Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : May-11-1977
Reported in : [1977]40STC333(P&H)
A.S. Bains, J.1. In this reference there is no controversy on facts which are briefly stated as under :The assessee-firm Messrs. Porritts and Spencer (Asia) Limited are engaged in the manufacture and sale of cotton/woollen dryer felts at Faridabad. The assessee-firm is registered both under the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter called as 'the Act') and also under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. It also deals in inter-State sales and the first such sale was effected on 26th April, 1971. A notice under the Act was given to the firm by the Assessing Authority for its liability to pay sales tax but the assessee-firm contested its liability on the ground that the products (i. e., dryer felts) manufactured by it fell into the category of tax-free goods being covered by item 30 of Schedule B of the Act and claimed that it was not liable to get itself registered either under the Act or under the Central Sales Tax Act. This contention of the assessee-firm was not accepted by the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-25-1977
Reported in : AIR1977P& H268
O. Chinnappa Reddy, C.J.1. The appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent and the Civil Writ Petition may be disposed of by a common judgment. We proceed to do so.2. In 1966, the Government of Punjab announced its 'New Policy' in regard to Industrial Development and issued a brochure containing the details of the 'New Policy'. It was stated in the brochure that though Punjab had made considerable progress in 'Small Scale Industry', the State was lagging behind in 'Large Scale Industry.' As it was felt that 'Large Scale Industries' were necessary for the survival of 'Small Scale Industries', the Government announced that 'a package of incentives' would be given to those setting up selected industries at any of the three 'focal points' of Dhandari Kalan, Rajpura and Mohali. The concessions and incentives offered, according to the brochure, were:(1) Land to be acquired at focal points and price to be paid in easy instalments, interest being calculated at 4 per cent; the facility to be e...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : May-24-1977
Reported in : AIR1977P& H320; [1977]110ITR170(P& H)
M.R. Sharma, J. 1. A copy of the partnership deed dated May 16, 1964, Annexure 'A' shows that the assessee-firm had the following partners with their respective shares denoted against (heir Dames:-- Nandlal party of first part 7/40Sohanlal party of second part 7/40Mukandlal party of third part 7/40Hardial party of fourth part 7/40Ramlal party of fifth part 5/40Harbanslal party of sixth part 7/40 2. on Oct. 20, 1967, Shri Mukand Lalone of the partners died. A new partnershipdeed dated Oct. 26, 1967, was executedwhereby Rajinder Kumar, the minor son ofthe deceased partner Sh. Mukand Lal, wasadmitted to the benefits of the partnershipwith effect from Oct. 21, 1967. The assessee-firm filed two returns for the period April13, 1967 to Oct. 20, 1967, and Oct. 21, 1967,to April 12, 1968. In the new partnershipdeed, it has been specifically provided thatthe death of any of the partners shall notdissolve the partnership and either the legalheir or the nominee of the deceased partnershall take hi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jul-26-1977
Reported in : [1978]48CompCas327(P& H); [1979(38)FLR46]
Chinnappa Reddy, J.1. The petitioner was an employee of the Punjab National Bank, a nationalised bank. On December 6, 1974, the Assistant Regional Manager of the bank issued a notice to the petitioner asking him to explain why disciplinary action should not be taken against him for certain alleged malpractices. It was stated in the notice that certain complaints had been received against the petitioner, that the complaints had been investigated by an inspector and that certain malpractices were noticed. The malpractices were stated to be as follows I'1. The undernoted borrowers have given written statements to the investigating officer, duly attested by Oath Commissioner, Mohindergarh, that they paid the amount, mentioned against each, to you as bribe for getting loan from the bank : Rs.(a) Ram Chander, son of RachpalSingh50(b) Bishan Lal, son of KaburChand150(c) Sant Lal, son of Jai Dayal75(d) Tirath Dass, son of HariChand90(e) Ratti Ram, son of KaburChand150Shri Mool Chand, son of Bi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Sep-13-1977
Reported in : 1978CriLJ20
S.S. Sandhawalia, J.1. The purpose, nature and scope of the power to grant anticipatory bail rested in the higher echelons of the judiciary by Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been the subject--matter of debate before the Full Bench in these two petitioners for bail which are before us on a reference.2. On the 26th of August, 1977, Shri Gurbachan Singh Behniwal, I. P. S. Superintendent of Police, Vigilance Squad, forwarded a special report to the Police Station. Civil Lines, Ludhiana, on the basis of which a case under S. 5(1)(d) and (e) read with S. 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Ss. 406, 409, 477A and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, was registered. In the said report it was alleged inter alia that Shri Zail Singh, former Chief Minister of the Congress Government in Punjab along with some members of his Council of Ministers, some office-bearers of the Punjab Pradesh Congress Committee, some appointees to high public offices and senior ranking Government o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jul-27-1977
Reported in : (1977)79PLR737
ORDER1. Service is complete in the case.2. The plaintiff--respondents filed a suit for pre--emption of sale of land by one Sardhi in favour of the vendee--petitioners on two grounds, namely, (1) that the plaintiffs are the sons of the brother of the husband of the vendor and (2) that the plaintiffs are co--sharers in the suit--land. During the pendency of the suit the vendees applied to the revenue officer for partition of the suit--land. If partition is effected before the pre--emption suit is disposed of, the plaintiff--respondents would lose their character as co--sharers. To avoid the possibility of such a situation, the plaintiffs made an application to the trial Court under O. 39, R. 1(c) of the Civil P. C. for restraining the vendee--respondents (petitioners before me) from continuing the partition proceedings. The application was allowed by the trial Court, and the appeal of the vendees having failed, they have come up for revision of the appellate order.3. Mr. V. K. Bali, the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-24-1977
Reported in : (1977)79PLR366
M.R. Sharma, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, has referred the following question of law to us at the instance of the assessee for our opinion under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the payment of Rs. 6,00,000 was not allowable under Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961?'2. M/s. Panipat Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd., Panipat (hereinafter called 'the assessee'), is an association of persons deriving income from the business of manufacture of sugar. For the assessment year commencing on April 1, 1967, the Income-tax Officer, vide his order dated September 17, 1971, assessed the total income of the assessee at Rs. 30,29,850 as against the declared income of Rs, 22,44,150. Out of the amount of Rs. 6,38,637 claimed by the assessee as cane development expenses, the Income-tax Officer disallowed the amount of Rs. 6,00,000 contributed by the assessee to ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Sep-27-1977
Reported in : [1978]48CompCas271(P& H)
Harbans Lal, J. 1. This is a claim petition under Section 446(2) read with Section 468 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter to be called ' the Act'). for the recovery of Rs. 7,518 26.2. Punjab Finance Pvt. Ltd., with its registered office at Jullunder city (hereinafter to be called ' the petitioner '), was ordered to be wound up by the order of this court, dated January 7, 1971, and the present petition has been filed on its behalf by the official liquidator. 3. Mohan Lal, respondent No. 1, took a loan of Rs. 2,500 from the petitioner on September 11, 1965, and executed a pronote as well as an agreement of pledge whereby the motor vehicle (tempo) No. PNH 2239 was pledged with the petitioner on September 11, 1965, for Rs. 2,797.50 comprising of principal, interest and finance commission. The said amount was payable by respondent No. 1 in six instalments. The first instalment of Rs. 466 was payable on March 20, 1965, and the subsequent instalments were to be paid monthly on the 20th o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-24-1977
Reported in : [1977]108ITR111(P& H)
M. R. SHARMA J. - The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, has referred the following question of law to us at the instance of the assessee for our opinion under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the payment of Rs. 6,00,000 was not allowable under section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'M/s. Panipat Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd., Panipat (hereinafter called 'the assessee'), is an association of person deriving income from the business of manufacture of sugar. For the assessment year commencing on April 1, 1967, the Income-tax Officer, vide his order dated September 17, 1971, assessed the total income of the assessee at Rs. 30,29,850 as against the declared income of Rs. 22,44,150. Out of the amount of Rs. 6,38,637 claimed by the assessee as cane development expenses, the Income-tax Officer disallowed the amount of Rs. 6,00,000 contributed by the assessee to the...
Tag this Judgment!