Allahabad Court September 1974 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.
Rashtriya Metal Manufacturing Works and anr. Vs. the District Magistra ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-03-1974
Reported in: [1975]35STC203(All)
Satish Chandra, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenges the validity of recovery proceedings launched by the sales tax authorities to recover from the petitioner a sum of Rs. 57,910.11 plus penal interest plus process fee charges. The writ petition gives a split up of the amount sought to be recovered for the assessment years as follows :For the assessment year 1967-68 ... Rs. 35,950.01 ' ' ' ' 1968-69 ... Rs. 10,071.65 (Central)' ' ' ' 1968-69 ... Rs. 11,888.45 (U.P.)2. The figures arise in this way. For the assessment year 1967-68 the petitioner was assessed to sales tax to the tune of Rs. 62,204.11. The amount of tax was reduced in appeal to Rs. 33,703.11. Out of this reduced amount the petitioner deposited Rs. 26,254. The department went, up in revision where by an order dated 29th September, 1973, the appellate order was set aside and the assessment made by the Sales Tax Officer was restored, with the result that the tax liability came to Rs. 62,204.11....
V.P. Tyagi Vs. Ram Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-03-1974
Reported in: 1975CriLJ897
ORDERHari Swarup, J.1. This is an application Tinder Section 561-A, Criminal Procedure Code for quashing the proceedings pending before the District Magistrate, Pitho-ragarh. A complaint had been filed by the respondent against the petitioner on '23-8-1969 alleging that the petitioner had committed offences under Sections 323 and 448, Indian Penal Code on August 20, 1969. The case is still pending and the trial has not concluded.2. Learned Counsel has urged that the proceedings be quashed because cognizance taken by the Magistrate was not in accordance with law and the trial is proceeding in a court which has no juris-diction. The othex contention is that the protracted nature of the trial is itself sufficient for quashing the proceedings. In support of the first contention he has relied on Section 35 of the Police Act and ^Regulation 488 of the Police Regulations. Section 35 of the Police Act reads as under:Jurisdiction - Any charge against a police Officer above the rank of a constab...