IT Act for the asst. yr. 1987-88, was issued to assessee in the status of an individual (GIR B-737) and hence, any assessment made in capacity of HUF, i.e., t...
Ghansu Yadav and ors. Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-22-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)MPHT95; 2005(3)MPLJ232
ORDERU.C. Maheshwari, J.1. Heard on admission. Admit. With the consent of the parties this revision petition is heard finally.This petition is directed by the applicants against the order dated 21-2-2005 passed by the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Chhatarpur in Criminal Appeal No. 21/2005 which was preferred against the judgment dated 17-12-2004 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Chhatarpur in Criminal Case No. 162/01, by which the applicants were found guilty under Sections 332 and 323 of IPC and awarded sentence one year R.I. to each applicant on first count and one year R.I. each on second count.2. Abovesaid appeal was preferred at belated stage alongwith an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation the delay by mentioning sufficient cause but the same was dismissed resultantly appeal was also dismissed thereby the judgment of the Trial Court has become final, hence this revision.3. The merits of the appeal were not considered by the Appellate C...
Halkai Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-22-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)MPHT317
S.K. Kulshrestha, J.1. Both the above appeals are directed against the judgment dated 28th September, 1998, by which in Sessions Trial No. 43/98, in which both the appellants were tried for offences under Sections 302 and 307 of the IPC, the learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Sagar, has convicted the appellants for the said offences and sentenced each of them to imprisonment for life for offence under Section 302, IPC and rigorous imprisonment for 10 years for offence under Section 307, IPC and they have also been sentenced to fine of Rs. 1000/- and on failure to deposit the fine, in each case, to simple imprisonment for one year. The substantive sentences have, however, been made concurrent.2. Accused Natthu @ Natthua and Halkai are both brothers who, at the relevant time, lived in Village Chapri and who were vegetable venders. It was not disputed that on the night intervening 16/17-10-97, deceased Bhagat had gone to the house of Natthu to buy vegetables and Natthu had asked him t...
Shyam Electric Works Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-22-2005
Reported in: (2005)199CTR(MP)400; [2006]284ITR413(MP)
A.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an IT Reference made by the Tribunal at the instance of assessee under Section 256(1) of the IT Act in RA No. 77/Ind/1991, arising out of an order dt. 31st Jan., 1991, passed by Tribunal in ITA No. 578/Ind/1987 to answer following questions of law :'1. Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the order of the CIT(A) is bad because no application for exemption from operation of proviso to Section 249(4) was filed before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) has not expressly passed an order exempting the assessee from payment of tax ?2. Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) would impliedly be deemed to have exercised his powers Under the proviso to Section 249(4) of the IT Act. and exempting the assessee from payment of tax, when he proceeded to dispose of the appeal on merits ?3. Whether the Tribunal is correct in law in relying upon the decision under the proviso to Section 30 of the IT Act, 1922...
Steel Tubes of India Vs. Steel Authority of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-22-2005
Reported in: I(2007)BC525; 2006CriLJ1988; 2006(1)MPLJ194
ORDERS.L. Kochar, J.1. This order also governs disposal of MCrC Nos. 291/05 to 297/05 filed by Steel Tubes of India v. Steel Authority of India.2. The contention of the learned Counsel for the applicant is that the non-applicant / complainant Steel Authority of India Limited has filed eight cases for dishonour of eight cheques, in each cheque the amount of one crore or more than one crores is involved. The complainant in his complaints, as well as statements recorded under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, 'the Code') has not disclosed as to against which liability or debt, the cheque was issued in his favour by the applicant: The applicant herein, filed an application under Section 91 of the Code seeking direction before the trial Court for production of documents by the non applicant/complainant regarding transaction concerning with the cheques issued by the applicant and their dishonour by the Bank, but according to the applicant, some documents were filled i...
Shyam Electric Works Vs. Cit
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-22-2005
Reported in: (2006)199CTR(MP)400
A.M. Sapre, J.This is an Income Tax Reference made by the Tribunal at the instance of assessee under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act in RA No. 77/Ind/1991, arising out of an order dated 31-1-1991, passed by Tribunal in ITA No. 578/Ind/1987 to answer following questions of law :'1. Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is bad because no application for exemption from operation of proviso to section 249(4) was filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Commissioner (Appeals) has not expressly passed an order exempting the assessee from payment of tax ?2. Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Commissioner (Appeals) would impliedly be deemed to have exercised his powers under the proviso to section 249(4) of the Income Tax Act and exempting the assessee from payment of tax, when he proceeded to dispose of the appeal on merits ?3. Whether the Tribunal is correct in law ...
Commissioner of Customs and C. Ex. Vs. J.K. Industries
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-22-2005
Reported in: 2007(207)ELT171(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an application made under Section 35G(3) of Central Excise Act made by the Commissioner Central Excise consequent upon the dismissal of their reference application for making a reference to this Court by the Tribunal (CEGAT), dated 9-11-1996, passed in Reference Case No. E/Ref/110-96-NB-In E/A/No. 419/95-NB which in turn arise out of CEGAT final order passed in Appeal No. E/419/95-NB, dated 6-5-1996/7-5-1996.2. In the opinion of Tribunal, since no question of law arises out of the order passed by Tribunal referred supra and hence, the application made by the petitioner (applicant) was rejected.3. Following question of law is proposed by the petitioner/applicant -i.e. Commissioner, Customs & Central Excise which according to petitioner does arise out of the impugned appellate order and need to be referred to this Court by the Tribunal on merits:Whether multilayer co-extruded film which is used for safeguarding the tread rubber, an intermediate product in th...
Kishun Bediya Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-21-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)MPHT309
S.K. Kulshrestha, J. 1. Aggrieved by his conviction, the appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 15-5-1998 of the learned Sessions Judge, Panna in Sessions Trial No. 58/1997, by which, the learned Sessions Judge has convicted the appellant for an offence punishable under Section 302, IPC and sentenced him to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1,000/-; in default of payment of fine, to serve out additional Rigorous Imprisonment for 1 year.2. The facts of the prosecution case lie in a narrow compass. It is alleged that deceased Sushila Bai alongwith her mother-in-law Noni Bai had gone to Village Hindoria for treatment of Noni Bai and had returned from there on 13-3-97. While they were returning to their village, the accused gave two betels to Sushila Bai (deceased) stating that she may have one and the other one was for her husband Kishori Lal. Sushila Bai consumed one, but while she was on way, she fell sick and consumed another. In the village her condition st...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ferro Concrete Co. (i) Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-21-2005
Reported in: (2005)195CTR(MP)615; [2006]282ITR448(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an appeal filed by Revenue (CIT) under Section 260A of the IT Act against an order dt. 7th Sept., 2001, passed by Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as Tribunal) in ITA No. 734/Ind/1995. This appeal was admitted for hearing on following substantial question of law :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in directing the AO to charge the interest under Section 234B on the basis of tax calculated on the returned income, whereas Section 234B for charging interest clearly speaks of tax on assessed income determined under Section 143(1) or on regular assessment minus tax deducted or collected at source ?'2. Heard Shri R.L. Jain, learned senior counsel with Ku. V. Mandlik, learned counsel for the appellant/Revenue. None for the respondent/assessee.3. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and having perused record of the case, we are inclined to allow the appeal and while set...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Simplex (indore) (P) Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-21-2005
Reported in: (2005)199CTR(MP)185; [2006]282ITR542(MP)
ORDER OF TRIBUNALTribunal having adopted casual approachAssessee claimed relief under section 80-IA on account of certain items of additions made by the AO. The CIT(A) allowed the deduction. The Tribunal, neither discussed facts and submission of parties also nor it gave finding for granting relief and decided the issue in favour of the assessee. Held: As the Tribunal took a casual approach in deciding the issue, the said order could not be said to be legal order of the Tribunal, therefore, case was remanded.Income Tax Act, 1961 s.254Income Tax Act, 1961 s.80-IA...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »