Allahabad Court July 1990 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.
Janta Metal Works Vs. Income-tax Officer and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-18-1990
Reported in: (1990)88CTR(All)224; [1990]186ITR458(All)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, C.J.1. The petitioner is asking for a writ of cer-tiorari, quashing the notice dated October 8, 1987, issued by the Income-tax Officer, BWard, Moradabad (respondent No. 1), under Section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act.2. The petitioner filed a return for the assessment year 1986-87, showing an income of Rs. 71,580 before the Income-tax Officer, C-Ward, Circle-1, Moradabad. Subsequently, his case was transferred to respondent No. 1. In connection with his assessment, respondent No. 1 issued the impugned notice calling upon him to produce his accounts relating to the said assessment year. Soon after receiving the said notice, the petitioner approached this court by way of this writ petition.3. The case of the petitioner is this : The Income-tax Department has published an advertisement appearing in Hindustan Times, New Delhi Edition, dated September 1, 1987, with the caption 'WE TRUST YOU'. The said advertisement stated that all returns showing income/loss up to Rs. 2 la...
Shashi Devi Vs. Mohd. Ahsan and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-18-1990
Reported in: 1991ACJ62
K.P. Singh, J.1. Aggrieved by the decision of Mr. M.S. Premi, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Judge/Special Judge, Shahjahanpur, dated 2nd February, 1984, in M.M. Case No. 21 of 1982, Shashi Devi v. Mohd. Ahsan alias Mohd. Aslam, the claimant-appellant has appealed to this court under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act. Yogendra Kumar Sharma was cleaner on truck No. UTX 5000. He was the brother of the claimant-appellant. On 16.10.1982 the aforesaid Yogendra Kumar Sharma died in an accident. He was under the employment of opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 in the claim giving rise to this appeal. The claimant had put forward a claim to the tune of Rs. 1,38,000/- due to death of her brother Yogendra Kumar Sharma.2. Opposite party Nos. 1 and 2, namely, Mohd. Ahsan alias Mohd. Aslam and Anis Ahmad filed joint written statement and alleged that the claimant-appellant was not related to the deceased and opposite party Nos. 3 and 4 are responsible for the payment of compensation, if any and tha...
Kailash Structurals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-18-1990
Reported in: 1990(31)LC711(Allahabad)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, C.J.1. The only grievance in this case is that though the petitioner filed an appeal along with a stay application before the Appellate Collector on 28th June, 1989, no orders have been passed in the stay application. It is complained that at the same time the authorities are proceeding to collect the duty as per the order under the appeal. Under the circumstances, it is directed that the Collector shall dispose of the stay application within one month of the. date of receipt of the certified copy of this order, if not already disposed of. Pending such orders, the recovery of the disputed duty in pursuance of the order under Appeal shall remain stayed.2. This order is subject to the condition that the petitioner produces a certified copy of this order within two weeks from today before the authority.3. This order shall not operate if the appellate authority has already passed orders in the stay application.The writ petition is deposed of with the above direction....
Shri Ram Hardcore and Allied Industries, Vs. Assistant Commissioner of ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-17-1990
Reported in: [1990]186ITR319(All)
1. A common question arises from these writ petitions. A raid was conducted in the premises of the petitioners on January 13, 1986, and certain books of account and documents were seized. The petitioner applied to the authority requesting him to return the books of account, etc., inasmuch as he required them in connection with, the sales tax assessment proceedings. The authority replied to the assessee saying that these books cannot be returned but it is open to him to inspect the documents and take notes. Thereupon, the petitioners approached this court by way of these writ petitions.2. Now, a contention is raised by learned counsel for the assessee that no order was passed by the authority extending the period of retention as contemplated by Sub-section (8) of Section 132 of the Income-tax Act and, therefore, the retention beyond 180 days is bad and illegal. We, however, find that this contention was never urged before the authority. It is not even clearly raised in the writ petition...
Radhey Shyam Jaiswal Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-17-1990
Reported in: [1990]186ITR354(All)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, C.J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the validity of the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as well as the notice issued under Section 143(3) in respect of the assessment years 1978-79 to 1986-87. 2. The petitioner is an individual For the assessment years 1978-79, 1979-80, 1980-81 and 1981-82, he fled returns and, on that basis, assessment orders were made on February 18, 1980, February 18, 1980, December 14, 1981, and August 24, 1982, respectively. On August 28, 1984, a raid was conducted in the premises of the petitioner under Section 132 of the Act and, according to the respondents, a good amount of incriminating material was discovered. While proceedings under Section 132 were being taken, the petitioner filed returns for all the aforesaid assessment years at once, on September 30, 1986. He says that he also paid tax on the basis of the said returns. The Income-tax Officer issued notices under Section 148 on March...
Commissioner of Gift-tax (Central) Vs. Motor Sales (Rf)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-17-1990
Reported in: [1990]186ITR419(All)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, C.J.1. By this application under Section 26(3) of the Gift-tax Act, 1958, the applicant is asking this court to refer the following questions for the opinion of this court :'(1) Whether, in law and the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that no deemed gift is involved and accordingly no gift-tax was chargeable in this case ? (2) Whether, in law and the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was legally correct in arriving at the conclusion that the value of shares of Rs. 8 lakhs issued to the partners of the firm includes profit and goodwill when there is no such documentary evidence which could establish this fact and justify the said conclusion ?' The assessee, a registered firm, was constituted on January 1, 1972. On August 2, 1972, there was a reconstitution. On October 16, 1972, all the assets and liabilities of the firm were taken over by a company, incorporated under the Companies Act. Th...
Prestige Engineering (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-16-1990
Reported in: 1991(51)ELT255(All)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, C.J.1. This writ petition raises a question whether this Court should award interest on excise duty found refundable as a result of proceedings under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. Petitioner, Prestige Engineering (India) Private Ltd., is engaged in the business of repairing old, defective and unserviceable cops. For the period 17-3-1981 to 7-6-1986 with which period we are concerned herein - excise duty was levied on repair work undertaken by the petitioner, treating it as a manufacturing activity. The petitioner protested against the same. In pursuance of the insistence of the departmental authorities, however, he filed a classification list under Rule 173-B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, under protest, with respect to repairing of cops. The Assistant Collector treated the 'repairing of cops' as 'assembling of cops' and held it dutiable under Tariff Item 68 of the First Schedule to the Act. While it is not neces...
Ali Singhani Bhagwandas Madhav Singh Vs. Sri Rajiv Gandhi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-13-1990
Reported in: AIR1991All145
ORDER1. The petitioner, who was a candidate in the general elections for the Lok Sabha seat from 25-Amethi Parliamentary Constituency District Sultanpur, has filed the present petition challenging the election of the respondent on a number of grounds.2. Appearance in this case was put in on behalf of the respondent by Sri S. C. Maheshwari on 13-2-1990, who, on the nextdate, i.e. 15-3-1990, filed an application under Order VI, Rule 16, Order VII, Rule II andSection 151, Code of Civil Procedure read with Sections 86 and 87 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 with the prayer that paras 8 to 21 of the election petition may be struck off and the election petition itself may be dismissed as not disclosing any cause of action. A copy of this application was given tothe petitioner who filed his reply on 10-4-90. On that date respondent's application (C.M. Application No. 37(E) of 1990) was taken upfor hearing.3. I have heard the petitioner who argued the case personally and Sri S. C....
Raj NaraIn Mehrotra Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-12-1990
Reported in: [1990]186ITR713(All)
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Three questions have been suggested by the assessee ; but, after hearing both the parties at some length, we think it proper to teframe the three questions into one in the following terms : 'Where a property is let out and is valued in accordance with Rule 1BB of the Wealth-tax Rules and in a subsequent assessment year it is sold at a higher amount, is it open to the Wealth-tax Officer to propose to value the property on the basis of the sale amount or is he obliged to follow Rule 1BB only?' 2. The application is, accordingly, allowed. ...
The State of U.P. Vs. Ram Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-12-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ1179
S.K. Mookerji, J.1. This is a Government Appeal against the judgment of the IV Additional Sessions Judge, Etah acquitting Ram Dass accused, who was sent for his trial for an offence Under Section 307 IPC According to the prosecution case, Ram Dass accused on 25-6-1975 at about 5-30 a.m. in village Kadarpur, a hamlet of village Kuramai, police station Kasganj, district Etah attempted to commit murder of Udaivir Singh by shooting at him by means of a country made pistol. Udaivir Singh lodged the First Information Report and is also injured. He is a resident of village Kadarpur, a hamlet of village Kuramai, police station Kashganj, district Etah. Accused Ram Dass is a resident of the said village and said to have been a cousin of Udaivir Singh. Ram Gopal is the uncle, Smt. Ram Kuer is the mother, Smt. Sheela Devi is the sister and Smt. Kusum Devi is the niece of Udaivir Singh. These ladies were also residing with Udaivir Singh at the time of occurrence. Ram Gopal was posted as a constable...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »