Allahabad Court October 1991 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kothiwala Cold Storage
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-24-1991
Reported in: (1992)101CTR(All)470; [1993]199ITR399(All); [1992]63TAXMAN330(All)
A.N. Verma, J. 1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following question has been referred for our opinion :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and the material available on the records, the Tribunal was justified in law in allowing the claim of investment allowance on the new machineries purchased during the year ?' 2. The facts giving rise to this reference are these. The assessee-firm is running a cold storage. Its accounting year for the assessment year 1982-83 ended on October 9, 1981. In the relevant previous year, the assessee had debited a sum of Rs. 5,058 in the profit and loss account which he claimed as investment allowance under Section 32A(2)(b)(ii) of the Income-tax Act. The same was disallowed by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner (Assessment). On appeal, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), relying on a decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in : [1986]159ITR18(MP) in the case of Mittal Ice and Cold Storage, held that the cold storage...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Nandlal Cold Storage and Kotiwal Cold S ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-24-1991
Reported in: [1993]199ITR327(All)
A.N. Verma, J.1. These three income-tax references are being disposed of by a common order as the question referred for the opinion of this court is identical. The question referred at the instance of the Revenue in each of the three references for our opinion is :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the new machinery employed in the cold storage of the assessee was entitled to investment allowance in terms of Section 32A(2)(b)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961?'2. Each of the assessees is a registered firm and runs a cold storage. In the relevant previous year, the assessee purchased new machinery for its cold storage plant and claimed investment allowance in respect thereof in terms of Clause (iii) of Section 32A(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which provides for deduction of investment allowance for any new machinery or plant installed after March 31, 1976, in any industrial undertaking for the purpose of bu...
Neeraj Kumar Agarwal Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-23-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ1247
ORDERPalok Basu, J.1. The revision has been filed by Neeraj Kumar Agarwal against the order dated 5-7-1991 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Aligarh in Criminal Revision No. 213 of 1991 by which he had set aside the order of the A.C.J.M. Hatras, Aligarh dated 9-5-91 directing release of tanker bearing registration No. UMA-9526 in favour of the applicant Neeraj Kumar Agarwal.2. The respondent Prem Kumar alleges himself to be the registered owner of the said tanker and claims that the tanker was in his possession and, therefore, it should be released in his favour.3. The controversy relating to the release of the said tanker arose thus. It is said that on 24-11-1991 the said tanker was seized by the police of Police Station, Hathras, district Aligarh with regard to the alleged contravention of Sections 192, 194 and 196 of the Motor Vehicles Act. From a perusal of the police report, there appears to be no doubt that the said tanker was taken to the police station and remained there...
Suresh Chand Vs. Vii-additional District Judge, Muzaffarnagar and Othe ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-21-1991
Reported in: AIR1992All295
ORDER1.This is a tenant's writ petition. Respondent No. 3 filed a suit for ejectment on the ground of default. Notices were issued to the defendant but he did not put in appearance. The suit proceeded ex parte. Subsequently it was decreed on 14-1-1987.2. The petitioner came to know of the said decree on 27-1-1987. The relevant record was got inspected the same day. He filed an application under O. 9, R. 13, C.P.C. along with an affidavit for setting aside the ex parte decree on 28-1-1987. Thereafter, he moved an application under S. 17 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act (in short 'the Act') praying that he may be permitted to furnish the personal security.3. The court allowed the application under 0.9, R. 13, C.P.C. on 13-3-1987 holding that there was no personal service on the defendant. The application under S. 17 of theAct was also allowed. The personal security was accepted. The order dated 23-9-1986, to proceed ex parte and ex parte decree dated 14-1-1987 were set aside on p...
Devesh Chandra Gupta Vs. Dina Nath
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-11-1991
Reported in: AIR1992All115
1. The plaintiff-appellant of Suit No. 437 of 1981. Devesh Chandra Gupta, claimed the following reliefs in the suit :--'(A) That by a decree of possession against the defendants and in favour of the plaintiff, the defendants be evicted from the property as detailed at the foot of the plaint in Schedule A & B and the plaintiff be put in actual and physical possession thereof after total eviction of defendants therefrom. (B) That a decree for recovery of Rs. 2,705/- as rent and damages for use and occupation since 1-1-1980 to 20-10-1981 bepassed in favour of the plaintiff against the defendants first set; (C) That a decree for recovery of pendente lite and future damages for use and occupation at the rate of Rs. 300/- P.M. viz. at the present rental value of the suit property be passed in favour of the plaintiff against the defendants first set on payment of additional court-fee in execution side; (D) That the costs of the suit be also awarded to the plaintiff against the defendants; (E)...
Moti Ram Vs. Ist Addl. District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-11-1991
Reported in: II(1992)DMC27
Palok Basu, J.1. The short question involved in this writ petition is whether the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. filed by the contesting opposite party Smt. Triveni can be entertained at Bareilly and also whether the child Km. Saraswati said to have born out of a wedlock of Moti Ram, petitioner and Smt. Triveni, opposite party can claim maintenance without herself being impleaded as an applicant in the said application.The short facts are that applicant Moti Ram was married to Smt. Triveni and out of the said wed-lock two daughters were born. This marriage, according to the allegations in the writ petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C., was performed in Bareilly. Thereafter husband and wife were living in Pilibhit. After a long passage of time Smt. Triveni was allegedly turned out along with the children from the house of Moti Ram in Pilibhit with the result she was forced to come at Bareilly with the children. In the meantime no efforts were made by Moti Ram to send for Smt. Triveni a...
Avadesh Kumar Upadhyay Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-10-1991
Reported in: [1993]199ITR214(All)
1. Having heard learned counsel for the assessee and learned counsel representing the Commissioner of Income-tax, we are of the opinion that the following question of law does arise out of the order of the Tribunal :'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the cash credit in the name of Smt. Memo Deyi amounting to Rs. 21,000 remained unexplained?'2. We, accordingly, direct the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to draw up a statement of the case and refer the above question for our opinion. No orders as to costs....
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hari Chand and Lakhpat Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-10-1991
Reported in: [1993]199ITR277(All)
A.N. Verma, J.1. These are three income-tax applications under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, seeking a direction to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to refer a common question stated to be a question of law for the opinion of this court.2. Income-tax Applications Nos. 215 of 1991 and 216 of 1991 relate to the assessment years 1979-80 and 1980-81, respectively, and are directed against Hari Chand and Income-tax Application No. 217 of 1991 is directed against Lakhpat Singh and arises out of the proceedings for the assessment year 1978-79. As the questions proposed arise out of common facts, it is convenient to dispose of these applications by a common order.3. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Commissioner of Income-tax as well as the assessee, we are not satisfied that, on the facts of these cases as found by the Tribunal, any statable question of law arises out of its orders. The question on which the reference is sought is :'Whether, on the facts and in the...
Universal Tyres Ltd. Vs. K.C. Srivastava and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-09-1991
Reported in: (1993)IIILLJ758All
S.K. Mookerji, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. It is made clear that Writ Petition No. 8943 of 1978, has been filed by M/s. Jay Shree Tyres & Rubber Products, Naini, Allahabad and the present petition has been filed by M/s. Universal Tyres Limited. In both the writ petitions Dr. K.C. Srivastava is the respondent. Both the writ petitions have been directed against an award passed by the Labour Court, Allahabad, in proceedings under Section 6-H(2) of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, initiated by Sri K.C. Srivastava.2. It appears that M/ s. Universal Tyres Limited on January 1, 1974 had appointed Dr. K.C. Srivastava , a Medical Practitioner, as a consultant for the treatment of its employees in its factory on a specific monthly remuneration. M/s. Universal Tyres Limited was closed down and it gave its factory on a lease to Jay Shree Tyres and Rubber Products, Naini, Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as Jay Shree). This Jay Shree stopped making monthly payment to Dr....
indodan Milk Products Ltd. Vs. Labour Court and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-09-1991
Reported in: (1992)IILLJ234All
Palok Basu, J.1. The question involved in the present writ petition is as to whether the respondents Jagdish Prasad and Om Pal Singh could be held by the impugned award of the Labour Court dated September 6, 1985 to have been retrenched contrary to the provision contained in the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act and could they on the facts and circumstances of the present case be directed to be reinstated by their employer?2. The short facts are that Indodan Milk Products Ltd, is a company with limited liability registered under the Indian Companies Act with its factory at Muzaffarnagar and produces milk products. It has about 2200 workmen. There was a Route Supervisor Cadre in the Company in which respondents Jagdish Prasad and Om Pal were working since quite sometime past. It is said that the company decided in February 1975, to abolish and discontinue the doing of the business through Route Supervision and instead resorted to engage commission agents who were not to be employees of the p...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »