Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Dec-16-1983
Reported in : [1984]56STC133(All)
H.N. Seth, J.1. As the learned single Judge before whom these two connected sales tax revision applications came up for hearing felt that the decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Bharat Oxygen, Lucknow 1980 UPTC 686 on which the Sales Tax Tribunal had placed reliance while disposing of the appeal before it, required reconsideration, he vide his order dated 20th December, 1982, directed that these cases be listed before a larger Bench and this is how the matter has come up before us.2. The two dealers involved in these cases carried on the business of dispensing and selling medicines in the names of M/s. Kaderul Sehat Dawakhana and M/s. Rafekul Sehat Dawakhana at Sambhal in the district of Moradabad. In due course their assessments for the years 1976-77 (in the case of M/s. Kaderul Sehat Dawakhana) and 1977-78 (in the case of M/s. Rafekul Sehat Dawakhana) were reopened under Section 21 of the U. P. Sales Tax Act as it was felt that the turnover of sales of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Nov-12-1983
Reported in : (1985)49CTR(All)308; [1985]153ITR638(All); [1985]22TAXMAN107(All)
Om Prakash, J. 1. This is an application under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act, 1961'), by the asscssee relating to the assessment year 1976-77, for which the previous year ended on March 31, 1976, praying that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal be asked to refer the following questions to this court: '1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal was right in law in holding that the Income-tax Officer was fully justified in reopening the assessment under Section 147(a), on the non-disclosure of the investment in the pick-up van in the original return of income filed under Section 139(1) by the assessee 2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal was correct in law that the money received by the assessee amounting to Rs. 18,000 from his sister-in-law, Smt. Somamati,. was in the nature of income character and it was rightly included as income from undisclosed sources in the hands of the assessee 3....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Feb-02-1983
Reported in : (1983)37CTR(All)218; [1983]142ITR104(All); [1983]13TAXMAN337(All)
R.M. Sahai, J.1. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench 'A', has referred the following question of law for opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in confirming the levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act?'2. On the submission advanced by learned counsel for the assessee, which we are inclined to accept, we do not consider it necessary to set out facts in detail. Penalty was levied on the assessee by IAC on March 30, 1977, under Section 274 of the IT. Act. Sub-section (2) of this section required an ITO to refer the case to the IAC if the penalty imposable exceeded Rs. 25,000. The ITO, after computing a total income of Rs. 98,880 against the returned income of Rs. 52,148, initiated proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act onFebruary 28, 1975, and referred the matter to the IAC because the minimum penalty imposable exceeded Rs. 25,000. By the time, however, the order was passed on ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Oct-21-1983
Reported in : [1984]55STC68(All)
B.N. Sapru, J.1. Sales Tax Revision No. 350 of 1982 has been filed by the assessee and pertains to the assessment year 1975-76.2. The assessee is a hotelier and declared a turnover of Rs. 16,33,742.14 but claimed exemption from the tax. The assessing authority assessed the assessee on a taxable turnover of sales at Rs. 11,50,900 and a taxable turnover of purchase at Rs. 40,164. The assessee preferred an appeal. The Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) remanded the matter to the assessing authority for determination afresh.3. Aggrieved by the order of remand, the assessee went up in appeal. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the assessee and upheld the order of the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial).4. Aggrieved, the assessee has come up in revision.5. Sales Tax Revision No. 398 of 1982 has been filed by the assessee and pertains to the assessment year 1976-77.6. The assessee runs a shop of sweetmeats, namkin, kachauri, puri, etc., at Daraganj, Allahabad, as also in Magh Mela. The assesse...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Jan-11-1983
Reported in : [1983]53STC90(All)
B.N. Sapru, J.1. This is a revision by the Commissioner of Sales Tax. The Sales Tax Officer, Mobile Squad, on 12th December, 1980, checked truck No. UPI 3468 and found that it was carrying 32 engines, 32 pumps and two couplings. The goods receipt was issued by the transport company, Southern Eastern Railway. The, way-bill in which the details of the goods were mentioned, was supposed to be of 12th December, 1980, but the date in the bills and the receipt read as 16th December, 1980. The Sales Tax Officer, in-charge of the squad, brought the truck back to the premises of the dealer and handed it over to the custody of the watchman. The stock register was signed and the goods found in the truck were found to have been entered in the account books under the date 12th December, 1980.2. The Sales Tax Officer, S. I. B., being of the opinion that it was a case where a penalty was likely to be imposed under Section 15-A(o), directed the assessee to deposit an amount of Rs. 28,560 for the relea...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Feb-14-1983
Reported in : [1986]60CompCas420(All)
S.D. Agarwala, J.1. This is a petition for winding up Pream Spinning and Weaving Mills Co. Ltd., hereinafter referred to as ' the company ', under Section 439 of the Companies Act, 1956. The'Companies Act, 1956, shall hereinafter be referred to as 'the Act'. The petitioner, Paramjit Lal Badhwar, was secretary-cum-manager of the company since 1969 up to January 16, 1981. The petitioner was in-charge of the day-to-day working of the company. After he ceased to be the secretary of the company, the present petition was filed on February 25, 1981.2. Originally, the registered office of the company was situated at Ujhani, District Budaun, but now the office has shifted to Ambala Road, Saharanpur. The total number of issued and subscribed shares of the companyare 26,215 of Rs. 60 each. The company was incorporated in the year 1921 and started manufacturing cotton yarn from 1923 and continued to manufacture cotton yarn till December, 1973. In 1973, the spinning section of the company was burnt...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Sep-02-1983
Reported in : (1984)38CTR(All)294; [1983]144ITR948(All); [1983]15TAXMAN506(All)
A. Banerji, J.1. The following questions have been referred for the opinion of thiscourt by the Appellate Tribunal under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act.'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to any earned income relief on the share of the income received by him from the business which is the subject-matter of wakf in his capacity as beneficiary ? 2. Whether, the assessment in the year in question having directly been made in the hands of the beneficiary, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee was not entitled to earned income relief ?' 2. The assessee is the Mutawalli of a wakf, Haji Lal Mohd. Bin Works and also one of the beneficiaries of the wakf. In the assessment year 1970-71, the disclosed income from the wakf was stated to be Rs. 1,51,534 after deducting a sum of Rs. 8,700 payable to the other beneficiary. In the assessment-proceeding it was held that the assess...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Sep-21-1983
Reported in : AIR1984All40
Deoki Nandan, J.1. This is a first appeal by the wife against the decree of divorce that was passed against her on 16th July, 1970 by the court of the Additional District Judge Jhansi, on the ground that she had deserted the petitioner, her husband for more than five years when the petition was filed in the year 1970.2. The petitioner husband, who is the respondent in the appeal, did not appear at the hearing in spite of due service of the notice of the appeal on him. The parties were married at Gwalior on 3rd Dec. 1965. The appellant was aged about 32 years and the petitioner was aged about 37 years at the time of their marriage. The appellant's father was dead and her mother was in poor circumstances. The appellant was accordingly living under the protection of her step-sister's husband Pulin Behari who was impleaded as a co-respondent in the divorce petition on the ground that he had illicit connection with the appellant since before the marriage; his wife, the appellant's step-sist...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Feb-28-1983
Reported in : [1984]145ITR689(All)
1. 'Shanti Villa', a house, was purchased in 1961 for a sum of Rs. 40,000 by Navin Chandra, Prabhat Chandra and Subhash Chandra, the three minor grandsons of the assessee, who was a leading civil lawyer of Hardoi having professional and property income, under the guardianship of their mother. In 1970, the ITO reopened proceedings for the assessment years 1962-63 to 1969-70, being of opinion that the assessee had failed to disclose the income from this property and to explain the investments made therein, in his returns. The explanation of the assessee supported by his own affidavit that the money was given to his grandsons by their grandmother who had owned property and had income therefrom was not accepted. The ITO held that the house was purchased by the assessee out of his past savings, the sale of agricultural land and National. Savings Certificates.2. In consequence of this finding, notices under Section 271(1)(c) were also issued. But as the assessee had died, proceedings were in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Sep-20-1983
Reported in : AIR1984All66
B.D. Agarwal, J.1. These three connected second appeals are directed against the judgment and decree of the VI Additional District Judge. Meerut, dated February 28, 1978.2. The following pedigree will serve to elucidate the relevant facts of the case. Jwala Prasad ___________________|_________________ | | Mool Chand Nanuwa Singh = Kastoori Devi |________________ | ___________________|_______________________ | | | Smt. Prakashwati Dhapo Malloo = Sri Ram = Kanchchi ________|_________________________________________________ | | | | Smt. Kamla Devi Chatrapal Chetan Pal Satya PalThe dispute relates to house No. 46 situate in Mohalla Chatta, Delhi Gate. Ghaziabad. Mool Chand was admittedly the exclusive owner of this house. He died on 2nd September, 1968. Smt. Kastoori Devi, the widow of Mool Chand, contends that prior to his death, Mool Chand executed a will in her favour on August 30, 1968, in respect of this house. She instituted Original Suit No. 319 of 1971 on March 17, 1971 for evicti...
Tag this Judgment!