Orissa Court September 1975 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.
Chintamani Sahu Vs. Collector
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-02-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Ori76
Ray, J.1. This appeal arises out of a reference made under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') which was registered as Misc. Case No, 16 of 1968 in the court of the Sub-Judge. Cuttack and is directed against the reversing decision of the learned single Judge passed in First Appeal No. 160 of 1968 (Pat) reducing the amount of compensation determined by the Sub-Judge.2. By notification under Section 4(1) of the Act dated 22-5-1968. 16.355 acres of lands in one block were acquired for the public purpose of construction of police building in mouza Tulasipur. Out of this 16 acres and odd 2.185 acres appertaining to Plot No. 122 (0.286) of khata No. 280 and Plot No. 224 (0.156), Plot No. 228 (1.563) and Plot No. 228/1399 (0.180) of 'khata No. 224 belonged to the appellant. The last Plot No, 228/1399 is a fractional plot having a total area of 0.190 acre. Declaration under Section 9(3) of the Act was served on the appellant who filed his claim on 12-9...
Hirji Nagji and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-02-1975
Reported in: [1976]105ITR286(Orissa)
R.N. Misra, J.1. By order dated 29th October, 1973, this court required the learned Appellate Income-tax Tribunal to state a case and refer the following questions for the opinion of the court: '(1) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the explanation of the assessee is liable to be rejected and, therefore, the amount of Rs. 41,075 is to be added to the income (2) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessee has not been prejudiced on account of the Income-tax Officer examining the bank manager behind the assessee's back (3) Whether the imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act is at all warranted ?' 2. Assessee is a registered firm and carries on business in brooms and jungle products. The year of assessment with which we are concerned is 1962-63. The Income-tax Officer determined the income at Rs. 76,657 which included a sum of Rs. 10,000 said to be credit received by the firm from two persons and an addition of Rs. 41,075 as inco...
Ruprag P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-02-1975
Reported in: [1976]104ITR469(Orissa)
R.N. Misra, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has stated a case arid referred the following question under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for the opinion of the court pursuant to a direction given by the court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the claim of the assessee in respect of Rs. 16,499 on the head of expenditure was of revenue character and, therefore, admissible or was of capital nature and, therefore, not to be allowed '2. The year of assessment is 1965-66. The assessee was engaged in the business of exhibiting cinematograph films. It laid claim for deduction on two counts, namely, (i) repairs and replacements to the tune of Rs. 27,158, and (ii) directors' remuneration of Rs. 24,000. For the purposes of cinema exhibiting business, the assessee had engaged an exhibition hall. According to the assessee Rs. 18,659 were spent on furniture and machinery account and the remainder out of Rs. 27,158 w...
Autoways (India) Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-02-1975
Reported in: [1976]102ITR761(Orissa)
R.N. Misra, J.1. By order dated November 19, 1973, this court on applications made under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ' the Act '), directed the Appellate Tribunal to state a case and refer the following questions for opinion of the court: '(1) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, is Sardar Santokh Singh entitled to claim the status of Hindu undivided family for purposes of assessment (2) In the facts and circumstances of the case, is the claim laid under Section 171(1) of the Act tenable in law (3) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the claim of registration made to the Income-tax Officer was valid in law and the registration is admissible '2. For the assessment years 1962-63, 1963-64, 1964-65, 1965-66, 1966-67 and 1967-68, the Income-tax Officer treated the status of Sardar Santokh Singh as individual while he claimed his status to be the karta of a Hindu undivided family. The assessee battered the position i...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›