Allahabad Court December 1995 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.
Mohd. Shamim Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-18-1995
Reported in: [1996(73)FLR1672]; (1996)ILLJ1148All
S.R. Singh, J. 1. Impugned herein is the retirement notice dated February 15, 1995 whereby the petitioner was notified that he would be attaining the age of 55 years on April 1, 1995 and consequently, retiring from the service of the company with effect from April 2, 1995 in accordance with the Standing Orders of the Company. According to the petitioner, who had been serving articles to the department of electrical maintenance in the Factory of the 3rd respondent, the certified Standing Orders of the Company do not provide for superannuation which according to the petitioner, is governed by the Model Standing Orders framed by the State Government of Uttar Pradesh vide Notification No. 2651/XXXVI-3-5(SC)-85 dated July 24, 1992 (Annexure 3) thereby prescribing 58 years as the a ge of superannuation. Accordingly, the petitioner has sought the relief for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the retirement notice dated February 15, 1995 and further a writ of mandamus dire...
U.P. State Cement Corporation Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-18-1995
Reported in: 1996(86)ELT6(All)
ORDERM.C. Agarwal, J.1. These nine writ petitions by the same petitioner against the same respondents raise a common controversy. They were, therefore, heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment.2. The petitioner U.P. State Cement Corporation Limited operates a factory for the manufacture of cement. For this purpose, it has set up split location plants at three places, namely, Dalla, Churk and Chunar. At Dalla and Churk plants, only cement clinker is produced which is an intermediary product used in the manufacture of the final product, namely, cement. The cement clinker produced at the Dalla and Churk plants is transported to Chunar plant located at a distance of about 125 Kms. where it is used for the manufacture of cement. Cement clinker and cement are both excisable goods under Excise Tariff Nos. 2502.10 and 2502.20 respectively. Under Section 5A of the Central Excises and Salt Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the Central Government has the power to exemp...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Vidya Charan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-15-1995
Reported in: (1996)133CTR(All)375; [1996]220ITR78(All); [1996]86TAXMAN133(All)
Om Prakash, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (Delhi Bench) referred the following question under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (briefly 'the Act'), for the opinion of this court :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the assessee is entitled to the deduction from his net wealth of Rs. 79,896 representing his debit balance in his capital account in the firm, Messrs. Sonpal Vidya Charan ?'2. The assessee in the status of an individual filed his wealth-tax return for the assessment year 1976-77 claiming deduction in respect of his debit balance of Rs. 79,896 in the capital account of the firm ; Sonpal Vidya Charan, in which he was a partner in view of the provisions of Section 2(m) of the Act. The Wealth-tax Officer rejected the claim of the assessee observing :'The assessee's capital in Sohpal Vidya Charan shows debit balance of Rs. 79,896. The firm attracts provision of Section 5(1)(xxxii). Capital balance whether debit or credit in the books Of ...
Miniature Bulb Industries India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-15-1995
Reported in: (1996)ILLJ1042All
R.K. Mahajan, J 1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks a writ in the nature of mandamus against the State of U.P. and the Officers not to enforce the impugned notification dated August 24, 1985, annexure No. 1 to the writ petition. Briefly the facts from which this writ petition has arisen are as follows:2. There was a dispute between the workers of petitioner factory and the petitioner regarding the revision of wages. U.P. Government issued the impugned notification after holding State Labour Tripartite Conference under the Chairmanship of State Law Minister convened at Dehradun on September 19, 1983 for consideration of determination of the wages of the workmen in the petitioner industry. This was necessitated as there was agitation for the increase in the wage at some of the important centres i.e. Dehradun, Allahabad, Faizabad and Agra since 1983. Thereafter under Section 3(b) of U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the Governor issued the impugned notification regarding the basic...
Harijan Evam Nirbal Varg Avas Nigam Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-ta ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-1995
Reported in: (1996)131CTR(All)183; [1998]229ITR776(All)
Om Prakash, J.1. For the assessment years 1982-83, 1983-84 and 1984-85, the assessee made Reference Applications Nos. 376, 377 and 378 of 1989, respectively, and the applications of the Revenue for the said assessment years are numbered as 379, 380 and 381 of 1989, respectively.2. Both sets of applications were partly allowed by the Appellate Tribunal by a combined order. On the applications of the assessee, the Appellate Tribunal referred the following questions under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (briefly, the Act), for the opinion of this court :R. A. Nos. 376 and 377 (All) of 1989 : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that the assessee is not eligible to exemption under Section 10(26B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that the assessee was not entitled to exemption under Section 10(20A) of the Income-tax Act, ...
Harijan Evam Nirbal Varg Avas Evam Vikash Nigam Ltd. Vs. Commissioner ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-1995
Reported in: (1996)131CTR(All)178; [1997]226ITR708(All)
Om Prakash, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (Allahabad Bench), drew up a statement of the case for the assessment year 1981-82 and referred the following questions at the instance of the assessee and of the Revenue :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal having found the assessee eligible for exemption under Section 10(26B) was justified in not declaring the whole of its income totally exempt from tax, irrespective of its nature and sources ?'(at the instance of the assessee)' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the income attributable to executing the housing schemes and the other connected schemes therewith for the benefit of Scheduled Castes is exempt under Section 10(26B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, when the corporation was also formed for promoting the interests of backward classes and other weaker sections of the society ?'(at the instance of the Revenue)2. These qu...
Himalaya Drug Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-1995
Reported in: [1996]218ITR346(All)
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (Delhi Bench), referred the following question under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for theopinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the assessee was not entitled to a deduction of its liability under the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964, in computing its income from business under the Income-tax Act, 1961,for the assessment year 1975-76 ?'2. The relevant assessment year herein is 1975-76. The assessee, a private limited company, carried on business in the manufacture and sale of ayurvedic and unani medicines in the said assessment year. It claimed a deduction of the surtax payable by it from the business profits of this year in the income-tax assessment, The authorities below rejected the claim. The assessee failed on further appeal before the Tribunal as well.3. There are divergent views of the High Courts on the question whether surtax is deductibl...
Harijan Avam Mirbal Varg Avas Nigam Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-ta ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-1995
Reported in: [1996]218ITR622a(All)
1. At the instance of the assessee, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, (Allahabad Bench), referred the following questions relating to the assessment year 1986-87 for the opinion of this court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in rejecting the claim of the assessee for exemption under Section 10(26B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in coming to the decision that the assessee was not entitled to exemption under Section 10(20A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in rejecting the claim of the assessee for relief under Section 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961 4. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in disallowing the expenditure of Rs. 15,872 5. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the expendi...
Harijan Evam Nirbal Varg Avas Evam Vikash Nigam Ltd. Vs. Commissioner ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-1995
Reported in: (1996)131CTR(All)185
OM PRAKASH, J. :The Tribunal, Allahabad Bench drew up a statement of the case for the asst. yr. 1981-82 and referred the following questions at the instance of the assessee and of the Revenue :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal having found the assessee eligible for exemption under s. 10(26B) was justified in not declaring the whole of its income totally exempt from tax, irrespective of its nature and sources ?' (at the instance of the assessee)'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct, in law, in holding that the income attributable to executing the housing schemes and the other connected schemes therewith for the benefit of Scheduled Castes is exempt under s. 10(26B) of the IT Act, 1961 when the Corporation was also formed for promoting interests of backward classes and other weaker sections of the Society ' (at the instance of the Revenue)2. These questions came up for our consideration in the assesse...
Shamsul Haque Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-12-1995
Reported in: [1996]219ITR680(All)
1. Heard counsel for the parties. 2. In his application made under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the assessee has raised the following questions : ' (a) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in estimating the turnover at Rs. 4,00,000 as against Rs. 1,99,362 shown, whereas as per the law the applicant was not bound to maintain his accounts as the sales were below Rs. 2,50,000 ? (b) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the hon'ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has rightly estimated the sales at Rs. 4,00,000 on the basis of the inspector's report conducted in the month of September, 1993, which was relevant to the assessment year 1994-95, and not for the year 1992-93 (c) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and after considering the purchases, sales and stock of the applicant, the estimation of turnover by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal at Rs. 4,00,000 is not excessive, without ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »