Madhya Pradesh Court August 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. Manjeet Fibers and Bhupendra Singh Rajp ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-02-2005
Reported in: [2007]290ITR194(MP)
1. These appeals have been preferred by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), against the composite order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore on July 12, 2004.2. I.T.A. No. 116 of 2004 was for the assessment year 1997-98, whereas I.T. A. No. 117 of 2004 is also for the same assessment year 1997-98. The appeals before the Tribunal were also preferred by the Revenue only against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Since common questions were formulated the appeals were taken up for hearing together by the Tribunal. Before the Tribunal the assessee has also filed cross-objections, but during the course of hearing the said cross-objections were not pursued ; hence they were dismissed.3. Before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as well as before the Tribunal, the Revenue assailed the deletion of an addition of Rs. 4,00,000 in I.T.A. No. 404/Ind of 2000 with regard to M/s. Manjeet Fibers and Rs. 3,50...
Shri Ram Marble Vs. Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-02-2005
Reported in: (2008)11VST411(MP)
Dipak Misra, J.1. Though this matter was listed for admission keeping in view the nature of the order the matter is finally disposed of.2. The petitioner, an assessee, under the Madhya Pradesh Commercial Tax Act, 1994 (for brevity 'the Act') was proceeded for assessment under the said Act and eventually certain demands were made, the assessing officer issued a notice to show cause under Section 69 of the Act. In the said show cause it was mentioned about the total tax assessed and the amount deposited with the returns. The petitioner filed his show cause treating the same to have been issued under Sub-section (3) of Section 69. The assessing officer by the impugned order imposed the penalty by computing the tax component by four times. The assessee preferred a revision but the revisional authority came to hold that the assessing officer had passed the order under Section 69(2) and not under Section 69(3) of the Act and hence, there was no error in the order.3. Mr. Nema, learned Counsel...
Kaniram Vs. Liyakat Khan and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-02-2005
Reported in: I(2006)ACC701
ORDERN.K. Mody, J.1. Being aggrieved by the inadequacy of the amount awarded by 1st MACT, Mandsaur, in Claim Case No. 139/97 vide award dated 13.5.1998, whereby a sum of Rs. 25,000 has been awarded along with interest @ 12% per annum, the present appeal has been filed.2. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that breakup of Rs. 25,000 awarded by the learned Tribunal is as under:Towards permanent disability : Rs. 15,000Towards pain and sufferings : Rs. 5,000Towards loss of income : Rs. 5,000.3. It is submitted that appellant has sustained grievous injuries. There was permanent disability of 25% in the right knee of the appellant. There was deformity of femur bone in the right leg. It is evident from the statement of Dr. P.K. Upadhayaya, who was CMO in District Hospital at Mandsaur. It is submitted that amount awarded is at lower side. No amount is awarded towards medical expenses. Similarly no amount has been awarded towards expenses incurred by the appellant on other heads. It is a...
Vidyut Upbhokta Association Society and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-01-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)MPHT379; 2005(4)MPLJ397
ORDERShantanu Kemkar, J.1. The petitioners have filed this petition for the following reliefs :-(i) for a declaration that Sections 2 (j), 3, 4 and 5 of the M.P. Vidyut Sudhar Adhiniyam, 2000 (for short 'V.S. Act') are ultravires as these sections are inconsistent with Sections 84 and 85 of the Indian Electricity Act, 2003 (for short 'the Central Act' or 'Electricity Act') and therefore, stood repealed under Section 185 of the Electricity Act.(ii) for a declaration that the post of Chairman of M.P. State Electricity Regulatory Commission be declared as vacant.(iii) For a direction to first respondent to appoint the Chairman of the said Commission in accordance with Sections 84 and 85 of the Electricity Act.The petitioners also contend that the continuance of the fourth respondent who is not a sitting or a retired High Court Judge but who is a retired Chief Secretary of the State of Madhya Pradesh on the post of Chairperson of the Commission is illegal on the ground that the said post c...
State Bank of India Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-01-2005
Reported in: (2006)202CTR(MP)615
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. By filing this writ under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner--a nationalized bank has sought quashing of a notice dt. 9th Dec., 1998 (Annex. P-15), issued by respondent No. 2-TRO to petitioner under Section 226(3) of the IT Act.2. By impugned notice, the TRO in exercise of powers conferred under Section 226(3) of the IT Act has called upon the petitioner-bank to release a sum of Rs. 6,00,000 in favour of IT Department which they (bank) are holding with them on behalf of respondent No. 4 who is a defaulter in payment of income-tax dues/arrears to the Department. Since the respondent No. 4 has not liquidated their income-tax arrears, IT Department through their TRO has invoked his powers conferred under Section 226(3) of the Act and issued impugned notice to petitioner calling upon them to release the money lying with them amounting to Rs. 6,00,000.3. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is having a current account of respondent No. 4 w...
Rajendra Sapre Vs. Janki Patel and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-01-2005
Reported in: 2007ACJ497
Arun Mishra, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the owner aggrieved by an award dated 30.11.2000 passed by Ninth Addl. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jabalpur in M.V.C. No. 25 of 2000.2. On 30.10.1997 late Ayodhya Prasad Patel was going on cycle to attend his office, when he reached near Police Station, Gohalpur, he was dashed by a truck No. MP 20-B 0964. Tikaram, respondent No. I, drove the truck in a rash and negligent manner. Truck was owned by Rajendra Sapre, respondent No. 2 and insured with Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. In the accident deceased sustained severe injuries, he was taken to the hospital where he died. First information report was lodged, offence under sections 279 and 304A of Indian Penal Code was registered against the driver of the truck as Crime No. 653 of 1997, charge-sheet was filed in the court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class.3. Deceased was working in Telecommunication Department in the capacity of Cable Joinder. It was alleged that he was aged 45 year...
Sitaram Gilda (Dead) Through Lrs. Vs. Kishore Kumar and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-01-2005
Reported in: I(2006)ACC662
ORDER1. This appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, has been preferred by appellant against the award dated 6.4.2002, passed by VIIth Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Indore in Claim Case No. 697 of 05, wherein, for the loss sustained by original claimant Sitaram [since dead], a sum of Rs. 40,000 has been awarded. The appeal is for enhancement.2. Facts material for deciding the said appeal and which have not been disputed before us seriously, are mentioned herein below:3. Deceased appellant Sitaram was having his industrial shed admeasuring 57'x 50' built up area at plot No. 40, Sajan Nagar, Indore. The shed was constructed in the year 1982-83.4. On 18.5.1995, an accident had taken place under the peculiar facts and features, whereby the said shed was gutted down completely. According to the appellant, on the relevant date at about 7 p.m. a loaded truck bearing registration No. CII 7302 belonging to respondent No. 2; driven by respondent No. 1 and insured with ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›