Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Cit Vs. Ganga Cold Storage

Cit vs Ganga Cold Storage

Type Court Judgment Court Allahabad Decided Jul 09, 2002
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/492779

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Allahabad High Court
Decided On
Case Number
IT Ref. No. 76 of 1983 9 July 2002 A.Y. 1977-78
Subject
Direct Taxation

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894 [C.A. No. 1/1894]. Section 4; [Sushil Harkauli, S.K. Singh & Krishna Murari, JJ] Acquisition of land Held, Court cannot issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the State Authorities to acquire a particular land. Land acquisition is not purely ministerial act to be performed by executive No...

Key legal issue
Direct Taxation

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Cit

Advocate None, for the Revenue V. Gulati, <i>for the Assessee</i>

Respondent

Ganga Cold Storage

Legal References

Reported In
(2002)176CTR(All)585

Excerpt

.....the provisions of land acquisition act, 1894. it would, however, be open to the court in exercise of that power to invite the attention of the executive to any public purpose and the need for land for meeting that public purpose and to require the executive to take a decision, even a reasoned decision, with regard to the same in accordance with the statutory provisions, perhaps even within a reasonable time frame. however, the power of the court under article 226 must necessarily stop at that. thereafter, if the decision taken by the executive is capable of challenge and, there exist appropriate legal grounds for such challenge, it may also be open to the court to quash the decision and to require reconsideration. but no direction in the nature of mandamus whether interim or final can be issued by the court under article 226 to the executive to necessarily acquire a particular area of a particular piece of land for a particular public purpose. section 4; compulsory acquisition of land powers of state government held, renewal of lease in favour of petitioners would not take away power of state government of compulsory acquisition of land. renewal of lease would at best be taken into consideration for determining quantum of compensation. counsels: none, for the revenue v. gulati, for the assesseein the allahabad high court s.k. sen, c.j. & ashok bhushan, j.judgment by the courtat the instance of revenue the tribunal has referred the following question of law to this court for its opinion :'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was justified in holding that in working out the income, the assessee registered firm, was entitled to set off of unabsorbed depreciation of the earlier years brought forward against the income liable to assessment for the assessment year 1977-78 ?'2. none appears for the applicant. we have heard sri v. gulati, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.3. in view of the judgment and decision of the supreme court in the case of garden silk weaving factory v. cit : [1991]189itr512(sc) , we answer the question referred to in affirmative and decide the reference in favour of assessee and against the revenue.the reference is accordingly answered.

Full Judgment

Counsels:

None, for the Revenue V. Gulati, for the Assessee

In the Allahabad High Court S.K. Sen, C.J. & Ashok Bhushan, J.

Judgment

By the Court

At the instance of revenue the Tribunal has referred the following question of law to this court for its opinion :

'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that in working out the income, the assessee registered firm, was entitled to set off of unabsorbed depreciation of the earlier years brought forward against the income liable to assessment for the assessment year 1977-78 ?'

2. None appears for the applicant. We have heard Sri V. Gulati, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

3. In view of the judgment and decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Garden Silk Weaving Factory v. CIT : [1991]189ITR512(SC) , We answer the question referred to in affirmative and decide the reference in favour of assessee and against the revenue.

The reference is accordingly answered.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial