Allahabad Court November 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.
income-tax Officer Vs. Smt. Tara Devi
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-29-1991
Reported in: (1993)47ITD649(All.)
1. The appellant-revenue by their present appeal contests the correctness of the order dated 16-2-1989 of the learned Dy. CIT (Appeals), Kanpur, for the assessment year 1980-81, inter alia, on the following grounds : 1. That the learned Dy. CIT (Appeals) erred in law and on facts of the case in holding that order of assessment passed under Section 143(3)(b) had been substituted in place of assessment order passed under Section 143(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 and since this order under Section 143(3)(b) of the I.T. Act, 1961 has been cancelled, there is no assessment order and provisions of Section 55 of the Act is not available and revision under Section 55 of the I.T. Act is not possible. 2. That the learned Dy. CIT (Appeals) erred in law and on facts of the case in holding that there was no assessment order available for amendment under Section 55 becomes this tantamounts to review of the order passed by the Dy. CIT (Appeals) (then AAC of Income-tax, Kanpur) in the assessee's own case ...
income-tax Officer Vs. B.D. Traders
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-29-1991
Reported in: (1992)43ITD45(All.)
1. These matters are consolidated for being disposed of by a single order, for the sake of convenience.2. To start with, we take up Revenue's ITA No. 603/All./1989 for the assessment year 1985-86. The effective ground taken is as under: 1. That the 1d. Dy. CIT (A) has erred in allowing registration to the firm as the two lady partners out of three partners were sleeping partners and they had not contributed anything towards capital of the firm.3. In the assessment order, the status shown is as unregistered-firm.The method of accounting was mercantile and the accounting period was the year ending on 30-9-1984. The assessee was dealing in electrical goods etc. Return was filed showing income of Rs. 5,880. Assessment was framed on 28-3-1988, on total income of Rs. 50,630 under Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.4. In the present case, a deed of partnership was drawn on 15-3-1984, between Raj Kumar Agarwal as karta of his HUF, Smt. Rita Kumari and Km.Smita Arora. The same was file...
income Tax Officer Vs. B. D. Traders, (Also B.D. Traders V. Ito).
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-29-1991
Reported in: (1993)45TTJ(All)87
ORDERS. S. MEHRA, J. M. :These matters are consolidated for being disposed of by a single order for the sake of convenience.2. To start with, we take up Revenues ITA No. 603/All/1989 for the asst. yr. 1985-86. The effective ground taken is as under :'1. That the learned Dy. CIT(A) has erred in allowing registration to the firm as the two lady partners out of three partners were sleeping partners and they had not contributed anything towards capital of the firm.'3. In the assessment order, the status shown is as unregistered firm. The method of accounting was mercantile and the accounting period was the year ending on 30th Sept., 1984. The assessee was dealing in electrical goods, etc., Return was filed showing income of Rs. 5,880. Assessment was framed on 28th March, 1988, on total income of Rs. 50,630 under S. 143(3) of the IT Act, 1961.4. In the present case, a deed of partnership was drawn on 15th March, 1984, between Raj Kumar Agarwal as Karta of his HUF, Smt. Rita Kumari and Km. S...
Deep Mala Sharma Vs. Mahesh Sharma
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-28-1991
Reported in: I(1992)DMC374
B.L. Yadav, J.1. The defendant-appellant, has filed the present First Appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, against the judgment and order dated 18.5 90 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Jhansi in Misc. CaseNo. 25/89 rejecting her restoration application along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act 1963 (for short the Act) under Article 123 of the Act the period of limitation to set aside an ex-parte decree was 30 days from the date of decree, or where summons or notice was not duly served, when the applicant had knowledge of the decree. The application for restoration was filed by the appellant (the wife) against the ex-parte decree dated 30.5.89 passed by the Family Court in Matrimonial case No. 65 of 1988 (Mahesh Sharma v. Smt. Deep Mala Sharma) under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, granting ex-parte decree for divorce in favour of the respondent (the husband) This restoration application was filed under order 9 rule 13 of the Code o...
Sharda Agarwal and ors. Vs. Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-27-1991
Reported in: [1993]78CompCas123(All); 1992CriLJ1442
Palok Basu, J.1. This is an application under Section 482, Criminal Procedure Code, filed by Smt. Sharda Agarwal, Smt. Kiran Agarwal and Sri M. P. Agarwal who are admittedly directors of a company named and styled Madhu Chandra Techno Chem Complex Pvt. Ltd. challenging the process issued against them by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur, on January 17, 1990, in Complaint Case No. 1116 of 1990, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.2. The facts are that Karam Chand Thapar and Brothers, a company having its registered office at Calcutta and its branch office at Thapar House, Kanpur, has filed the aforesaid complaint through its deputy manager, Vishalpuri, against four accused. Three of the accused are the applicants and the fourth one is Sri P. K. Agarwal, managing director of the aforesaid company, Madhu Chandra Techno Chem Complex Pvt. Ltd. It is said in para 2 of the complaint that P. K. Agarwal is the managing director while the applicants are the director...
Asha Ram Singh and Another Vs. Board of Revenue, U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-26-1991
Reported in: AIR1992All229
ORDER1. Present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks quashing of the impugned orders and judgments dated 5-12-1983, 24-9-1984 and 18-9-1991 passed by respondents 3, 2 and 1 respectively thereby concurrently dismissing the petitioners' suit under Section 229B of the U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951.2. Facts of the case are that the suit filed by the petitioners has been concurrently held to be barred by Section 49 of U.P.C.H. Act by all the three courts below. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that since the plot in dispute was not included in the scheme for the purposes of allotment of Chaks, the petitioners could not have filed any objection under Section 9 of the U.P.C.H. Act and therefore, Section 49 of the Act does not come into play. The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioners is totally misconceived. The only effect for the plot being kept out of the scheme is that it is not subjected to proceedings for allotment of chaks. So far as the q...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Keshav Fruit Mart
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-25-1991
Reported in: [1993]199ITR771(All)
1. Heard counsel for the parties. Before the Tribunal, the question for consideration was whether there was a mistake apparent from the record in that a ground raised in the memorandum of appeal before the Tribunal was not at all considered by the Tribunal. Taking the view that omission to consider the ground raised in the appeal was a mistake apparent from the record, the Tribunal set aside the order passed thereby and fixed the date for a rehearing. 2. On these facts, the Revenue has raised the following question in an application made under Section 256(2) : ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal was in law justified in recalling their order dated July 2, 1987, in I.T.A. No. 2113(All.)/1984, with a direction to rehear the case which was passed by them after a careful consideration of all the grounds of appeal taken by the Revenue ?'3. It is urged by learned standing counsel that the arguments were duly addressed before the Tribunal on this ...
Ramesh Chand Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-25-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ1444
ORDERPalok Basu, J.1. This is an application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. filed by Ramesh Chand and six others which included brothers of Ramesh Chand and his sister-in-law (Bhabhi). It has been prayed in this application that a complaint filed by opposite party No. 2 Baijnath praying that proceedings under Section 498A, I.P.C. pending in the court of the Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar, be quashed.2. Sri A.N. Sinha in support of this application while Sri R.N. Bhalla, learned counsel for opposite party No. 2 and Sri A.K. Yadav, learned A.G.A. have been heard on behalf of the opposite parties. The entire record has been perused.3. It is not disputed that the opposite party No. 2 Baijnath happens to be the father-in-law of Ramesh Chand, applicant No. 1, and some bad relations are flowing between the parties. It further appears that the mother-in-law of the applicant had in the meantime, died. The notable factor, however, is that the marriage between the applicant Ramesh Chand and Sm...
Kamal Vs. Km. Ahilya and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-20-1991
Reported in: I(1992)DMC480
N.L. Ganguley, J.1. This is first appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 by the alleged husband Kamal challenging the judgment and order of the Family Court in Criminal Suit No. 43 of 1989, by which the family Court awarded Rs. 100/- each to the three minor children, Km. Ahilya, Ram Kumar and Km. Sukhmari alias Neelu, total amount Rs. 300/- per month payable with effect from the date of filing of the application on 19.3.1989 for maintenance of the minors. The family Court after filing of the criminal suit under Section 125 Cr. P.C. issued notice and the appellant submitted the written statement.2. The case of the respondents is that Kamal-appellant and Dhanni Ram were two real brothers. Smt. Shanti was married to Dhanni Ram. Dhanni Ram died and after his death Smt. Shanti, according to custom, started living with appellant Kamal as his wife. It was pleaded that out of the said union three children Km. Ahilya, Raj Kumar and Km. Sukhmari were born. It was pleaded that sin...
Hari Singh and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-20-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ1802
ORDERPalok Basu, J.1. The applicants, Hari Singh and Mahipal Singh, have filed this application Under Section 482, Cr. P.C. praying that further proceedings in case No. 34 of 1985, Ram Sewak v. Hari Singh and Ors., pending in the Court of the Special Judge, Etawah, in which a summoning order has been passed on 6-7-1985, may be quashed.2. It appears that O.P. No. 2, Ram Sewak, husband of Smt. Karma Devi, O.P. No. 3, has preferred a complaint Under Section 394, IPC in the court of the Special Judge (D.A.A.), Etawah. He examined himself Under Section 200, Cr. P.C. At the stage of 202, Cr. P.C. the Special Judge felt the need of the matter being investigated by the police and an order to that effect was passed. The police investigated the matter and reported that the case was false. Thereafter the complainant filed four affidavits of Hari Vilas, Ram Kishan, Surendra Nath and (sic) allegedly supported the prosecution story as eyewitnesses. Consequently, the Special Judge by the impugned ord...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »