Patna Court June 1997 Judgments

Smt. Shakunti Devi and ors. Vs. Sri. Nawal Kishore Sharma and ors.

Court: Patna

S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. The civil revision application was originally filed by defendant-appellant, Smt. Shakunti Devi. During the pendency of this civil revision application a petition was filed for adding one Brajesh Kumar and another Vikash Kumar as petitioners in the revision application on the ground that they are transferees from the original petitioner of this revision application. The petition was allowed by this Court on 19th of September, 1996 and they have also been impleaded as petitioners and were heard.2. The order dated 5th of July, 1994 passed by the learned 5th Additional District Judge in Misc. Appeal No. 30 of 1992 is under challenge in this case. By the impugned appellate order and judgment the appellate Court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the order dated 18th of May, 1992 passed in Misc. Case No. 1/89 and held that the ex-parte judgment and decree passed in Title Suit No. 165/86 is legal and justified.3. The plaintiff-opposite party 1st set filed the Title Su...

Social Action for Relief To the Consumer and Anr. Vs. Ranchi Municipal ...

Court: Patna

Aftab Alam, J.1. These two writ petitions/have been heard together mainly because in both cases reliefs are claimed against a common set of respondents, Ranchi Municipal Corporation and its Adminstrator. But the issues raised in the two cases are quite different; CWJC No. 2704/1995 (R) questions the Corporation's authority to realise latrine tax and education cess whereas the petitioners in CWJC No. 586/96 (R) seek to challenge certain mode devised by the Corporation for determining the annual rental value of the holdings (hereinafter referred to as 'A.R.V.') on the basis of which municipal taxes payable in respect of a holding are to be fixed. It will be more convenient, therefore, to deal with the two cases separately, and I propose to do so in this judgment.2. For the first time after its constitution in 1979 the Ranchi Municipal Corporation, in 1992, took up the work of revision of valuation and assessment lists. Title previous general assessment was made 30 years ago in 1961-62 b...

Gaya Mahto and ors. Vs. Babu Ram Singh

Court: Patna

P.K. Sarin, J.1. This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code) has been moved by the opposite party of Criminal Revision No. 574 of 1993 for recalling the order dated 3.10.1994 passed in the said revision and restoring the case to its number.2. The said criminal revision was filed by the petitioners of the criminal revision and the matter related to a proceeding under Section 145 of the Code. This Court heard the said criminal revision on 3.10.1994 and allowed the revision by final order.3. The opposite party, who has moved the present application for recalling that order, has stated in his application that on the date of hearing his learned Counsel could not appear in court due to misunderstanding and in this way the opposite party has not been heard in the said case before disposal of the same. It has been stated in the application that the criminal revision was earlier listed before Hon'ble Mr. Justice D.S. Dhaliwal but t...

Mrityunjay Ghatak Alias Mirtunjay Ghatak Vs. Bibhuti Bhushan Sen Gupta ...

Court: Patna

Prasun Kumar Deb, J.1. Both the appeals have been heard analogously as they arise out of the common judgment dated 19.8.1988 passed by Shree Chiranji Singh, 4th Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi, in two probate cases, namely, Probate Case Nos. 134 of 1982 and 69 of 1983 which were also heard together and disposed of by a common judgment.2. There is chequered history of the case. Once both these appeals were heard by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Amir Das as he then was and by order dated 2nd February, 1994 the appeals were allowed and the judgment under appeals was set aside and both the cases were remanded back to the learned court below for coming to a just conclusion of the case after consideration of the different circumstances as enumerated in the remand order itself giving opportunities to both the parties to adduce further evidence in support of their respective claims. Against that remand order, Bibhuti Bhushan Sen Gupta, the respondent in both the appeals, had preferred Letters ...

Abhay Kumar Shroff Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna

Reported in: (1997)63ITD144(Pat.)

1. These two appeals involving a common issue are being disposed of by a common order for the sake of convenience. Both the sides agreed that essential facts were similar in the two cases. We will, therefore, discuss facts in the case of Shri Abhay Kumar Shroff (I.T.A. No.95/Pat./1993) and the decision will be equally applicable in the case of Late Sri Hanuman Prasad Shroff through legal heirs.2. The assessee, Shri Abhay Kumar Shroff is an individual and a member of the HUF called 'Hanuman Prasad Abhay Kumar'. The HUF purchased a property called Diamond Plaza for Rs. 7,60,000 and leased it to the assessee on 5-3-1987 on a rent of Rs. 2,185 per month for five years and Rs. 2,665 for the next five years. The assessee, thereafter, sub- let the premises to the Union Bank of India or rent on Rs. 2,28,060 per year. According to the assessment order, it was let out on 20-4- 1987 but according to the ld. counsel for the assessee, before us, the date should be 10-4-1987. However, the differenc...

Pradip Kumar Loyalka Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna

Reported in: (1997)63ITD87(Pat.)

1. The assessee has three grievances in this appeal which are as under :- 1. Confirmation of a sum of Rs. 87,000 as income from undisclosed sources under section 68 of the Act. 2. Retention of a sum of Rs. 15,000 as against Rs. 20,800 made by the Assessing Officer (A.O.) on account of low withdrawal for household expenses.2. As regards the third grievance it was brought to the notice of the assessee's counsel that there is no decision whatsoever by the Appellate Commissioner (A/C) and, therefore, this ground does not arise from out of the impugned order of the A/C. However, after some discussion it was decided that instead of sending the matter back to the A/C for rendering a decision on the ground taken in the first appeal regarding levy of interest under section 217, we direct the Assessing Officer to give a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee before charging interest under section 217. The third ground is disposed off accordingly. The assessee maintains personal a...

Arun Kumar Srivastava Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna

Reported in: (1997)63ITD49(Pat.)

1. The assessee in this appeal has two grievances one regarding confirmation of addition of Rs. 10,000 in labour payment account and the other in respect of confirmation of an amount of Rs. 1,22,077 added under section 40A(3) of the Act representing cash payments made to M/s.STP Ltd. Dhanbad in respect of supplies made under various bills. The assessee's case in respect of second grievance was that M/s STP Ltd. with its Head Office at Calcutta and Union Office at Dhanbad did not have any bank account at Dhanbad and, therefore, the assessee made payments in cash for immediate business purposes and payment by bank demand draft or by cheque would have delayed the business transaction resulting in losses to the assessee. According to the assessee M/s. STP Ltd. was an income-tax assessee and payments to that concern were not doubted. Moreover on account of unavoidable and unexceptional circumstances, cash payments exceeded Rs. 2500 were made and the assessee came within the benevolence of ...

income-tax Officer Vs. Gayatri Coal Supply Co.

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna

Reported in: (1997)63ITD237(Pat.)

1. These two appeals filed by the Department are being disposed of by a common order for the sake of convenience.2. The appeals have been filed against the orders of the CIT(A) cancelling penalties of Rs. 56,072 and Rs. 74,951 for assessment years 1987-88 and 1988-89 respectively, levied under section 271B of the Act.3. According to the provisions of section 44AB of the Act, the audit report under that section was due to be prepared by 31-7-87 for assessment year 1987-88. However, it was actually signed on 2-8-88 and was, thus, delayed. Similarly, the audit report for assessment year 1988-89 was due to be prepared by 31-7-88 but the report was actually signed on 20-10-89. It was thus again delayed. Penalty proceedings were commenced by the Assessing Officer for both the years, in response to which replies were filed stating that the accounts could not be audited in due time due to illness of the assessee's Authorised Representative, who was also employed as auditor, and because the Ac...

income-tax Officer Vs. Dwarka Prasad. (Dwarka Prasad V.

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna

Reported in: (1997)63ITD1(Pat.)

1. These are cross-appeals filed by the assessee as well as by the Revenue. We shall first take up assessee's appeal.2. Ground Nos. 2 and 3 state that the Appellate Commissioner (A/C) erred in confirming the deposit by Smt. Girja Devi of a sum of Rs. 18,000 treating it as assessee's income and also disallowing the interest amount of Rs. 1,828 paid to that lady on her loan account.3. The assessee obtained a loan from Smt. Girja Devi amounting to Rs. 18,000. No confirmation letter from this lady was filed. However, the assessee explained that she obtained loans from two different persons through account payee cheques which were deposited by her in her bank account and then the cheque was issued to the assessee. It was stated before the AO that both the lenders of Smt. Girja Devi were assessed to tax. Explanation was disbelieved and the amount of Rs. 18,000 was added to the assessee's income under s. 68 of the Act at the same time adding Rs. 1,828, interest payable by the assessee in res...

income-tax Officer Vs. Dwarka Prasad. (Dwarka Prasad V. Ito).

Court: Patna

ABDUL RAZACK, J.M. : July, 1995.These are cross-appeals filed by the assessee as well as by the Revenue. We shall first take up assessees appeal.ITA No. 352/Pat/1989 :2. Ground Nos. 2 and 3 state that the Appellate Commissioner (A/C) erred in confirming the deposit by Smt. Girja Devi of a sum of Rs. 18,000 treating it as assessees income and also disallowing the interest amount of Rs. 1,828 paid to that lady on her loan account.3. The assessee obtained a loan from Smt. Girja Devi amounting to Rs. 18,000. No confirmation letter from this lady was filed. However, the assessee explained that she obtained loans from two different persons through account payee cheques which were deposited by her in her bank account and then the cheque was issued to the assessee. It was stated before the AO that both the lenders of Smt. Girja Devi were assessed to tax. Explanation was disbelieved and the amount of Rs. 18,000 was added to the assessees income under s. 68 of the Ac...