Allahabad Court March 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.
Sohan Lal Singhania Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-25-1991
Reported in: [1992]194ITR519(All)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, C.J.1. This writ petition is preferred against two notices issued under Section 148(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on March 22, 1976, with respect to the assessment years 1967-68 and 1969-70. The assessments for the said two assessment years were made on October 30, 1971, and December 29, 1971, respectively. After receiving the impugned notices, the petitioner says that he filed revised returns on April 21, 1976. Along with the revised returns, the petitioner says, that he had enclosed a letter/application requesting that the reasons for reopening the assessments may be supplied to him. Since there was no reply from the Income-tax Officer to his request and reassessment proceedings were sought to be proceeded with, the petitioner came forward with this writ petition. A counter-affidavit has been filed by the Income-tax Officer. His case is that the assessment is sought to be reopened because the assessee has not disclosed certain facts in the original assessment pro...
R.S. Mehrotra Vs. Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-25-1991
Reported in: [1991(63)FLR76]; (1992)IILLJ530All
R.R.K. Trivedi, J.1. Heard Shri A.K. Yog, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Pankaj Bhatia holding brief of Shri Shared Verma for the respondent Bank. The dispute is regarding the date of birth mentioned in the Service Record of the petitioner. He joined service in the respondent Bank on February 24, 1948 and the date of birth then reported was July 4, 1926. On the basis of this date of birth the petitioner was retired from service on July 31, 1986 after completing the age of superannuationn, i.e. 60 years. The petitioner filed a claim petition before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal claiming that he has been wrongly retired from the Bank service and his date of birth mentioned in the High School Certificate is September 18, 1930. The Tribunal after considering the case of both the parties has rejected the claim of the petitioner vide order dated November 26, 1990. Aggrieved by the said order, this writ petition has been filed.2. Admittedly, the petitioner joined ser...
Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-22-1991
Reported in: (1991)37ITD522(All.)
1. It is an appeal filed by the assessee against an order of the learned CIT (Appeals) dated 26-2-1990 for the assessment year 1974-75.The following grounds have been taken :- 1. (i) For that order dated 26-2-1990 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Kanpur is contrary to facts, erroneous in law, without jurisdiction and barred by limitation. (ii) For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned CIT (Appeals) should have held that the assessment order under Section 144 dated 10-11-1989 was barred by limitation and as such he should have quashed the aforesaid assessment order. 2. For that the appellant creaves leave to take, add and/or amend any further ground(s) of appeal before or at the time of hearing of this appeal.2. The brief facts of the case are that the original return in this case was filed at an income of Rs. 55,82,360 on 6-12-1974 which is alleged to have been revised at an income of Rs. 53,60,580 on 22-3-1977. The ITO had passe...
Kedar Nath Singh Gautam Vs. Secretary, Board of High School and Interm ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-21-1991
Reported in: AIR1991All381
ORDER1. Heard Sri Chandrahas Singh Gautam, learned counsel for the petitioner.2. It cannot be gainsaid that existence of a legal right and invasion thereon is acondition precedent for invoking writ jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner has not been able to demonstrate either the existence of any legal right or any invasion thereon.3. The complaint of the petitioner, who is Principal of Uchchatar Madhyamik Vidya-laya, Gosandey Pur, District Ghazipur, is that the students of his Institution, who are appearing in the ensuing examination conducted by the Board of High School & Intermediate Education, U.P., Allahabad, have been allotted centre different from the Institution itself. The centre allotted to the aforesaid students is far away from the location ofthe Institution of which the petitioner is Principal. According to him this will cause lot of inconvenience to the students.4. It is to be noticed that neither any of the students ...
Dr. Dinesh Mohan Vs. Income-tax Officer and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-21-1991
Reported in: [1992]194ITR507(All)
V.N. Khare, J. 1. By means of this petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has come to this court for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the Assessing Officer, Ward-I, Moradabad, to stay further proceedings for the assessment years 1988-89 and 1989-90, till his application before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi, and application under Section 144A of the Income-tax Act are disposed of. Initially, the petitioner was assessed for the year 1988-89. The Commissioner of Income-tax has set aside that order and remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer. The petitioner alleges that he has filed an appeal against the said order of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Lucknow, before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi. It is alleged that the said appeal was filed on January 8, 1991. Subsequently, on January 24, 1991, the petitioner also moved a stay application for suspending the operation of the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax, remandin...
Uttam Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-21-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ708
P.P. Gupta, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the appellant Uttam Singh against his conviction and sentence under Section 302, IPC passed by the Sessions Judge, Nainital in Sessions Trial No. 95 of 1982.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the informant Amarjeet Singh and deceased Thakur Singh were real brothers. Their sister Indra Bai Kaur is married to one Kundan Singh, resident of Feeka Barrage Bhojpur Dam, district Nainital who had a son namely Pokhan Singh. On 17-3-82, at about 5.30 p.m. the deceased Thakur Singh and his brother Amarjeet Singh were going to village Reeka Barrage Bhojpur Dam to meet their sister Indra Bai Kaur. When they reached near the house of Smt. Indira Bai Kaur, they found their sister and her husband absent. They met their nephew (Bhanja) Pokhar Singh in the house. Taking him along with them, they proceeded towards nearby field where Kundan Singh had gone. They were going on a pathway which passed through the field and near the house of the appella...
State of U.P. and ors. Vs. Shanti Devi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-21-1991
Reported in: 1992ACJ537
N.N. Mithal, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the State of U.P. under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Dehradun. From the perusal of the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, it appears that on 4.5.1986 at about 1.30 p.m. deceased was going on a bicycle on Kauwali Road where he was hit by vehicle No. UGA 4560 driven by appellant No. 3 on the right side of the road, coming from the opposite direction. The deceased was thrown up in the air and the motor vehicle dragged the cycle on which he was riding for several paces. The deceased fell to the ground and received serious injuries and died on the spot.2. The case of the appellant is that a bullock-cart came in front of the vehicle. As he was trying to overtake the same, the cyclist lost his balance and fell down and was crushed. The submission made by the appellant is that there was no negligence on the part of the driver and, therefore, the finding recorded in ...
State and ors. Vs. Smt. Shanti Devi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-21-1991
Reported in: II(1991)ACC589
N.N. Mithal, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the State of U.P. under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Dehradun. From the perusal of the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, it appears that on 4.5.1986 at about 1.30p.m. deceased was going on a bicycle on Kanwali Road where he was hit by vehicle No. UGA-4560 driven by appellant No. 3 on the right side of the road, coming from opposite direction. The deceased was thrown up in the air and the motor vehicle dragged the cycle on which he was riding for several paces. The deceased fell to the ground and received serious injuries and died on the spot2. The case of the appeallant is that a bullock-cart came in front of the vehicle. As he was trying to over take the same, the cyclist lost his balance and fell down and was crushed. The submission made by the appellant is that there was no negligence on the part of the driver and therefore, the finding recorded in this beh...
Rampur Finance Corporation Limited Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-19-1991
Reported in: [1992]194ITR442(All)
S.R. Singh, J. 1. At the instance of Rampur Finance Corporation Ltd., Kanpur (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee'), the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has drawn up a statement of the case and referred the following questions to be answered by this court under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, briefly called the Act:'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the authority by whom the penalty was to be imposed and the period of limitation by which the order of penalty was to be passed were matters of procedure and, therefore, in respect of these matters the law as applicable on the date of the initiation of penalty proceedings and not the law as applicable on the date of the filing of the original return will be applicable and, in this view, holding that the penalty was to be imposed by the Income-tax Officer and was within the time limit of two years from the end of the financial year in which the p...
Govind Hari Singhania Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Wealth-tax and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-19-1991
Reported in: (1992)104CTR(All)337; [1992]194ITR474(All)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, C.J. 1. Common questions are raised in these two writ petitions. They can be disposed of by a common order. For the sake of convenience, we shall refer to the facts in the writ petition filed by Shri Govind Hari Singhania. The attack is upon the validity of two notices issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Wealth-tax (1st respondent) on February 18, 1991, and March 2, 1991. It is further prayed that a direction be issued to respondent No. 1 not to proceed with the determination of the wealth of the petitioner on the basis of and in accordance with the said letters/notices. The matter arises under the wealth-tax assessment proceedings relating to the assessment year 1987-88 for which the relevant valuation date is said to be March 31, 1987.2. The petitioner was a partner in a partnership firm, Juggilal Kamlapat Bankers, till March 18, 1987. The said firm was dissolved with effect from March 19, 1987, under a deed of dissolution dated March 26, 1987. The assets of th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »