Allahabad Court February 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.
Kanpur Textiles Agent and anr. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1991
Reported in: [1991]192ITR472(All)
1. This writ petition is filed against an order of the Commissioner made under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Under the said order, the Commissioner has revised the order of assessment for the assessment year 1978-79, It appears that the Income-tax Officer made the assessment following the decision of this court in CIT v. Shiv Shanker Lal Ram Nath : [1977]106ITR342(All) . The Commissioner, however, revised the said assessment order saying that the Income-tax Department has not accepted the said judgment of this court and has obtained special leave to appeal from the Supreme Court against it.2. It is true that invoking the revisory power on the said ground is not valid or proper as held by this court recently in Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petitions Nos. 387 and 388 of the year 1980 (Sheo Narain (K. N. Agrawal) v. CIT), decided on January 11, 1991, reported in [1991] 189 ITR 769, but this aspect is no longer relevant now inasmuch as the said decision of this court has been overru...
U.P. Hotels and Restaurants Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1991
Reported in: [1991]189ITR404(All)
1. Under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal has submitted the following question ;'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, was the expenditure incurred by the assessee on the foreign tour of two of its directors an allowable deduction either in whole or in part ?'2. The assessee is a limited company running a five star hotel known as Hotel Clark Shiraz at Agra. For the assessment year 1972-73, the assessee claimed deduction of Rs. 40,295 on account of foreign travel of its two directors and other incidental expenses. The Income-tax Officer disallowed 2/3rds of the said amount while allowing deduction of l/3rd thereof. This was for the reason that the agreement between the assessee and the Ramada Inns provide that the technical collaboration related to the operation of the existing hotel and construction of future hotels. The Income-tax Officer found that the petitioner was setting up two new hotels at Lucknow and some other place.3. On appeal, ...
Bhagat Singh and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ221
K. Narayan, J.1. This is an appeal by ten persons. During pendency of the appeal, appellants-Nawab Singh and Bhagat Singh have died and the appeal has abated in respect of them. The other appellants are, Pritam Singh, Chhotey Singh, Malkhan Singh, Kaptan Singh, Rajpal Singh, Ganga Singh, Jeet Singh alias Jeewan Singh and Babu Ram and the appeal has been heard on their behalf. All the abovementioned accused appellants were held guilty of offences under Sections 302/ 149, and 307/149, I.P.C. and sentenced to imprisonment for life and imprisonment for three years under the two counts. Appellants Jeet Singh, Kaptan Singh, Rajpal Singh, Ganga Singh and Babu Ram were also held guilty of noting under Section 148, I.P.C. and sentenced to R.I. for two years while appellants Nawab Singh, Bhagat Singh, Pritam Singh, Chhotey Singh and Malkhan Singh were sentenced to R.I. of 11/2 years each under Section 147, I.P.C.2. An occurrence had taken place in village Indrakha Jagania, P. S. Sindhauli, Distr...
M/S. K.R. Foods Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi and Another Vs. State of U.P. and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-19-1991
Reported in: AIR1991All169; (1991)2UPLBEC846
ORDERA.P. Misra, J.1. The petitioners initially have sought for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to rescind their letter dated 30-11-1989 (Annexure-1 to the petition) cancelling the Provisional Registration Certificate and further directing the respondents to grant the Permanent Registration Certificate under the Small Scale Industries Scheme. Then by amendment sought for quashing two subsequent orders passed by respondent No. 2 one dated 14th December, 1989 rejecting petitioners' objection and another dated 7-12-1989 relating to the cancellation of the Provisional RegistrationCertificate and the order dated 16th December, 1989 cancelling petitioners' application for grant of permanent registration. Union of India later applied for its implead-ment, which was allowed, which also contested claim of the petitioners.2. Petitioner No. 1 is a Private Limited Company and petitioner No. 2 is one of the shareholders duly authorised by the resolution of the Company to prosecute the ...
M/S. Jhunjhunwala Vanaspati Ltd. Vs. Bureau of Indian Standards and Ot ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-19-1991
Reported in: AIR1991All259
ORDERA.P. Misra, J.1. The petitioner has sought for quashing the order dt. 11th May, 1990 (Annexure 16 to the petition), passed by the Director of the Bureau of Indian Standards, Lucknow directing the petitioner to send the industrial licence or a letter of indent from the Central Government and permission from Directorate of Vanaspati according approval to manufacture of Vanaspati by it within fourteen days, otherwise the application for the grant of licence will be treated as closed without any further correspondence, and further to direct the respondent to complete the processing of the application of the petitioner for the grant of licence to use the standards mark forthwith.2. The petitioner is a public limited company and has established a manufacturing unit for the manufacture of Vanaspati ghee. The said unit has been granted provi-siona! registration certificate by the Director of Industries, U.P. as a small scale unit. On 20th Jan., 1989, and 19th Jan., 1990, the petitioner al...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Rani Rajendra Kumari Ba
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-19-1991
Reported in: [1991]192ITR419(All)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, C.J.1. Under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, the Tribunal has stated the following questions in respect of the assessment years 1965-66 to 1967-68 : --'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in quashing the assessments for the assessment years 1965-66 to 1969-70 made by the Wealth-tax Officer under the provisions of Section 17(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act for the assessee's failure to disclose all primary facts in some of the years and her disclosure of only part of the primary facts in other years ? (2) Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in quashing the assessment orders on the one hand and in directing the Wealth-tax Officer to estimate the value of properties in a particular manner on the other hand ?' Similarly, with respect to the assessment years 1968-69 and 1969-70, the following two questions have been referred :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, was the ...
Shyambir Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-19-1991
Reported in: 1991CriLJ3236
A.P. Misra, J.1. This petition is directed as against the order of detention dated 29th August, 1990, passed by the District Magistrate, Ghaziabad (Annexure 1 to the present petition) Under Section 3 of the National Security Act. The aforesaid detention order was served on the petitioner in the District Jail Meerut as he was detained in pursuance of earlier FIR dated 1st. of August, 1990. The grounds of detention have been delineated in Annexure-2 to the writ petition. The ground of detention is based on one single incident for which the aforesaid First Information report Under Section 365/307, IPC was lodged as against the petitioner and also on the ground that there is likelihood of the petitioner being released on bail. The version as disclosed in the first information report dated 1-8-90. In short is that on 1st of August, 1990, one Rakesh who also runs an Electrical shop at Vijai Nagar in the district of Ghaziabad, had reported to respondent No. 1 about the incident in which victi...
Sarfaraz HusaIn and Others Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-18-1991
Reported in: AIR1991All324
ORDER1. A notification purporting to be u/S. 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was issued on 4th May, 1982 and was published in the U.P. Gazette on 25th Sept. 1982. By this notification a number of agricultural plots including plot No. 351 (area 1.53 acres) situated in village Sonakpur, tehsil and district Moradabad were sought to be acquired for the Moradabad Development Authority. The validity of the said notification is being impugned in the present petition by the petitioners who allege themselves to be the owners of plot No. 351.2. Shri R. H. Zaidi has advanced the following submissions in support of this petition : (1) No publication of the notification u/S. 4 took place in the locality, (2) the notice issued u/S. 4 was not served upon the petitioners in conformity with S. 45 of the Act and (3) the publication in the locality having not taken place within 21 days from the date of publication of the notification in the official gazette, th...
Pt. Jagan Nath Prasad Misra Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax/Wealth-tax ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-18-1991
Reported in: [1991]192ITR662(All)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, C.J. 1. This writ petition is directed against an order of the Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Lucknow, made on August 16, 1980, under Section 18B of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. By the said order, the Commissioner has rejected the application made by the petitioner for waiver of penalties imposed in respect of three assessment years. 2. The petitioner filed returns under the Wealth-tax Act in respect of the assessment years 1972-73 and 1973-74 on October 7, 1974. For the assessment year 1974-75, however, he had filed the same on September 30, 1974 itself. The assets owned by him included an agricultural property. He valued the same at Rs. 400 per bigha according to which the value of the said asset ranged near about 80,000. The Wealth-tax Officer, however, did not accept the said valuation. He noticed that the income from the said asset disclosed by the petitioner himself was rupees eight to ten thousand per annum. Applying the multiple of fifteen, he valued the said asset...
Hari Om Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-18-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ182
ORDERB.P. Singh, J.1. The applicant Hari Om alias Baboo is facing prosecution in Crime No. 73 of 1990 under Sections 304B, 201 and 34, IPC P. S. Shera Mau North, district Shahjahanpur. The applicant was married to Guriya daughter of Ram Larait of village Mahuwa Gundey district Shahjahanpur about three years back. On 2-6-1990 a F.I.R. was loged by the father-in-law of the applicant under Sections 302/498A, I.P.C. and Section 13 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The case was subsequently converted into a case under Sections 304B/201/34, I.P.C.2. The applicant applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Shahjahhanpur, but his application did not find favour. Consequently, the present bail application has been filed in this Court.3. The main ground taken by the applicant is that the charge-sheet was filed beyond 90 days, as such he was entitled to be released on bail in view of the provisions contained in the proviso (a) of Sub-section (2) of Section 167, Cr. P.C. The contention of the learned...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »