Patna Court April 1996 Judgments
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Metallurgical Engineering Consultants ( ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-25-1996
D. P. WADHWA, C.J. :The Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna, drew up a statement of case as directed by the High Court in proceedings under s. 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'), for the asst. yrs. 1974-75, 1975-76 and 1976-77. A common statement for six cases, three at the instance of the Revenue and three at the instance of assessee, was drawn up. For the asst. yr. 1974-75, the tax case at the instance of the Revenue is Tax Case No. 232 of 1981 and at the instance of the assessee is Tax Case No. 19 of 1983, for the asst. yr. 1975-76, the tax case of the Revenue is Tax Case No. 233 of 1981 and that of the assessee is Tax Case No. 18 of 1983 and for the asst. yr. 1976-77, the tax case of the Revenue is Tax Case No. 234 of 1981 and that of the assessee is Tax Case No. 17 of 1983.The questions which have been referred to this Court for decision are as under :'1. Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the assessee would be entitled to depreciation on the amounts of Rs. ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Western India Sales and Service
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-25-1996
1. These references under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, are at the instance of the Revenue. The solitary question referred to this court for its opinion is : ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in cancelling the order levying penalty under Section 140A(3) ?' 2. The material facts are as follows : The assessee, which is a firm, filed returns of income for the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75 on August 14, 1973, and September 23, 1974, respectively. For the assessment year 1974-75, a revised return was filed on January 13, 1975. After adjustment of advance tax, etc., self-assessment tax amounting to Rs. 1,71,943 and Rs. 1,61,292 was payable under Section 140A of the Income-tax Act. The assessee informed the Income-tax Officer on September 15, 1973, about his inability to pay the tax on account of financial stringency. The Income-tax Officer refused the prayer and initiated penalty proceedings. The show-cause filed...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ashok Kumar Jha
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-24-1996
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following questions of law pursuant to the order of this court for its opinion under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the Revenue :' (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, who deleted the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act by wrongly putting the onus upon the Department ?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the deletion of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act is justified when Explanation to Section 271(1)(c) is attracted ?'2. The material facts are as follows :The assessee filed returns showing income of Rs. 9,400 and Rs. 4,500 from truck business for the assessment years 1966-67 and 1967-68, respectively. The Income-tax Officer, in the course of assessment proceedings, found that the assessee had made investment of Rs. 42,100 for purch...
Tag this Judgment!Raghunath Pathak and anr. Vs. Kamal Prasad Naik and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-24-1996
Prasun Kumar Deb, J.1. This civil revision application has been preferred by the above-named defendants No. 2 and 3 of Title Suit No. 7 of 1994 regarding part of the order dated 7.3.1994 passed by the Munsif at Seraikella and then confirmed by the 4th Additional District Judge, Chaibasa, in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 3 of 1994 by which temporary injunction granted in favour of the original plaintiff-respondent has been maintained. The other part of the order regarding amalgamation of the above mentioned suit with Title Suit No. 32 of 1992 has not been challenged.2. The original plaintiff Smt. Jamuna Naik alias Bodo Devi @ Savitri Devi Title suit No. 7 of 1994 before the court of Munsif at Seraikella for a relief of declaration that the sale deed dated 4.4.1975 executed by her brother defendant No. 1 in favour of defendants No. 2 and 3 in respect of the suit lands as described in the schedule of the plaint was illegal, void and inoperative and without consideration and was not binding up...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Steel City Beverages (P) Ltd.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-24-1996
1. At the instance of the Revenue, this court under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), on an application for the assessment year 1979-80, asked the Tribunal to refer the following question to this court for its opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in directing to allow depreciation at cent per cent. new purchases of bottles and containers worth Rs. 29,55,813 ?'2. The assessee is a private limited company and it derives income from sale of cola, soda and ice boxes, etc. It had claimed Rs. 29,55,813 as depreciation under Section 32(1)(ii) of the Act, which was allowed 100 per cent., as the purchase price of each bottle was less than Rs. 750. The Income-tax Officer held that the bottles could not be equated with plant and depreciation could not be allowed, as claimed by the assessee. On appeal, however, the Commissioner of Income-tax referring to a decision of the Delhi Hig...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Gouri Shankar Suresh Prasad
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-24-1996
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal at the instance of this court on an application filed under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), referred the following question of law for the assessment year 1977-78 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in cancelling the penalty of Rs. 15,218 imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. As to what are the facts in the case we may refer a portion of paragraph 2 of the case sent by the Tribunal. 'The assessee is a partnership firm. The assessment year involved is 1977-78. As against the loss of Rs. 12,790 returned the assessment was completed on a total income of Rs. 52,270. The difference between the returned figure and the income assessed arose because : (i) the assessee had claimed expenses of Rs. 40,793 on repairs and maintenance as revenue expenses which were disallowed by the Income-tax Officer treating them as capital ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Smt. Sushila Agrawal
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-24-1996
1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following questions of law, for the assessment years 1974-75, 1975-76 and 1976-77 have been referred to this court for its opinion, by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna, under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 : ' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to the benefit of Section 7(4) of the Wealth-tax Act for the years 1974-75, 1975-76 and 1976-77 ?2. Whether the operation of Section 7(4) is retrospective in nature ?'2. Sub-section (4) of Section 7 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, was inserted by the Finance Act, 1976, with effect from April 1, 1976. This Sub-section (4) of Section 7, is as under : ' Notwithstanding anything contained in Sub-section (1), the value of a house belonging to the assessee and exclusively used by him for residential purposes throughout the period of twelve months immediately preceding the valuation date may, at the option of the assessee, be taken ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Bishwanath Tulsyan
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-23-1996
1. At the instance of the Revenue under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'), the Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna, has referred to this court the following questions for its opinion pertaining to the assessment year 1977-78 : ' 1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that the issuance of a show-cause notice is a condition precedent before charging the interest under Sections 139(8) and 217 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? 2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in deleting the interest charged by the Income-tax Officer ?' 2. The assessee was assessed in the status of an unregistered firm for the assessment year 1977-78. It filed a return of income on September 30, 1979, which was due on July 31, 1977. The Income-tax Officer charged interest under Section 139(8) of the Act amounting to Rs. 43,179. The interest was also charged under Section 217 of the Act whic...
Tag this Judgment!Mst. Krishna Mani Kaur and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-23-1996
S.J. Mukhopadhyaya, J.1. Appellant Nos. 2 to 5 and one Umeshwar Mishra were Respondent Nos. 6 to 10 in the writ petition (C.W.J.C. No. 4579 of 1986. The said writ-petition was filed by the Respondent-Managing Committee of Shri Vishnudutta Mishra Sanskrit High School along with others. One order which was passed by Respondent-Chairman of Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board (for short the 'Board'), contained in letter No. 16 dated 3rd May, 1983 (Annexure-12 to the writ-petition) was under challenge in the said writ petition. The order which was passed by the appellate authority with respect to appeal against the aforesaid order (Annexure-1 to the writ-petition), the same was also under challenge.The learned Single Judge by the impugned order dated 28th September, 1986 allowed the said writ petition (C.W.J.C. No. 4579/86), set aside the appellate order (Annexure-1 to the writ-petition) and also set aside the order, contained in letter No. 16 dated 3rd May, 1983 (Annexure-12 to the writ petition...
Tag this Judgment!Tata Engineering and Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-23-1996
Sachchidanand Jha, J.1. The point for consideration in this writ-petition is whether the respondents can legally ask the manufacturers of motor vehicles to obtain 'certificate of fitness' with respect to unsold vehicles while being sent to different sales centers for sale.2. The point involves a pure question of law and, therefore, it is not necessary to notice the factual aspects of the case which are more or less undisputed. It may only be stated that the petitioner, which is a public limited company, is one of the premier manufacturers of commercial vehicles including motor vehicles chassis, dumper etc. and other engineering goods. After the motor vehicles are manufactured, they are sent to various sale centers/regional sale centers situate in various parts of the country. Sometimes only chassis of the motor vehicles and sometime vehicles with body built thereon, as per the demand of the customer, are supplied. Whenever they move out to the sale centres they carry certificate of te...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »