Allahabad Court August 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.
Pramod Kumar S/O Ramesh Chandra Vs. the State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-24-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ1063
ORDERKamlakar Chaubey, J. 1. This application Under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter called Code) has been moved for the release of the applicant on bail in Crime NO. 166 of 1989 Under Section 147, 148, 149, 307 and 302, I.P.C. of P.S. Etmadpur, district Agra. The learned counsel for the applicant, the learned counsel for the complainant and the learned A.G.A. have already been heard at length.2. Before looking to the merits of the argument of the learned counsel for the parties, it is necessary to note down relevant facts leading to the present bail application.3. On 31-7-1989 first informant Harish alias Kallu Chauhan, r/o Nagla Prem, Mazra Chauli, P.S. Etmadpur, district Agra handed over a written report at Police Station on the basis of which the above case was registered. In this report it was alleged that on 31-7-1989 at about 5.30 P.M. Rajveer Singh, Jagraj Singh, Dharma and Raj Kumar along with two unknown persons committed murder of the father o...
Ahmad Sayeed and ors. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-24-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ901
R.K. Saksena, J.1. Heard Sri P.C. Sharma, Advocate, Learned Counsel for appellants and Sri Kamal Krishna, Counsel for the State.2. Each of the above named three appellants stands convicted Under Section 396 of the Indian Penal Code with a sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years, per judgment and order dated 22-2-79, passed by the then V Additional Sessions Judge, Etah, in Sessions Trial No. 70 of 1978.3. Briefly put, the prosecution story is that prem Das P.W. 2 son of Bhopal used to run his sweet stall at the bank of Gangas in village Lehara. Near about sun-set, when the Mela was almost over and he was winding up his business, 10-11 persons came to his shop and asked him to surrender whatever he possessed and give sweets, when Prem Das did not accede to the demand and refused to part with his belongings, one of the criminals moved towards him for making an assault. Thereupon, Bhopal, father of Prem Das took up a lathi to attack that miscreant and then one of the mi...
Smt. Surendra Kaur Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-1990
Reported in: [1991]188ITR110(All)
1. List revised. No one appears for the petitioner.2. The petitioner filed an objection to the attachment and sale of the house in question. The said house was sought to be sold by the Tax Recovery Officer for realisation of tax arrears due from one Marinder Singh. The petitioner herself states, vide paragraph 32 of the writ petition, thatshe had filed a suit for a declaration that she is owner of the house in dispute on the basis of the will. In such a situation, the writ petition cannot be entertained. The petitioner can work out her remedies under the law in the said civil suit.3. The writ petition is dismissed with costs. Interim stay order is vacated....
Surendra Prakash Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-1990
Reported in: (1991)95CTR(All)229; [1991]187ITR456(All)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, C.J.1. This writ petition is filed against an order of the Commissioner of Wealth-tax dismissing the petitioner's application made under Section 18B of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, in part. A few relevant facts need be stated.2. The petitioner filed his wealth-tax returns for the assessment years 1973-74, 1974-75, 1975-76 and 1976-77, on a single day, namely, October 20, 1978. For the assessment year 1977-78, he filed the return on February 24, 1979. Again, for the next four years, i.e., 1978-79, 1979-80, 1980-81 and 1981-82, he filed the return on October 21, 1981. For the assessment year 1982-83, he filed the same on September 22, 1983. Assessments were made and proceedings for imposing penalties were also taken. Penalties were imposed on different dates under Sections 18(1)(a) and 18(1)(c) for all these years. It is then that the petitioner made a single application under Section 18B for waiver of the penalties imposed under Section 18(1)(a) as, well as Section 18(1)...
Sunni Central Waqf Board and Others Vs. Gopal Ingh Vishrad and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-22-1990
Reported in: AIR1991All89
ORDERS.C. Mathur, J.1. This application has been made on behalf of defendant No. 2, Paramhans Uam Chandra Das, to decide the matter mentioned therein as preliminary issues. The application has been made under Order XIV R. 2(2)(b) and S. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. According to the applicant in view of the finding recorded by the learned Civil Judge, Faizabad, on issue No. 17 by order dated 21-4-1966 the suit filed by Sunni Central Board of Waqfs is liable to be dismissed without recording findings on other issues. On this basis the applicant prays that the suit may be dismissed at this very stage.2. The finding recorded by order dated 21-4-1966 is 'no valid notification u/S. 5(1} of the Muslim Waqf Act No. XIII of 1936 was ever made so far relating to specific disputed property of the present suits at hand.' At the time of hearing Sri V. K. S. Chowdhary, learned counsel for some of the defendants prayed that Issues 3, 5(b), 5(e), 5(f), 6, 18, 19(d), 19(e), 20(b) and 21 be...
Swarup Vegetable Products Industries Ltd. (No. 2) Vs. Commissioner of ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-22-1990
Reported in: [1991]187ITR416(All)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, C.J.1. This income-tax reference is preferred against the order of the Tribunal made on a petition for rectification filed by the assessee. Against the order of the Tribunal from which Income-tax Reference No. 71 of 1986 (Swarup Vegetable Products Industries Ltd. (No. 1) v. CIT : [1991]187ITR412(All) arises, the assessee filed an application for rectification on the ground that the Tribunal has not noticed a particular decision of this court and, therefore, the decision suffers from a mistake apparent on the face of the record. That petition was dismissed by the Tribunal whereon the present income-tax reference was obtained. The questions sought to be raised are three in number, which arc as follows :'(a) Whether the decision of the Tribunal based on the case of Addl. CIT v. Mukul Corporation : [1978]111ITR312(Guj) , and by ignoring the decision on the same issue of the jurisdictional High Court of Allahabad in the case of J. P. Srivastava and Sons (Kanpur) Ltd. v. C...
Swarup Vegetable Products Industries Ltd. (No. 1) Vs. Commissioner of ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-22-1990
Reported in: (1990)90CTR(All)113; [1991]187ITR412(All)
ORDER--Absence of enquiry by ITO--Order of ITO accepting assessee's claim that particular receipt was assessee's taxable income without making proper inquiriesHELD:It may be noticed that the petitioner did in fact receive the amount during the previous year relevant to the assessment year concerned. The mere fact that a writ petition was pending or a suit was pending wherein a third party had claimed a portion of the amount could not have been a valid ground for claiming that the said amount should not be treated as the assessee's income. The ITO had accepted the claim erroneously and that too without making proper enquiries. In view of these circumstances the Commissioner came to the conclusion that the ITO's order was erroneous inasmch as it was not passed after a full enquiry and a proper investigation and that it is also prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. Commissioner therefore, was justified in directing fresh assessment.Income Tax Act 1961 s.263 ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kamla Town Trust
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-22-1990
Reported in: [1991]187ITR435(All)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, C.J.1. A common question arises in these three income-tax applications.2. By these applications under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Revenue has requested this court to direct the Tribunal to refer the following three questions for the opinion of this court :'(1) Whether, in law and on facts of the case, the Income-tax Appel late Tribunal, Allahabad, was justified in holding that the Kamla Town Trust is a trust for charitable purposes while the activities of the trust are contrary to the provisions of Section 2(15) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and resulted in benefit and profit to the J. K. Organisation ?(2) Whether, in law and on facts, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, was justified in taking a decision contrary to the ratio of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Indian Sugar Mills Association : [1974]97ITR486(SC) ?(3) Whether, in law and on facts of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in holding...
Surendra Enterprise Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-1990
Reported in: 1990(31)LC393(Allahabad)
1. The writ petition is directed against a proceeding dated 24.7.1990 of the Assistant Collector (Valuation), Central Excise, Kanpur addressed to the petitioner intimating him that the 'Zarda' sold by him in retail packets in the brand name is dutiable order the heading 24.01 (sic). This proceeding was issued in reply to a letter of the petitioner dated 11.7.1990 in which he contended that the packets contain tobacco and nothing else. The petitioner says that according to trade notice No. 136 of 87 it falls under heading 24.01 of the Schedule to the Central Excise and Tariff Act and must be treated as unmanufactured tobacco.2. An appeal lies against the impugned notice under Section 35 of the Central Excise Act. There is no reason why the petitioner should not adopt the said statutory remedy nor there is any reason why should he be allowed relief by this Court at this stage.3. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed on the said ground. It shall be open to the petitioner to file an...
Prestige Cops Private Limited Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and Ac Ce
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-1990
Reported in: 1992(38)LC435(Allahabad)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, C.J.1. Inasmuch as the petitioner has an alternative remedy of appeal, we do not think it proper to interfere in the matter at this stage. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed on that ground. No costs. If, however, the petitioner files an appeal before the appropriate authority within one month from today, the same shall be entertained without raising an objection on the ground of limitation, and will be disposed of in accordance with law....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »