Orissa Court January 1982 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Labala Haribandhu Sahu
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-25-1982
Reported in: 54(1982)CLT1; (1982)29CTR(Ori)349; [1983]142ITR21(Orissa)
R.N. Misra, C.J. 1. At the instance of the Revenue, this court by order dated December 6, 1979, in exercise of powers Under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act of 1961 called upon the Cuttack Bench of the Appellate Tribunal to state a common case and refer the following common question for the opinion of the court :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the penalty levied Under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act ?' 2. The relevant assessment years are 1962-63 and 1964-65. The ITO made trading additions of Rs. 62,821 and Rs. 1,35,145 in the respective years. Similarly, a sum of Rs. 58,899 was treated as cash credit in the first year and a sum of Rs. 58,868 was treated as cash credit in the second year. The dispute relating to the quantum was finalised in appeals before the Tribunal. The Tribunal gave a set-off of the unexplained cash introductions against additions in the trading account. 3. In the proceedings Under Section 2...
Tag this Judgment!Sibaram Panda and ors. Vs. Collector, Cuttack and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-21-1982
Reported in: AIR1982Ori117; 54(1982)CLT152
Das, J. 1. Petitioners are students of the Orissa School of Engineering, Cuttack. After completing Diploma Course in Engineering they were undergoing a Condensed Course for Diploma in Automobile, Mechanical, Instrumental and Control. In Sept 1981 there was a tension in the school. It is said that the Principal managed to get an application from students making allegations against the petitioners. Some criminal cases were started. On 3-12-1981 transfer certificates issued to the petitioners by the Principal containing a notice that the Managing Committee decided to issue compulsory transfer certificates to the petitioners and others for misconduct and indiscipline. Petitioners contend that mere allegation has been treated as sufficient proof of and justification for such punitive action. It is, therefore, prayed to quash the transfer certificates issued by the Principal. 2. In the counter, it has been averred that the transfer certificates have beenissued in the best interest of the ins...
Tag this Judgment!iswardas Dwarkadas Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-21-1982
Reported in: [1982]50STC154(Orissa)
R.N. Misra, C.J.1. The Member, Additional Sales Tax Tribunal, Orissa, has referred this case and the following two questions have been sent for opinion of the court at the instance of the assessee :(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the articles, namely, satranjis, asanis and durees, which are woven out of coloured cotton yarn are cotton fabrics or carpets ?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, satranjis and durees which are woven out of coloured yarn are cotton fabrics and are to be treated as tax-free list as per entry serial Nos. 19 and 33 of the tax-free list or are to be taxed under entry serial No. 25 of the luxury list ?2. The assessee is a dealer in mill-made and handloom cloth, hosiery goods, satranjis, etc. In the course of assessment, a question arose as to whether satranji would be tax-free article or being carpet would be taxed as luxury goods. The Member, Additional Sales Tax Tribunal, ultimately in second appeal by t...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Orissa Vs. Bhagawandas Ashok Kumar
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-21-1982
Reported in: [1982]51STC74(Orissa)
R.N. Mishra, C.J.1. At the instance of the Revenue on the applications made under Section 24(2)(b) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947, this Court directed the Member, Sales Tax Tribunal, Orissa, to state a case and refer the following common question for the opinion of the court:Whether the Member, Sales Tax Tribunal, is correct in law to hold that garlic is a vegetable and accordingly free from sales tax ?2. The Tribunal came to the conclusion that garlic was vegetable. The Tribunal referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case Mangulu Sahu Ramahari Sahu v. Sales Tax Officer, Ganjam [1973] 32 STC 494 (SC) where it was held that lemon and chilli were vegetables.It has also been held that ginger is vegetable. Entry 5 of the schedule of taxable (sic) goods, as amended by the relevant notification with effect from 1st October, 1974, read thus :-Vegetables green or dried, other than medicinal preparation, ginger, garlic, lemon and chillies.That vegetables would no more include g...
Tag this Judgment!State of Orissa Vs. Satyabadi Sahu and Sons
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-21-1982
Reported in: [1982]51STC75(Orissa)
R.N. Misra, C.J.1. This court at the instance of the State of Orissa in exercise of powers under Section 24(2)(b) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947, called upon the the Member, Additional Sales Tax Tribunal, Orissa, to state a case and refer the following question for opinion of the court:Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the second appellate authority was justified in holding that misri (sugar-candy) was a tax-free article coming within the exemption of entry 34 of the list of exempted goods?.2. In the case of State of Gujarat v. Sakarwala Brothers [1967] 19 STC 24 (SC) the question for consideration was whether sugar included misri. The Commissioner of Sales Tax held that 'sakar' (sugar-candy) was a form of sugar and was covered by the definition of 'sugar'. The Gujarat High Court also came to the same conclusion. In the Supreme Court the point was recanvassed. The Supreme Court referred to the definition of 'sugar' in the First Schedule to the Central Excis...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. R.K. Deo
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-19-1982
Reported in: [1983]140ITR614(Orissa)
R.N. Misra, C.J.1. The Cuttack Bench of the Wealth-tax Appellate Tribunal, has stated these cases pursuant to the direction of this court atthe instance of the Revenue, under Section 27 of the W.T. Act of 1957 and the following common question has been referred for our opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in upholding the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner directing the Wealth-tax Officer to allow deduction of tax liabilities in accordance with the principles laid down by the courts ?'2. The relevant assessment years are 1970-71 and 1971-72. The asses-see declared a net wealth of Rs. 41,21,486 for the first assessment year and Rs. 41,04,502 for the second assessment year but did not claim any deduction on account of liabilities in respect of income-tax, wealth-tax and other taxes on the relevant valuation dates. The WTO did not allow any such liability to be deducted in the matter of computation of net wealth.3. On appe...
Tag this Judgment!Sridhar Sahu Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-18-1982
Reported in: 53(1982)CLT187; 1982CriLJ506
ORDERB.K. Behera, J.1. The petitioner stands convicted by the trial and appellate courts Under Section 34A of the Police Act, i8fil (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), inserted by the Police (Orissa Amendment) Act, 1976 and sentenced thereunder to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months, for attempting to sell six second class cinema tickets for the evening first show at Jyoti Cinema Hall at Cuttack at about 6 p.m. on July 1, 1978, which was detected by the Sub-Inspector of Police (PW 6), then attached to the Madhupatna police station, who, being accompanied by other police officials (PWs 2 to 5), had raided the premises of that Cinema Hall to detect such anti-social activities. The petitioner was caught red-handed with six tickets (MOs I to VI) and a cash of Rs. 11.20 paise (MO VII) which were seized by PW 6 in the presence of the police officials and PW 1, the booking clerk of the Jyoti Cinema Hall, vide Ext. 1, the seizure list and after arrest, the petitioner...
Tag this Judgment!Sandeep Kumar Ghosh Vs. Utkal University and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-14-1982
Reported in: AIR1982Ori152
Behera, J. 1. The petitioner, a candidate at the First M.B.B.S. Examination held in April, 1981, by the Utkal University, as a regular student of Shriram Chandra Bhanja Medical College. Cut-tack, challenges the decision that he had failed at the examination although he had secured marks entitling him to pass under the Regulations of University read with the Rules of 'Hard Cases' for the M.B.B.S. Examinations (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules'). Regn. 9 (2) of Chapter XI dealing with M.B.B.S. Examination of the Utkal University: 'In order to pass the examination a candidate must obtain 50% (fifty per cent) of the maximum marks in the written and oral together, subject to a minimum of 40 per cent in each of these (written and oral) and 50 per cent in practical.' The petitioner had secured in Biochemistry 60 per cent in practical, 60 per cent in the oral, but fell short of 2 marks in the written and oral examinations taken together having secured two marks less than the minimum of 40...
Tag this Judgment!Dwaraka Prasad Agarwala Vs. State and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-14-1982
Reported in: 1982CriLJ713
ORDERJ.K. Mohanty, J.1. Petitioner Dwaraka Prasad Agarwala is the owner of a rice mill at Junagarh in Kalahandi district. Pro-forma opposite party Jayashankar Patra (driver) was transporting 100 bags of rice from Junagarh to Cuttack on 25-9-79 in the truck bearing registration No. ORH 1699 belonging to the petitioner. On that day the Inspector of Supplies, Khurda, seized the truck and lodged prosecution report against the petitioner and the driver of the truck for contravention of Clauses 2 and 11 of the Orissa Rice and Paddv Control Order, 1974(1965?) punishable Under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. Thereafter the petitioner moved th Civil Supplies authorities for withdrawal of the aforesaid case inter alia on the ground that he is a licensed wholesale dealer under the Orissa Rice and Paddy Control Order, 1965 and since the rice was transported from Junagarh to Cuttack, no offence was committed as alleged. The State Government in their letter dated 2-2-1980 wrote to the S....
Tag this Judgment!Mayadhar Nayak Vs. Sub-divisional Officer, Jajpur and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-13-1982
Reported in: AIR1982Ori221; 54(1982)CLT265
ORDERJ.K. Mohanty, J. 1. This petition has been filed by Shri Mayadhar Nayak. the unsuccessful candidate who contested the election to the Orissa Legislative Assembly from 23-Sukinda Assembly constituency in Cuttack District. The election was held on 31-5-1980. The petitioner stood as a candidate of S. U. C. I. party and secured 15,718 votes while the third respondent Sarat Rout, who stood on Congress (1) ticket, was declared elected securing 22,640 votes. The other candidates, namely, Prafulla Chandra Gharei (respondent No. 2), Sarat Chandra Patra (respondent No. 4), Sarangdhar Muduli (respondent No. 5). Haladhar Dhir (respondent No. 6) and Hrushikesh Rout (respondent No. 7) secured 8385, 3603, 630, 434 and 1957 votes respectively. The total number of valid votes polled was 53,367. 2. According to the petitioner, the nominations to fill up the seal from 23-Sukinda Assembly constituency were invited by the Returning Officer, Jajpur, on the basis of notification (Ext. 4) issued by the G...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »