Allahabad Court October 1992 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.
Rajendra Singh Alias Pahalwan Singh Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-30-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ2895
S.K. Mookerji, J.1. This Habeas Corpus Writ Petition has been filed on behalf of Rajendra Singh alias Pahalwan Singh challenging the order of the District Magistrate, Gorakhpur dated 20-7-1992.2. The impugned order has been passed by the District Magistrate, Gorakhpur detaining the petitioner, under Section 3(3) of the National Security Act, 1980. By the above writ petition the petitioner has also prayed for releasing him forthwith from the police custody.3. At the very out set it is necessary to point out that at the time when the detention order was passed or served, the petitioner was in jail at Basti in connection with case Crime No. 124 of 1985 under Sections 403/411/467, I.P.C. and case Crime No. 375 of 1992 under Sections 395/397, I.P.C The above detention order along with grounds of detention was served on the petitioner in jail.4. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged. Two counter affidavits have been filed, namely, one by Kalika Prasad, District Magistrate, Gor...
Tullu Engineering Works Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-30-1992
Reported in: 1993(64)ELT184(All)
1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Chief Standing Counsel for the respondents, on the facts and circumstances of this case, the learned counsel for the parties agreed that the present petition be disposed of finally at the stage of admission even before the exchange of affidavits.2. The petitioner seeks quashing of order dated 17th September, 1992 passed by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, and further directing the respondents not to press for the pre-deposit of the duty amounting to Rs. 1,64,517.10 and penalty amounting to Rs. 10,000/-. The Tribunal rejected the application for waiver moved by the petitioner on the ground that since there is no financial hardship to the petitioner and since after coming into force the Notification dated 18th April, 1988, which granted an exemption on the manufacture of mono-block PD pumps or sumbersible pumps, there is no case for waiver.3. The petitioner impugned the said order on the ...
Nanak Chand Sharma and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-29-1992
Reported in: 1994CriLJ664
R.A. Sharma, J.1. In exercise of power conferred on them by Section 63 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) the Governments of U. P. and Haryana executed a reciprocal agreement (hereinafter referred to as the agreement) in 1968 for providing road transport service on the inter-State routes, lying between the two States, One of the inter-State routes covered by the agreement is Muzaffarnagar-Panipat-Karnal via Shyamli (hereinafter referred to as the route). Pursuant to the agreement the Regional Transport Authority, Meerut grafted permanent stage carriage permits to the petitioners in 1971. These permits were counter-signed by the transport authorities of Haryana State. Both these permits and their counter-signature continued to be renewed by the transport authorities of the two States after every three years, up to 1980. Permits renewed in 1980 were valid up to 9-11-1983. However, applications for renewal of permits of the petitioners, filed in 1983 for...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Rose Lock Factory
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-28-1992
Reported in: [1993]204ITR753(All)
Om Parkash, J.1. This is a reference under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'), for the assessment year 1968-69. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following questions :'(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee could be allowed to take the plea of technical mistake in accounting regarding the amount of Rs. 30,863 as it could reasonably be presumed by it that since the goods were in transit, the assessee need not show the value of the same in the closing stock ? (ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the assessee was guilty of concealment of income only with reference to the revised return ? (iii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the penalty imposed should be reduced accordingly as per the provisions of law applicable on ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. U.P. Poorvanchal Vikas Nigam
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-23-1992
Reported in: (1993)113CTR(All)425; [1996]218ITR697(All)
1. At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Allahabad, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (briefly, 'the Act'), for the opinion of this court ;'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the fixed deposit should be included in the computation of capital for making out the relief under Section 80J of the Act ?'2. The reference relates to the assessment year 1974-75, the accounting period for which ended on March 31, 1974. The assessee is a State Government undertaking which was brought into existence for the development of the industries in the Eastern region of Uttar Pradesh. The assessee undertaking acquired fixed deposit receipts (F. D. R.) of the amount aggregating to Rs. 4,01,500 and claimed that the same was to be included for the purposes of computation of the capital employed in the undertaking. The Income-tax Officer while mak...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ishwari Khetan Sugar Mills (P) Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-23-1992
Reported in: (1993)111CTR(All)260
BY THE COURT :Pursuant to the direction of this Court under sub-s. (2) of s. 256 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in brief the Act), the Tribunal has referred the following questions relating to asst. yr. 1972-73 for the opinion of this Court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the extra amount of Rs. 1,03,445 realised on enhanced price of sugar had not accrued in the relevant assessment year ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in confirming the order of the AAC deleting the additions of Rs. 1,47,520 on account of commission to M/s. Bharat Vyopari Mandal ?3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the deletion of the disallowance of Rs. 1,669 as interest being paid on the delayed payment of provident fund ?2. So far as question No. 1 is concerned, it is squarely covered by a decision of this Court in Dhamp...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kanhya Lal Angan Lal Ujhani
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-22-1992
Reported in: [1993]204ITR791(All)
1. At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Lucknow, the Income-tax Appellate. Tribunal has referred the following question under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (briefly, 'the Act') :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the provisions of Section 187 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, were not applicable and that there were two separate firms during the previous year liable to be assessed separately?'2. A notice was sent to the assessee by registered post long before. The registered cover has not been received back undelivered and, therefore, the assessee is presumed to have been served with the notice.3. List has been revised. None appears for the assessee and we have, therefore, heard learned standing counsel only for the applicant.4. The reference relates to the assessment year 1974-75, the accounting period for which ended on March 31, 1974.5. The facts, in brief, are that the assessee, a partnersh...
Sewa Ram Oil Mills Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-21-1992
Reported in: [1994]205ITR384(All)
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following questions under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the opinion of this court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the Rent Control Act will not apply to the property let out to the directors by the assessee-company 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in estimating the annual letting value of the building at Rs. 6,000 ?' 2. The question for consideration is as to what is the annual letting value of bungalow No. 906 belonging to the assessee-company which was admittedly used in the relevant assessment year by its three directors, namely, M/s. Raja Ram Gupta, Balakrishna Gupta and Ramesh Chandra Gupta, as their residence. The assessee-company disclosed the annual letting value at Rs. 720 only. The Income-tax Officer took the view that the annual letting value disclosed by the assessee-comp...
Coolade Beverages Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-21-1992
Reported in: 1993(64)ELT385(All)
D.S. Sinha, J.1. Heard Sri A.P. Mathur, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sushil Kumar, learned counsel representing the respondents.2. A notice dated 26th October, 1987 calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why short-paid duty of excise amounting to Rs. 3,06,122.24, for the period between 28th April, 1987 and 10th July, 1987 be not recovered from it under Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, hereinafter called the Act. The notice was duly replied with. The Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Division-II, Ghaziabad, the respondent No. 3, by means of his order dated 26th November, 1991 confirmed the demand. Aggrieved by the order of the respondent No. 3 dated 26th November, 1991, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Collector (Appeals), Ghaziabad, the respondent No. 2, under Section 35 of the Act. Alongwith the appeal, the petitioner also filed an application under the proviso to Section 35F of the Act, praying for dispensation of the req...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Kanodia and Sons.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-21-1992
Reported in: (1993)112CTR(All)77
BY THE COURT :This is a reference under s. 256(1) of the IT Act. The Tribunal has referred the following question for the opinion of this Court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that sub-r. (3) of r. 19A of the IT Rules, 1962 should not be taken into account while computing the capital employed in the industrial undertaking ?'2. The facts as briefly stated are that the assessee, a registered firm carrying on business of sale of sugar and oil in the name of Kanodia Flour Mills, did not claim any relief under s. 80J of the IT Act in its return pertaining to the asst. yr. 1972-73, but later on, it made an application under s. 154 of the Act, on which deduction of Rs. 53,554 was allowed under s. 80J. Similar deduction of Rs. 60,524 was also allowed to the assessee in the regular assessment completed under s. 143(3) for the asst. yr. 1973-74. The CIT took the view that the relief under s. 80J allowed by the ITO under s. 154 fo...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »