Orissa Court December 1986 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.
Nityananda Subudhi and Partners Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-16-1986
Reported in: [1987]168ITR362(Orissa)
S.C. Mohapatra, J.1. Pursuant to the application of the assessee under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ' the Act '), a statement of case was called for on the following question :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the amount kept under suspense account was the assessee's trading receipt and, therefore, includible in the total income of the assessee '2. The assessee is a partnership firm which carries on the business of sale and purchase of chillies. During the assessment year 1976-77 relevant for the accounting year ending on 31st March, 1976, it collected various amounts from the purchasing dealers of chillies belonging to Andhra Pradesh for payment of tax under the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947. The collected amount of Rs. 89,386 was, however, not paid to the Government, but was kept under a suspense account. Treating it to be a trading receipt and as such part of the total income, the asses...
Kalinga Jute Products Private Limited Vs. Sales Tax Officer and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-16-1986
Reported in: 63(1987)CLT551; [1988]68STC264(Orissa)
H.L. Agrawal, C.J.1. By this writ application the petitioner has challenged the vires of the notification dated 9th September, 1977 issued by the State Government in the Finance Department in exercise of powers under Section 6 of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (for short, 'the Act') making some further amendments in the earlier notification dated 23rd April, 1976 and giving it retrospective effect from 20th May, 1977. By this amendment, an entry at serial No. 26 has been substituted as follows; 'Sl. Description of goods Conditions and exceptions subject No. to which exemption has been allowed (1) (2) (3) 26 Purchase or sale of raw mate- The exemption shall be allowed rials, i.e., goods which directly for a period of five years from go into the composition of the the date from which the manu finished products, when sold to -facturing unit has started produc- a registered dealer who is a tion irrespective of change in manufacturer inside the State ownership, if any, provided the and wher...
Batapa Bada Seth Vs. the State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-15-1986
Reported in: 1987CriLJ1976
B. K. Behera, J.1. Accepting the case presented by the prosecution that on Jan. 20, 1980, after night fall, the appellant committed the murder of Rajanikanta Deo (to be described hereinafter as the deceased), threw the dead body of the deceased inside the forest with the intention of screening himself from the legal, punishment by causing evidence to disappear and committed theft of Rs. 1411 /- by taking it out of the possession of the deceased, the learned Sessions Judge has convicted the appellant under Sections 302, 201 and 379 of the I.P.C. (for short, the 'Code') and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302 of the Code, without any sentence having been imposed on him in respect of the other two offences.2. It is not disputed at the Bar that the deceased died a homicidal death in the forest on the way leading to village Tekalamela. While the learned Counsel for the appellant has contended that none of the charges has been brought home to the appellant. Mr. P...
Tunu Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-15-1986
Reported in: 1988CriLJ524
ORDERB.K. Behera, J.1. The petitioners in both the revisions assail the appellate judgment and order passed against them holding them guilty of commission of offences punishable under Sections 326 and 324 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, the 'Code') and, sentencing each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment thereof, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of ten days passed under Section 326 read with Section 34 of the Code without any separate sentences having been passed under Section 324 read with Section 34 of the Code. The appellate Court has set aside the, order of conviction and sentences passed against the petitioners by the trial Court holding them guilty of the charge under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the Code and sentencing each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay a fine Rs. 2000/- and in default of pa...
Krupasindhu Prusty Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-12-1986
Reported in: 63(1987)CLT578; 1987CriLJ1426
K.P. Mohapatra, J.1. In this Criminal Revision, the petitioner has challenged the order of his conviction and sentence under Section 409, I.P.C.2. Prosecution case in brief is that in the year 1973, the petitioner was the Sarpanch of Rakama Gram Panchayat of Khandapara in Nayagarh Sub-Division of Puri District. On 20-9-1973 he encashed a bank draft bearing No. B567000 dated 11-5-73 for a sum of Rs. 471.71 representing the value of four loan bonds of Rs. 100/- each with interest thereon belonging to the said Gram Panchayat from Khadapara Sub-Treasury. After encashment, instead of making deposit of the amount encashed in the Gram Panchayat Office, he misappropriated the same. He did not even make the deposit when required to do so by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Nayagarh by letter dated 4-5-77 and personally on 21-6-77. He made the deposit on 13-4-78. Therefore, the Block Development Officer, Bhapur lodged the F.I.R. and after investigation charge-sheet was submitted against the petitione...
Kulamani Mohanty Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-11-1986
Reported in: 63(1987)CLT250; [1987]67STC418(Orissa)
S.C. Mohapatra, J.1. This is an application under Section 24(1) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act') at the instance of the dealer. The following question of law has been referred to this Court by the Member, Additional Sales Tax Tribunal, for decision of this Court.Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that rejection of the accounts and completion of assessment on the basis of best judgment were proper, notwithstanding the report of the inspecting officer that there was no excess stock of ammonia sulphate on 16th September, 1974 and that the sale, purchase, stock accounts maintained are up to date and no defect noticed 2. The dealer is registered under the Act. In respect of the year 1974-75, the Sales Tax Officer assessed him to the best of judgment under Section 12(4) of the Act which reads as follows :12. Assessment of tax.-(1) to (3)....(4) If a registered dealer does not furnish returns in respect of a...
State of Orissa Vs. Sardar Automobiles
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-11-1986
Reported in: 63(1987)CLT428; [1987]67STC458(Orissa)
S.C. Mohapatra, J.1. This reference arises out of a petition by the Revenue under Section 24(1) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act'). Statement of the case has been made by the Member, Additional Sales Tax Tribunal on the following questions :(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, in the absence of certificate as required under proviso to Clause (a) of Sub-rule (4) of Rule 94 of the Orissa Sales Tax Rules, the Member, Additional Sales Tax Tribunal is correct in law to permit adjustment of Rs. 270.64 ?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Member, Additional Sales Tax Tribunal, was correct in law to allow under Section 13(8) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act rebate of Rs. 144.41 ?2. The dealer registered under the Act carries on business of purchase and sale of automobile spare parts, tyres, tubes and lubricants at Jajpur Road. He is to file quarterly return and pay the tax admitted in such returns along with it. While a...
State of Orissa Vs. Tormal Rameswardas
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-11-1986
Reported in: [1988]68STC204(Orissa)
S.C. Mohapatra, J. 1. In this reference under Section 24(1) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act') on the application of the Revenue statement of the case has been made on the following question:Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Sales Tax Tribunal was correct in reducing the assessment to the returned figures instead of remanding the case to the assessing officer for allowing a further opportunity to the opponent to cross-examine the witness or/and examine the seized accounts ?2. In spite of valid service of notice, the dealer has not preferred to appear in this Court and the learned Standing Counsel, Commercial Tax Department was heard in the matter.3. The facts giving rise to this reference are to the effect that the dealer not having furnished the returns on due date, assessment was completed under Section 12(4) of the Act to the best of judgment of the assessing officer. For the purpose of completing the assessment to the best of judgm...
Rama Chandra Sahu Vs. the State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-10-1986
Reported in: 1987CriLJ2025
ORDERK.P. Mohapatra, J.1. The order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Berhampur, upholding the conviction and sentence of the petitioner under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (for short, 'the Act') is under challenge.2. Shorn of unnecessary details the prosecution case stated in brief is that the petitioner owns a grocery shop at Kalingia in Phulbani district. On 18-2-1978, Food Inspector, Phulbani (P.W. 2) inspected the grocery shop and suspected common salt exposed for sale for human consumption to be adulterated. Therefore, he made statutory purchase of 750 grams of that commodity on payment of price and after observance of the formalities according to rules, divided the same into three equal parts and kept each part separately in dry clean bottles, sealed and lavelled them and sent one of the samples for examination by the public analyst. The public analyst reported in his report (Ext. 5) that the sample of common salt was adulterated. After o...
Surath Behera Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-10-1986
Reported in: 1988CriLJ1508
ORDERK.P. Mohapatra, J.1. This is a petition for bail under Section 439(1) of the Criminal P.C. by one of the accused in S.T. No. 168 of 1986 under Sections 147, 148, 337, 323, 379 and 302 read with Section 149 l.P.C. in the court of the learned Sessions Judge, Puri.2. The prosecution case against the petitioner in brief is that on 11-10-1985 at about 10 a.m. all the accused persons being armed with deadly weapons such as Lathis and Tentas surrounded deceased Nakula when the petitioner, who was armed with a Tenta (Tenta is a spear with more than one sharp blade meant for stabbing) assaulted the deceased by means of it, as a result, one of the blades pierced into the left side of the chest which resulted in his death.3. The accused persons (eleven in number) moved for bail before the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khurda, who refused to release them on bail. The accused persons moved for bail before the learned Sessions Judge, Puri, who by separate orders released all the a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »