Allahabad Court July 1989 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.
Barnwal Abhushan Kendra Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-31-1989
Reported in: (1990)82CTR(All)178; [1990]181ITR269(All)
1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been filed by Barnwal Abhushan Kendra which is a registered firm doing business at Varanasi.2. For the assessment year 1980-81, the petitioner did not submit the return within time. It was submitted by it voluntarily before initiation of the proceedings under Section 139(2) or 148 of the Income-tax Act. After imposition of interest and penalty, the petitioner applied for waiver of the same. This application has been rejected by the impugned order dated October 14, 1987. While rejecting the application, the Commissioner of Income-tax held that as the return was filed much beyond the assessment year in which this was due, that is, after the lapse of the period when the notice under Section 139(2) of the Act could have been issued, the penalty could not be waived. However, the Commissioner of Income-tax waived a part of the interest. Against the aforesaid order, the present writ petition has been filed.3. In this case, the penalty...
Haji Ismail and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-31-1989
Reported in: [1990]181ITR312(All)
1. Haji Ismail and Company has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking certiorari for quashing of the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Allahabad, dated October 14, 1987, passed under Section 273A of the Income-tax Act.2. The assessee (petitioner) voluntarily filed the return for the assessment year 1983-84 on March 31, 1986, whereas it should have been filed by June 30, 1983. It showed an income of Rs. 1,04,300. The return was filed without initiation of any notice under Section 139(2) or 148 of the Income-tax Act. Income-tax was imposed on the petitioner, which it stated in the writ petition, was deposited by it in time. Thereafter, the petitioner applied for waiver of interest and penalty. The petitioner's case was that, for reasons beyond its control, it could not submit the return in time.3. Relying on Section 271 of the Act, the petitioner submitted that since the return had been filed by the petitioner without initiation of proceedings u...
Sheo Mangal Singh and ors. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-31-1989
Reported in: 1990CriLJ1698
ORDERRajeshwar Singh, J. 1. A case under Section 302, I.P.C. has been committed to the Court of Session. There some accused raised objection that they were juveniles under The Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 and they should not be tried by Sessions Court. The Sessions Court rejected that application. So they have approached this Court through an application in revision.2. The definition of 'juvenile' is given in Section 2(h) of the Act. According to this definition 'juvenile' means a boy who has hot attained the age of 16 years or a girl who has not attained the age of 18 years. The definition does not say that this age is to be seen on the date of occurrence. Section 20 deals with inquiry by Juvenile Court against juvenile offenders. It says that where a juvenile accused of an offence appears or is produced before a Juvenile Court, it shall make an inquiry. Thus it appears that a Juvenile Court proceeds when a juvenile appears or is produced before it. It means that the person produced sho...
Dr. Shakeel Ahmad Vs. Smt. Sabina Khatoon
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-28-1989
Reported in: AIR1990All11
ORDER1. Heard Sri C. B. Yadav, holding brief of Sri R. H. Zaidi, learned counsel for the applicant.2. In Suit No. 107 of 1984, wherein the opposite party and the applicant figure as plaintiff and defendant respectively, 4th May, 1987iwas fixed for final hearing. The opposite party failed to appear. Consequently, the suit was dismissed in default on 15th September, 1987. The opposite party moved an application under O. IX, R. 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, hereinafter called the Code, along with an application under S. 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963, hereinafter called the Act. In the application, the opposite party pleaded that she was a Pardanashin lady and dependent on her brother for the purposes of Pairavi. Her brother had gone to Kanpur in connection with his business and on account of his absence the opposite party could not appear on 4th May, 1987. She could not personalty instruct her lawyer either. However, she had sent a letter to her counsel which, according t...
State of U.P. and Another Vs. District Judge, Meerut and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-27-1989
Reported in: AIR1990All108
ORDER1. Writ Petition No. 357 of 1902. (hereinafter referred to as the first petition) and writ petition No. 359 of 1982 (hereinafter referred to as the second petition, involve common question of law and facts, hence it is convenient to dispose them of by a common judgment.2. The first petition filed by the State of U.P. was directed against the appellate judgment dated 22-9-81 passed under S. 33 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulations) Act, 1976 for short the Act. The Second Petition is directed against the order dated 23-9-81 passed by the District Judge, Meerut. In the first petition the point was as to whether the area measuring Sq. metre (sic) was built up and was not to be treated as vacant land within the meaning of S. 4(9) of the. Act. Whereas in the second petition similar point was involved about the interpretation of S. 2(q)(i) of the Act, In that petition it has been held that over an area of 1480 sq. mtrs. no construction was permissible on the land which was within th...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jananamandal Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-27-1989
Reported in: (1989)79CTR(All)43; [1989]180ITR420(All); [1989]46TAXMAN191(All)
R.K. Gulati, J. 1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The following five questions have been referred for the opinion of this court:'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there was material on record justifying the Tribunal's finding that the assessee-company was maintaining the cash system of accounting ? 2. Whether; on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the method of accounting employed by the assessee is such that the income for the assessment year 1973-74 could be properly deduced therefrom without adding to the assessee's total income a sum of Rs. 2,40,380 being excess of closing balance of bills receivable over the opening balance of the same ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the method of accounting followed bythe assessee was cash having regard to the fact that expenses for gratuity which had not been actually paid were claimed as deduct...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Chaman Lal Mahendra Prakash
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-27-1989
Reported in: [1989]179ITR226(All); [1989]46TAXMAN193(All)
K.C. Agrawal, Actg. C.J.1. The following two questions were referred to this court under Section 256 of the Income-tax Act :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the partnership between the karta of the Hindu undivided family and the coparcener was a valid partnership ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the partnership which came into existence by the partnership deed dated August 28, 1971, was a valid partnership and in granting registration to the assessee ?' 2. The assessment years involved are 1973-74 and 1974-75. The assessee-firm was constituted by a deed of partnership dated August 28, 1971, with effect from September 1, 1970. According to the deed, the firm was constituted by M.P. Jain as representing the Hindu undivided family, being its karta, with 40% share. The other three partners were Vijay Kumar, Vinay Kumar and Anil K...
Balkar Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-27-1989
Reported in: 1990CriLJ77
H.C. Mital, J.1. Balkar Singh has preferred this appeal against his conviction and sentence under Section 302. I.P.C. to life imprisonment, under Section 201. I.P.C. for a period of two years R.I. and fine of Rs. 200 -(in default of payment of fine, one year R.I.) and under Section 379 to two years R.I. passed by Sri C.G. Garg. III Additional Sessions Judge Mathura.2. According to the prosecution the facts of the case in brief are that Truck No. PUG 2120 belonged to Jagir Singh deceased resident of village Athwal P.S. Dera Baba Nanak district Gurudaspur and appellant Balkar Singh and co-accused Pyara Singh who has been acquitted were drivers thereon. That on 23rd March 1977 along with the Truck and the two drivers Jagir Singh had gone to the Truck Union at Batala and from there he did not return. On 14-4-1977 cleaner Balvendra Singh along with Gurumeet Singh (P.W. 10) owner of another truck informed the complainant. Gurmit Singh (P.W. 2) brother of the deceased Jagir Singh that a quarr...
Smt. Gopi M. Puri Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-27-1989
Reported in: 1990(45)ELT225(All)
ORDER1. Through this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has claimed a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to return the gold ornaments seized from the petitioner on 23-12-1985. The petition is directed against the Collector of Central Excise, Allahabad and Assistant Director Enforcement Directorate (Foreign Exchange Regulation Act) 36, Gandhi Nagar Digra, Varanasi who have been arrayed as respondents No. 1 and 2 respectively.2. As per the writ assertions the petitioner Smt. Gopi M. Puri owned a locker being locker No. 62 with the Union Bank of India, Civil Lines Branch, Allahabad. The said locker was searched on 23-12-1986 by the Assistant Director Enforcement Directorate (Foreign Exchange Regulation Act) when 12 gold lockets were seized as per search memo, a copy whereof is Annexure 1 to the writ petition. According to the petitioner, after the said seizure no action whatsoever or proceedings were taken by the respondents against the pe...
Ram Nath Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-26-1989
Reported in: [1989(59)FLR872]; (1994)IIILLJ118All
U.S. Srivastaya and S.H.A. Raza, JJ. 1. By means of this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the notices dated May 27, 1985 and June 1, 1985 through which he has been proposed to be reverted from the post of Head Assistant to the post of Stenographer. The petitioner had preferred a claim petition which was allowed against which a writ petition was filed. Subsequently the writ petition was amended and a prayer for quashing the same was made. 2. It appears that the petitioner after graduating himself in laws and appointed as Stenographer in the office of Chief Audit Officer in the year 1956 while opposite party No. 3 was appointed in the ministerial cadre in lower pay-scale. In the office of Chief Audit Officer, there is a post of Head Assistant in the pay-scale of Rs. 450-770 revised to Rs. 625-1360 which was created in the year 1973. One Rajbir Prasad was appointed as Head Assistant and on his retirement the said post fell vacant and was to be filled in from amongst th...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »