Patna Court January 1993 Judgments

Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna

Reported in: (1994)48ITD47(Pat.)

1. The assessee had filed the appeal originally on March 26, 1984.Several months after filing of the appeal, the assessee filed additional grounds of appeal, vide petition dated August 21, 1984.These grounds are against the charge of interest under Sections 139(8) and 217. It is mentioned in the petition that the additional grounds do not require any investigation and hence these should be admitted for being considered.2. We have considered this request of the assessee. It is also clear that these grounds do not arise out of the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. Moreover, these grounds would require investigation into facts. We do not agree with the assessee that these grounds do not require investigation into facts. The additional grounds of appeal filed, therefore, are not being admitted for consideration as these grounds were not raised in the original appeal as these grounds do not arise out of the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and as these grounds req...

Prabhat Ranjan Sarker Vs. Income Tax Officer.

Court: Patna

B. NATH, A. M. : September, 1985The assessee had filed the appeal originally on 26th March, 1984. After several months of filing of the appeal, the assessee filed additional grounds of appeal vide petition dt. 21st Aug., 1984. These grounds are against the charge of interest under Ss. 139(8) and 217. It is mentioned in the petition that the additional grounds do not require investigation and hence these should be admitted for being considered.2. We have considered this request of the assessee. It is also clear that these grounds do not arise out of the order of AAC. Moreover, these grounds would require investigation into facts. We do not agree with the assessee that these grounds do not require investigation into facts. The additional grounds of appeal filed, therefore, are not being admitted for consideration as these grounds were not raised in the original appeal filed, as these grounds do not arise out of the order of AAC; and as these grounds would require investigation into fact...

Central Coalfields Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi.) and ors.

Court: Patna

B.N. Agrawal, J.1. Heard learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant. Nobody has appeared to contest the appeal in spite of service of notices upon the respondents.2. This appeal has been filed against the order passed by Railway Claims Tribunal, Patna Bench, (hereinafter to as 'the Tribunal') in a claim application by which the appellant's claim has been rejected on the ground of limitation though on merit the Tribunal was of the view that it was a fit case for allowing the claim. According to the Tribunal, the suit was barred under Article 11 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as '1963 Act') which corresponds to Article 31 of the Limitation Act, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as '1908 Act'). In the present case, the claim case was filed on 18.5.1983 for awarding compensation to the tune of Rs. 7,649.46 being price of goods in question on account of short deli very. The question is whether the limitation shall begin to run from 15.1.1980 on which day demand...

Central Coalfields Ltd. Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Patna

B.N. Agrawal, J. 1. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant. No body has appeared to contest the appeal in spite of service of notices upon the respondents. 2. This appeal has been filed against the order passed by Railway Claims Tribunal, Patna Bench, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') in a claim application by which the appellant's claim has been rejected on the ground of limitation though on merit the Tribunal was of the view that it was a fit case for allowing the claim. According to the Tribunal, the suit was barred under Article 11 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as '1963 Act') which corresponds to Article 31 of the Limitation Act, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as '1908 Act'). In the present case, the claim case was filed on 18-5-1983 for awarding compensation to the tune of Rs. 7649.46 p. being price of goods in question on account of short delivery. The question is whether the limitation shall begin to run from 15-1-80 on whic...

Tulsi Ram Agrawal Vs. Assistant Commissioner of

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna

Reported in: (1993)45ITD61(Pat.)

1. These two cross appeals were filed objecting certain decisions of the ld. CIT (Appeals) in his order dated 30-6-1992. The assessee objected to the disallowance of Rs. 22,742 paid as interest and the revenue objected to the deletion of addition made under Sections 69 & 69A(sic) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter naming of the Act is omitted).2. The assessee is an individual. He is a Director of M/s Bharat Engineering & Body Building (P.) Ltd. and one of the partners of M/s B.F. Industries. The assessee had paid interest on loans amounting to Rs. 22,742 during the year. The parties to whom the interest was paid were as follows:- 5. V. Dayal Khuntelal Rs. 8,676 ----------- The payment of these interest was claimed as deduction from income earned by the assessee. The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim as according to him the claim does not satisfy the conditions of Section 57(iii). He had given various reasons which can shortly be described as follows:- He pointed out that th...

Mahesh Jha Vs. State of Bihar and ors.

Court: Patna

S.B. Sinha, J.1. This application is directed against an order dated 28-1-1989 passed by the Sub-divisional officer, Jhanjharpur (Respondent No 4), the order dated 9-11-1990 passed by the Collector, Madhubani, (Respondent No. 3), and the order dated 31-7-1992 passed by the Additional Member, Board of Revenue, Patna (Respondent No. 2) as contained in Annexures 3, 5 and 6 respectively.2. The petitioner is admittedly a landholder. He submitted a return in terms of Section 6 of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act).3. Upon receipt of the said return a proceeding under the said Act was initiated and a report from the Anchal Adhikari, Jhanjharpur was called for. The Anchal Adhikari allegedly reported that the date of birth of Sri Suresh Jha was 7-12-1955. However, as the petitioner had lands in village Khutouna Anchal, a report from the Anchal Adhikari of the said Anchal was called for and he had...

Rajiv Kumar Thakur Vs. State of Bihar and ors.

Court: Patna

S.B. Sinha, J.1. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing an order dated 20th April 1992 in Land Ceiling Case No. 2 of 1973-74/3 of 1982-83 and as contained in Annexure-5 to the writ application whereby and whereunder the said proceeding was directed to be re-opened.2. The fact of the matter lies in a very narrow compass.One Sheetal Prasad Thakur was the land holder. The respondent No 4 is his son and the petitioner is the son of Respondent No. 4. In a proceeding initiated in terms of the provisions of Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 two units were allotted one in favour or the petitioner and another in favour of the respondent No, 4. Sheetal Thakur died in the year 1984 and by an order dated 6;9-1988 (Annexure-1) it has been held that the petitioner became a major on 26-3-1984 and thus he became entitled to one unit in view of the decision of this court in Smt. Ramdular...

Mannu Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and ors.

Court: Patna

S.B. Sinha and G.C. Bharuka, JJ.1. In this application the petitioner has prayed for quashing of an order as contained in Memo No. 3836 dated 30-6-1992 whereby and whereunder the appointment of the petitioner in the post of Graduate Physical Training Teacher in Anusuchit Janjati Awasiya Uchcha Vidyalaya, Nima, Katihar has been cancelled and also for quashing of the order whereby he has been directed to refund a sum of Rs. 12.127-60 paise.2. The fact of the matter lies in a very narrow compass.3. The petitioner filied an application before the Director Welfare, Government of Bihar for his appointment as a Graduate Physical training teacher in the school in question.4. The Minister Incharge, Tribal Welfare made an endorsement to the respondent No. 3 on 21-8-1991 for his appointment in the said school. The said application of the petitioner was thereafter forward by the Assistant Director, Welfare, vide his memo No. 7204, dated 1-10-1991 with a direction to take necessary steps for his a...

Chanda Devi and ors. Vs. Shrinath Sharma and anr.

Court: Patna

S. Ali Ahmad, J. 1. The facts are so peculiar that I had to request Mr. Majumdar, a senior counsel, to assist me amicus curiae, in spite of the fact that learned counsel appearing for the parties are persons having fairly good knowledge of civil law. 2. One Ramchandra Sharma filed Title Suit No. 2/25 of 198043 in the Court of the Munsif, Buxar for a declaration that deed of gift dated 17-12-1979 executed by his father in favour of the defendant was invalid, illegal and inoperative. The suit was decreed. An appeal was filed before the lower appellate Court which was numbered as Title Appeal No. 54 of 1985. During the pendency of the appeal, Ramchandra Sharma, who was respondent in the Court below was kidnapped on 10-2-1992. First information report in this regard was also lodged on 13-2-1992. Efforts were made to trace him. Unfortunately till today nothing has been heard of Ramchandra Sharma. The appeal was, however, taken up in the Court below for hearing and allowed by the judgment...

Sal (Components) Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Bihar State Financial Corporat ...

Court: Patna

S.B. Sinha, J. 1. A notice dated 29-6-1989 issued to the petitioners and two others by the Branch Manager, Bihar State Financial Corporation, Vikash Bhawan, Adityapur, Jamshedpur, purported to be in terms of Sections 29 and 30 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 (hereinafter to be referred as to the Act) is the subject-matter of this writ application. 2. The brief fact necessary to be noticed for disposal of this application are as follows: (a) The petitioner No. 1 and the Bihar State Financial Corporation entered into an agreement on 7th October, 1988, in terms whereof a sum of Rs. 30.63 Lakh was to be provided as loan by the respondent No. 1 to the petitioners. The petitioners allegedly repaid a part of the loan by making timely payment of instalments to the extent ofRs. 16.75 Lakh. The petitioners contend that respondent No. I had not disturbed Rs. 16,45 lakh despite repeated demands. In the meanwhile, the impugned notice has been issued. (b) In the said notice it has be...