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.
Vishwanath Chakrawarti Vs. Anjali Chakrawarti and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-05-1991
Reported in: II(1991)DMC598
Girdhar Malaviya, J.1. This application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the order dated 17.121981 passed by the 8th Addl. District Judge Allahabad in Criminal Revision No. 463 of 1981 whereby he upheld the order dated 22.6.1981 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Allahabad on the application by the applicant for cancelling the order by which the applicant was directed to pay Rs. 100/- per month to his wife and Rs. 75/- to his daughter per month by way of maintenance under Section 125, Cr.P.C.2. The crux of the matter is that applicant was married to Smt. Anjali Chakrawarti, the Opp-party on 17.1.1975. On 25.3.1976, an application under Section 125, Cr.P.C. was moved by the Opp-party Smt. Anjali Chakrawarti which was allowed, as indicated above, by the Magistrate on 28.2.1977. Without adverting to the other details in respect of the proceedings it will be enough to mention that this order dated 28.2.77 granting maintenance to Smt. Anjali Chakrawarti and her dau...
Vespa Car Co. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Collector of Central Excise
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-05-1991
Reported in: 1991(33)ECC292; 1991LC176(Allahabad); 1992(61)ELT16(All)
ORDER1. This writ petition is directed against a proceeding dated 22nd February, 1991 initiated by the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Central Excise Division, Rai Bareli, whereunder certain goods belonging to the petitioner have been detained in lieu of excise duty demand totalling Rs. 15,64,358.40 P. This amount is made up of 8 items mentioned in the order of detention. The petitioner is challenging the said detention as incompetent and invalid.2. So far as Items No. 5 and 6 are concerned, it is brought to our notice that the appeals were preferred against these demands along with stay applications and the said stay applications were disposed on 13th February, 1991. Though the stay applications were rejected, the petitioner was granted a month's time for paying the duty. The month's time will expire only on 17th March, 1991. It is, therefore, stated that the detention of goods for recovering the said amount of duty under Items No. 5 and 6, is premature.3. So far as the amounts d...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Gulab Chand
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-1991
Reported in: (1992)101CTR(All)226; [1991]192ITR495(All)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, C.J.1. Under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal has stated the following question :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the receipt of Rs. 15,000 by the assessee for the surrender of its tenancy of the godown in question was a capital gain and not a causal receipt and tax was computable thereon under the Income-tax Act, 1961, accordingly ?'2. The assessee is an individual. It carries on the business of pawning and dealing in shares. The assessment year concerned is 1976-77. During the relevant previous year, the assessee received an amount of Rs. 15,000 by way of consideration for surrendering the tenancy of a godown occupied by him as a tenant. The godown belonged to Badri Prasad Agrawal who sold the same to one Smt. Navnita Chatterji. Smt. Navnita Chatterji paid the said amount to the assessee to get the premises vacated. In the return filed by him, the assesse...
Ram Swarup Cold Storage and Allied Industries Vs. Assistant Commission ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-1991
Reported in: [1991]192ITR537(All)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, C.J.1. This writ petition is directed against a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act on July 22, 1988, with respect to the assessment year 1980-81. The petitioner is a partnership-firm constituted under a deed of partnership dated June 22, 1978. It was observing the calendar year as the 'previous year'. During the year 1979 (assessment year 1980-81), the petitioner commenced construction and installation of a cold storage plant. The construction went on till March, 1980. During the year 1979, the petitioner did not have any income but only investment in the setting up of the said plant. For that reason, the petitioner says, he did not file a return for the assessment year 1980-81.2. The return for the assessment year 1981-82 was filed on September 14, 1981, in response to a notice under Section 139(2) of the Act. Thereafter, on October 16, 1981, the petitioner also filed a nit return for the assessment year 1980-81. Along with this return, the petiti...
Asharfi Lal Shami Vs. U.P. State Road Transport Corpn. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-1991
Reported in: [1991(62)FLR917]; (1994)IIILLJ385All; (1991)1UPLBEC673
M.P. Sinha, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. D.K.S. Rathor appearing on behalf of the respondents.2. The petitioner was appointed as a Junior clerk on 14.12.1965 in the U.P. Government Roadways Department. The services of the petitioner were transferred to the U.P. State Road Transport Corporation after its formation in the year 1972. Thereafter he was promoted to the post of senior clerk on 1.12.1985.3. On 26.7.1988 the General Manager, U.P. State Road Transport Corporation, Agra, passed the following orders:'The following senior clerks are hereby deputed to the places noted against their names to assist the S.S./S.S.I. to perform duties normally entrusted to the Station Incharge, they should be relieved and directed to report to their new place of posting at once'.4. The petitioner was also one of those head clerks who was deputed to assist the S.S./S.S.J.5. Whether the said order is an order of promotion ?6. For the reasons given below, I am of the view that it...
Pachrangi and ors. (In Jail) Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-1991
Reported in: 1991CriLJ3232
Palok Basu, J.1. This appeal has been filed by Pachrangi, Sinder Singh and Chandra Prakash against their conviction Under Section 302/34, IPC and sentence of imprisonment for life as awarded by II Addl. Sess. Judge Shahjahanpur on 16-1-1979 in Sessions Trial No. 351 of 1978.2. An incident is said to have happened at about 10 p.m. on 21-8-1977 in the precincts of the Railway Station Maigalganj, District Shahjahanpur. Ram Kumar, P.W. 3, was employed in the said Railway Station and P.W. 2, Salgi Ram had come to see him. They were on a charpai. At the station platform, four other travellers were asleep, one of whom was sleeping on the cement bench. Three appellants reached there when appellant Pachrangi fired at the person who was sleeping on the Bench from his tamancha (country made pistol), appellant Sinder Singh delivered blows with a Hatta (Iron rod) and appellant Chandra Prakash beat him with his hands after catching hold of him. Alarm was raised by Salig Ram and Ram Kumar who also fl...
L.M.L. Fibres Ltd. Vs. Assistant Collector of Central Excise
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-1991
Reported in: 1992(58)ELT501(All)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, C.J.1. This writ petition is filed by (1) L.M.L. Fibres Ltd. and (2) Prakati Synthetics Ltd., for issuance of writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the order of detention passed by respondent No. 1 (Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Division-I, Kanpur) and declaring the same ultra vires, illegal and without jurisdiction and for other incidental reliefs. In the impugned order the Assistant Collector of Central Excise recite the following facts.2. An amount of more than rupees one and half crore towards Central Excise dues is recoverable from M/s. L.M.L. Fibre Ltd., Panki Industrial Estate, Kanpur in terms of order No. E/78-80/90-D, dated 8-2-1990 passed by CEGAT. The party was called upon to deposit the said amount by the Superintendent of Central Excise through his letter dated 5-6-1990 and again by another letter dated 30-8-1990. They failed to make the payment in spite of the said letters. Accordingly, in exercise of the pow...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›