Rajasthan Court November 1985 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.
Additional Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Birdichand Pannalal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-05-1985
Reported in: [1987]163ITR576(Raj)
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur ('the Tribunal' herein) has referred the following three questions for the opinion of this court, which are said to arise out of its common order dated November 29, 1972, passed in Income-tax Appeals Nos. 63 and 205/JP/1971-72 relating to the assessment years 1965-66 and 1966-67 : --'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that income of Curious House, Birdhi Chand Pannalal and Birdhi Chand & Sons were not includible as part of the income of the assessee, Shri Birdhi Chand, karta of M/s. Birdhi Chand Pannalal ? (This question was referred in Reference Application No. 129/72-73). (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the income of Curious House, Birdhi Chand Pannalal and Virdhi Chand & Sons were not includible as part of the income of M/s. Birdhi Chand Pannalal ? (This question was referred in Reference Appl...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Birdhi Chand
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-05-1985
Reported in: [1987]163ITR578(Raj)
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur ('the Tribunal' herein) has referred the following question for the opinion of this court arising out of its order dated December 1, 1976 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the income of M/s. Curious House, M/s. Birdhichand Pannalal, Birdhichand & Sons and the income earned by Sarva Shri Onkarmal and Narainlal unseparated coparceners of the Hindu undivided family from the properties acquired out of Hindu undivided family funds were not includible as part of the income of the assessee, Shri Birdhichand, karta of M/s. Birdhichand Pannalal ?'2. This question was referred in pursuance of the order dated January 9, 1980, passed in D. B. Income-tax Case No. 25/78 (Addl. CIT v. Birdhichand Pannalal ) by this court.3. Mr. B.R. Arora, learned counsel for the Revenue states that in view of the answer given in Addl. CIT v. Curious House (D.B. Income-tax...
Hulas Chandra Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-05-1985
Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)407
Ashok Kumar Mathur, J.1. The petitioner by this writ petition has challenged the order dated 19th April, 1983 and 11th June, 1984.2. The petitioner was working as Secretary of the Bikaner Divisional Unit of All India Postal Employees Union Class-Ill. In that capacity the petitioner issued Savingram to Sarvashri K.L. Moza General Secretary of the Union and S.K. Gosh Director General, P&T;, New Delhi for ventilating certain grievances. He was informed by communication dated 22nd January, 1983 that the Department proposed to take action against him under Rule 16 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 (here in after referred as the Rules of 1965) for directly sending Savingram. He was served with the statement of charge for this misbehaviour and he was given 10 days time to file reply to this the gravman of the charge was that he has sent a Savingram to the higher authorities in contravention of the instructions issued by the Directer General that ce...
Todi Paharmal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-04-1985
Reported in: (1986)55CTR(Raj)203; [1987]163ITR540(Raj); 1985(2)WLN772
1. The aforesaid two matters arise out of the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, dated September 30, 1975, passed on the application for making a reference to this court for answering the questions of law submitted by the assessee arising out of the order of the Tribunal in I. T. A. No. 759 of 1972-73 in respect of the assessment year 1967-68. The assessee moved the Tribunal for making a reference on the following questions of law for the opinion of this court:'1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and the material on record, the Tribunal was justified in refusing to allocate total accepted profits of Rs. 32,220 in cotton account No. II in the ratio of sales, i.e., 16,449 and Rs. 4,70,209, for both the periods relating to 1967-68 and 1968-69 assessments when there is practically no difference in average sale and purchase prices in both the periods. 2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and the material on record, the method of co...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shivji Ram Agarwal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-04-1985
Reported in: (1986)52CTR(Raj)274; [1986]162ITR793(Raj)
S.K. Mal Lodha, J. 1. This application under Section 256 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Act No. XLIII of 1961) (for short 'the Act ' hereinafter), by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Jodhpur, for a direction to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur (' the Tribunal '), to refer the following questions of law which are said to arise out of its order dated July 15, 1982, passed in Income-tax Appeal No. 431(JP) of 1982 : ' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that in the absence of inclusion ofSection 64(1)(vi) in Explanation 3 to Section 64 of the Act, the provisions of Section 64(1)(vi) will not apply to the clubbing of income which arises from assets transferred directly or indirectly to the son's wife after June 1, 1973, with the income of the father-in-law 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that there was no intimate connection between the l...
Surgyan Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-04-1985
Reported in: 1985(2)WLN706
Gopvl Krishan Sharma, J.1. This revision petition has been preferred against the judgment dated 22nd July, 1985, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Dholpur, in Criminal Appeal No. 5/85, whereby he confirmed the judgment and order passed by the Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Dholpur, dated 8th September, 1982 in Criminal Case No. 89/81, convicting the petitioner under Section 54 of the Rajasthan Excise Act, and sentencing him to 1 year's simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/-, and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 1 month's simple imprisonment.2. Mr. Kaushik did not argue the case on merits, but he only prayed for releasing the accused petitioner on probation under the provisions of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.3. As a very short point is involved in this revision petition, with the consent of both the learned counsel, it is being finally disposed of at this stage.4. On 12th December, 1978, Excise Inspector Jagdish Prasad Sharma raided the house of the pet...
Uka Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-04-1985
Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)548
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Addl. Sessions. Judge, Jalore, dated 31st July 1975 whereby the appellant Uka was convicted under Section 302 IPC and was sentenced to imprisonment for life and to a fine of Rs. 100/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment for having murdered one Moda on the night intervening 27-6-1975 and 28-6-1975 at 4 a.m.2. The prosecution case in brief is that the accused Uka, deceased Moda Jhulha PW 2 Khangara PW4 and other persons had gone to Mafwa with their cattle as there was famine in their village. Some of their women also accompanied with them. The wife of the deceased Moda viz. Gajra was also in their company. It is alleged that the accused Uka developed illicit relations with Gajra for which accused was rebuked. It is said that on the night between 27-6-75 & 28-6-75 after their return from Malva when they were sleeping the outskirts of village Meda the accused cut the throat of Moda with '...
Additional Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Curious House and Birdhichan ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-01-1985
Reported in: [1987]163ITR573(Raj)
S.K. Mal Lodha, J.1. By this consolidated order, we propose to answer the common question referred in these references.2. D.B.I.T. Reference No. 24 of 1978 relates to the assessment years 1965-66 and 1966-67. D.B.I.T. Reference No. 39 of 1980 is in respect of the assessment years 1967-68 to 1978-79. D.B.I.T. References Nos. 26 of 1978, 17 of 1984 and 49 of 1980, relate to the assessment years 1966-67, 1970-71, 1971-72 and 1972-73 respectively. In D.B. Income-tax Reference No. 5 of 1981, the assessment year involved is 1971-72.3. The following question, which is common in the aforesaid six references, is said to arise out of the orders of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur ('the Tribunal' herein) :'Whether, in the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the registration or continuation of registration could not be refused to the assessee ?'4. The answer to this question involves a finding on the question whether Birdhichand...
Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Curious House.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-01-1985
Reported in: (1986)50CTR(Raj)266
ORDERS. K. Mal Lodha, J. - By this consolidated order, we propose to answer the common question referred in these references.2. DBIT Ref. No. 24/78 relates to asst. yrs. 1965-66 and 1966-67. DBIT Ref. No. 39/80 is in respect of the asst. yrs. 1967-68 to 1978-79. DBIT Ref. Nos. 26/78, 17/84, and 49/80, relate to asst. yrs. 1966-67; 1970-71 and 1971-72; and 1972-73 respectively. In DBIT Ref. No. 5/81, the assessment year involved is 1971-72.3. The following question, which is common in the aforesaid six references, is said to arise out of the order of the ITAT, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur :'Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the registration or continuation of registration could not be refused to the assessee ?'4. Answer to this question involves finding on the question whether Virdhichand, in his capacity as Karta of HUF could take first one of his sons and, therefore, both his sons as partners even though they have not contributed anythi...
Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer Vs. Rajasthan Chemical Corporation
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-01-1985
Reported in: [1987]65STC356(Raj)
S.K. Mal Lodha, J.1. These two references involve identical questions and, therefore, they were heard together and it will be convenient to dispose of them by a common order.2. This Court by its order dated 2nd February, 1980, directed the Board of Revenue for Rajasthan, Ajmer ('the Board' herein), to state the case and make a consolidated reference in both the cases on the following question :Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Board of Revenue was justified in holding that 'neel' (ultramarine blue) is not included in the term 'pigment' and is as such taxable at the general rate of 7 per cent ?3. The dealer-assessee deals in 'neel' (ultramarine blue) and chemicals. It is a firm and is registered dealer under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 (No. 29 of 1954) (for short 'the Act' herein). In respect of the periods, under consideration, the assessing authority assessed the sale of 'neel' (ultramarine blue) by the assessee to sales tax at the rate of 12 per cent by hol...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »