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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sedco International S.A.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-12-1995
Reported in: [1996]219ITR765(All)
1. By this application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Revenue requires us to direct the Appellate Tribunal to refer the following question for the opinion of this court ; ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was legally correct and justified in cancelling the interest of Rs. 11,86,926 charged under Section 201(1A) for the assessment year 1984-85 ?' 2. After hearing the argument of both the parties, we are of the view that the aforesaid question is a question of law and we, therefore, direct the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to draw up a statement of case and refer the above question for the opinion of this court. 3. The application is, accordingly, allowed. ...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Mrs. Saidunnisa Begum
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-11-1995
Reported in: [1996]218ITR171(All)
1. Pursuant to the direction of the High Court, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal referred the following question under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal's decision is vitiated in law in ignoring the material on record and upholding the share of compensation at Rs. 91,466 only even though the assessee had claimed the whole of the amount of compensation ofRs. 1,44,665 awarded ?'2. The undisputed facts are that land belonging to the assessee was acquired and an award was made by the Land Acquisition Officer determining the compensation of Rs. 91,466 paid to the assessee. The assessee, however, claimed compensation to the extent of Rs. 1,44,665. The difference of Rs. 1,44,665 and Rs. 91,466 was paid to the tenants, who remained in occupation of the land for a long time. The fact remains that under the award, the assessee became entitled only to receive compensation to the ext...
Sichai Mazdoor Sangh Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-11-1995
Reported in: (1996)IIILLJ805All; (1996)1UPLBEC9
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. The instant writ petition has been filed by Sichai Mazdoor Sangh, a registered union, on behalf of its 29 members, i.e., part-time Tube-well operators of district Aligarh. Itraises various issues and several reliefs have been claimed. Shri B.D. Mandhyan, learned Counsel for the petitioner has restricted his submission only for the claim of 'equal pay for equal work' and no other issue has been agitated by him.2. The petitioner claimed that though the members of the Sangh are called part-time Tube-well operators, they work equal to the work done by the full time Tube-well operators and thus they are entitled for the similar treatment as was given to the full-time Tube-well operators.3. In the case of State of Punjab v. Surendra Kumar AIR 1992 SC 1593, the Apex Court has dealt with the case of the part-time teachers and observed as under.'It is also not suggested that the respondents accepted the terms set out in Annexure P/1 and P/2 under mistake. We, therefore, do no...
Chandoo Son of Ram Diya Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-11-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ2496
Kundan Singh, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 6-3-80 of Sri Harish Chandra Saxena, the then HI Additional Session Judge, Saharanpur, in S.T. No. 97 of 1979, convicting the appellants under Section 302 read with Section 149, I.P.C. and sentencing each of them to imprisonment for life and also further convicting them under Section 323 read with Section 149, I.P.C. and awarding six months' R.I. to each of them. He also held Chandoo, Isam Singh, Simal and Dal Singh appellants guilty of the charge punishable under Section 148, I.P.C. and accordingly he convicted and sentenced them under that count to a term of two years R.I., each, whereas Mehar appellant was further held guilty under Section 147, I.P.C. and was convicted thereunder and sentenced to one year's R.I. However, he directed the sentences of all the appellants passed under different counts to run concurrently.2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case, as set out in the first information report, was...
Raju Babu and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-08-1995
Reported in: [1996]219ITR642(All)
1. The contention of the petitioners is that as a result of the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) refund had become due to them but no refund has been given by the respondents on the pretext that appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) is pending before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. Counsel for the petitioners urges that there being no stay order by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, the petitioners are entitled to immediate refund. 2. The contention of learned standing counsel is that under Section 241 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Chief Commissioner or the Commissioner is empowered to withhold the refund depending upon the facts and circumstances as stated therein and in the exercise of that power an order dated September 9, 1992, was passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Agra, withholding the refund which has been communicated by the impugned order dated September 17, 1992 (annexure-4 to the petition). 3. Considering the provi...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Harijan Evam Nirbal Varg Avas Nigam
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-06-1995
Reported in: (1996)131CTR(All)169; [1997]226ITR696(All)
Om Prakash, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal drew up a statement of case and referred the two following questions to this court for its opinion :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal was justified in law in holding that objects Nos. 2 to 5 as mentioned in the memorandum of association of the company were supplementary and were introduced with a view to achieve the object mentioned in Clause No. 1 of the said memorandum of association and without that the corporation cannot achieve its main objects ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal was correct in law in holding that income attributable in executing the housing schemes and the other connected schemes therewith for the benefit of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes are exempt under Section 10(26B) of the Income-tax Act, '1961, when the corporation was also formed for promoting the interests of backward...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Lord Goverdhan Dhari (P.) Family Trust
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-06-1995
Reported in: [1996]219ITR485(All)
Om Prakash, J. 1. Learned standing counsel pointed out to us that the question mentioned in the application made by the Revenue under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, has already been referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in the reference applications relating to the consecutive assessment years 1987-88 to 1988-89 as stated in the statement of facts.2. The assessee has not appeared before us to controvert this fact.3. We, therefore, direct the Appellate Tribunal to refer the following question to this court for its opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances, the Tribunal is right in holding that the Assessing Officer has no jurisdiction to change the status while making the assessment under Section 143(1) and in the background whether a change in the status is appealable to the first appellate authority ?'4. The application is accordingly allowed....
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Oil and Natural Gas Commission
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-06-1995
Reported in: [1996]219ITR591(All)
1. Heard counsel for the parties.2. The Revenue has stated the following questions in its application made under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was legally correct to hold that the salary paid to the assessee for the laid-off period outside India was not chargeable to income-tax, in terms of Section (1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was legally correct to hold the order of the lower authorities as erroneous and unjustified ?' 3. In so far as question No. 1 is concerned, the standing counsel has drawn our attention to a decision dated December 13, 1993, of this courtrendered in I. T. A. No. 124 of 1993 -- CIT v. F. D. Naterville, by which this court had already directed the Appellate Tribunal to refer this question. It will, therefore, be nothing but appropriate to direct the A...
Ram NaraIn Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-06-1995
Reported in: 1(1996)ACC654
Kundan Singh, J.1. This revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 21.8.82 passed by Sri Rurimal Sessions Judge, Mainpuri, dismissing Criminal Appeal No. 78 of 1982 and confirming the conviction under Section 304-A, IPC and sentence of one year's R.I. of the applicant as passed by Mr. R.B. Lal Dhore, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mainpuri on 29.3.82 in Case No. 924 of 1980.2. Applicant Ram Narain was driver of U.P. Government Roadways and on 21.6.79. He was carrying Roadways Bus No. UTW-8729 from Mainpuri city to Bewar. He was driving the busat a fast speed. At about 3.15 p.m. when he crossed the bridge of Isah River outside Mainpuri city, the bus hit a cyclist, namely Nahar Singh at a distance of about 20 paces from the Northern fringe of the bridge of the river. Fatal injuries were sustained by Nahar Singh who was coming from the opposite direction. Nahar Singh was going on a right side i.e., on left side of the road. When the but hit Nahar Singh it was going with a fast ...
Tomasek Alexander, Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-1995
Reported in: (1996)131CTR(All)411; [1996]219ITR313(All)
M.C. Agarwal, J. 1. These writ petitions in the name of foreign technicians have been preferred by the Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, Hardwar (hereinafter referred to as 'the BHEL'), and are directed against the orders dated February 18, 1994, passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Meerut, whereby he rejected the petitions of the petitioners under Section 264 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), praying that the assessment orders framed by the Income-tax Officer, Saharanpur, be modified to the effect that the taxable income of the assessee-petitioners was nil. 2. I have heard Sri Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Sri R. R. Agarwal, learned standing counsel for the Income-tax Department. 3. The matter in issue relates to the assessment year 1990-91 in Writ Petitions Nos. 532, 533, 534 and 535 of 1994 and to the assessment year 1989-90 in Writ Petitions Nos. 535 and 557 of 1994. 4. All the aforesaid persons were Czechoslovakian te...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »