Allahabad Court May 1987 Judgments
U.P. Export Corporation Ltd. Vs. Inspecting Assistant
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Decided on: May-29-1987
Reported in: (1987)23ITD389(All.)
1. The appeal, filed by the assessee, is directed against the order dated 27-3-1986 of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [CIT(A) for short]. This appeal has arisen out of the assessment of the assessee for the assessment year 1982-83. The previous year relevant to this assessment year ended on 31-3-1982.2. The first ground taken up by the assessee in its appeal is that the CIT(A) erred in enhancing the income of the assessee as determined by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (Assessment) IAC (Asstt.) for short by a sum of Rs. 63,84,520. The assessee, M/s U.P.Export Corporation Limited, is a U.P. State Government undertaking. It was constituted in the year 1966 as a company under the Companies Act, 1956, primarily with the purpose of serving as a channel for exports and to act as a promotional body for developing various handicrafts of the State. The State Government implements certain schemes from time to time to promote the development of handicrafts and expo...
Tag this Judgment!Mukesh Kumar and Etc. Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-28-1987
Reported in: 1987CriLJ1808
S.I. Jafri, J.1. This application under Section 482 Cr. P.C. has been preferred by Prasant Gaur seeking hereby to quash the First Information Report dated 11-4-1985 in Crime No. 58 of 1985 under Section 409/467/ 468/420 I.P.C. for police Station Shivali, District Kanpur Dehat. A further prayer for stay of arrest of the applicant had been made in the aforesaid application during the course of the pendency of the application under Section 482 Cr. P.C. Initially, the aforesaid : application was put up before Hon. V. P. Mathur, J. for admission and thereafter the arrest of the applicant was stayed by an order dated 14-4-1986 excepting that the investigation in the case shall continue. Now, this application has come up before me for disposal.2. learned Counsel for the State has submitted that the provisions of Section 482 Cr. P.C. cannot be invoked for staying the investigation or arrest of the accused. In support of his contention, reliance was placed on a division Bench decision of this C...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. M.P. Sugar Mill Co. (P.) Ltd.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Decided on: May-25-1987
Reported in: (1987)23ITD6(All.)
1. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Kanpur, by his application under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, requires the Tribunal to refer to the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, the following question, said to be a question of law, arising out of the Tribunal's order in M.A. No. 143 (Alld.) of 1986, dated 22nd December, 1986 : Whether in law and on facts of the case the Tribunal was right in rejecting the miscellaneous application filed by the Department relying upon its own order dated 26-9-1986 in the case of Champaran Sugar Company Ltd. and in holding that there is no mistake apparent from records 2. It has been submitted by the Ld. Departmental Representative that the aforesaid question is a question of law and, therefore, the statement of the case may be drawn up for reference as applied for. We have heard the learned counsel for the assessee as well and have perused the order of the Tribunal together with the connected record.Briefly speaking the fac...
Tag this Judgment!Luxco Electronics Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-22-1987
Reported in: 1987(31)ELT883(All)
1. The grievance of the petition in the case is that during the pendency of the appeal before it, the Customs Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi has refused to grant stay of recovery of the amount directed to be paid by the petitioner by order of the Collector of Central Excise, Allahabad. The Copy of the order of the Tribunal is Annexure 'A-6' to the petition. The Tribunal has asked the petitioner (Appellant before it) to deposit a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- in cash and secure the balance of the duty amount (amounting to Rs. 1,37,289/52) by way of Bank Guarantee within a period of six weeks from the date of the order. It has stayed the recovery of the amount of penalty in respect of the appellants.2. One of the pleas which the appellant had taken before the Tribunal is that the demand was time barred. This ground has specifically been mentioned in the application for stay made by the petitioner before the Tribunal. The Tribunal has noticed this plea, in its order of Ap...
Tag this Judgment!Bhagat Singh and ors. Vs. Foran Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-22-1987
Reported in: 1988CriLJ72
ORDERB.L. Yadav, J.1. This is a revision under Section 397/401- the the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1974, (for short the Code), with a prayer that the order dt. 10-7-86 passed by the Special Judge (Dacoity Affected Area), Agra, issusing process against the applicants in a case under Section 395, IPC, may be set aside.2 . It appears that after the F.I.R. was lodged, the police investigated the case under Section 395 of the IPC. against the applicants and submitted a final report. Thereafter a protest petition was filed and some witnesses were examined and their statements were recorded under Sections 200 and 202 of the Code. Apart from other witnesses, principally three witnesses, ilel(sic) Bishambhar Singh, Sahab Singh and Danodar Singh supported the complainant case and they had also earlier filed affidavits. The Special Judge (Dacoity Affected Area), Agra after considering the aforesaid statements was of the view that a prima facie case for taking cognizance and issuing process was m...
Tag this Judgment!Food Corporation of India Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-21-1987
Reported in: [1988]69STC374(All)
Brijesh Kumar, J.1. In this bunch of writ petitions, the petitioner, namely, the Food Corporation of India, who claims to perform governmental function for the purposes of constituting national pool of foodgrains, objects to the levy of purchase tax by the State of U.P. under the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948. The different writ petitions relate to different assessment years. However, since according to learned counsel for the petitioner, points raised and argued are common, covering all the petitions, we propose to dispose of all the petitions by this judgment.2. The Food Corporation of India is a 'dealer' as defined under Section 2(c) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, which reads as follows :(c) 'dealer' means any person who carries on in Uttar Pradesh (whether regularly or otherwise) the business of buying, selling, supplying or distributing goods directly or indirectly, for cash or deferred payment or for commission, remuneration or other valuable consideration and includes-(i) a local a...
Tag this Judgment!Jumrnan and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-21-1987
Reported in: 1988CriLJ199
ORDERB.L. Yadav, J.1. By present revision under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short the Code), the order dated 25th Jan. 1986 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mirzapur issuing process against the applicants in Crime No. 107 of 1985 under Section 302/34, I.P.C. is sought to be quashed.2. The short account of the events, relevant for the disposal of this revision may be indicated. One Smt. Naimun (complainant) opposite party No. 2 lodged a F.I.R. on 7th May, 1985 at 4 p.m. at P. S. Adalat Distt., Mirzapur stating that on the same day at about 2 p.m. Km. Parm'ra daughter of complainant, went to the bank of river Ganga but failed to come back. Her sister Km. Hamida who went to trace her out, stated on return that her sister (Km. Parmia) was being drowned by Jumman and Islam, (the applicants 1 and 2). Sardar and Dilbahar went on the spot and saw the accused running away after drowning Km. Parmia who was taken out of water and was found dead. Final report w...
Tag this Judgment!Bishambhar Lal Vs. Sushila Devi and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-21-1987
Reported in: II(1987)ACC280
S.D. Agarwala, J.1. This is a First Appeal From Order filed under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act.2. The facts giving rise to the present appeal are as under:3. An accident took place on 15th July, 1983, in which Moti Chand received an electric shock and died. Smt. Sushila Devi, the widow of Moti Chand, and the minor son of Moti Chand filed a claim petition before the Workmen Compensation Commissioner, Gorakhpur. In the claim petition, it was categorically stated that Moti Chand had died because of an electric shock while he was in the employment of M/s Aluminium Factory, Kasia Road, Deoria.4. Evidence was led before the Workmen's Compensation Comissioner. Four witnesses were examined on behalf of the claimant. The first was Satya Narain Prasad, who was a clerk in the electricity department. P.W. 2 is Smt. Sushila Devi, the widow of the deceased. P.W. 3 is Rama Kant Jaiswal, father-in-law of the deceased Moti Chand, and P.W. 4, Brij Bahadur Singh, is a clerk in the office ...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Sewak Dubey and ors. Vs. Smt. Ajirana and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-20-1987
Reported in: AIR1988All41
A.N. Dikshita, J. 1. This Second Appeal has been preferred by the defendant-appellants against the judgment and decree dated 22-12-1980 passed by Sri G. S. Pandey, Additional Civil Judge, Gorakhpur, in Appeal No. 191 of 1978 by which the appeal preferred by the plaintiff-respondents was allowed and the judgment and decree dated 15-3-1978 passed by the 3rd Additional Munsif, Gorakhpur, in Original Suit No. 693 of 1968 dismissing the suit was set aside. 2. The original plaintiff Smt. Rituraji brought a suit for the cancellation of the sale deed dated 24-1-1969 alleged to have been executed by her in favour of the defendants on the allegations that after the death of her husband she was left with one daughter alone; that one of the daughters of the plaintiff was married to defendant No. 1 while defendants Nos. 2 and 3 were the collaterals of defendant No. 1; that after the death of the plaintiffs husband defendant No. 1 was looking after her and he started living with the plaintiff; that ...
Tag this Judgment!Himachal Steel Rerollers and Fabricators Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-20-1987
Reported in: AIR1988All191
Mithal, J. 1. The F.A.F.O. is directed against an order passed by the 4thAdditional District Judge, Allahabad dismissing an application for issue of ad interim injunction and restraining the Railway authorities from encashing the bank guarantee furnished by the appellant in connection with a contract entered into between the parties.2. The short questions that arise for determination, apart from other somewhat irrelevant and almost insignificant points urged are,(i) Whether the plaintiff had made out a prima facie case for issue of temporary injunction? and, (in Whether the suit is bad for want of a notice under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure? 3. The plaintiff had entered into a contract with the Railways for supply of angle iron as per specifications after re-rolling-raw material to be supplied by the Railway. There is no material disagreement about the quantity of angle iron to be supplied after re-rolling against a given quantity of raw material after accounting for agree...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »