Allahabad Court August 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.
Bachchan Pandit Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-22-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ2401
D.K. Trivedi, J.1. Petitioner Bachchan Pandit by means of this petition has challenged the detention order dated 21-10-94, under Section 3(2) of National Security Act passed by the District Magistrate, Gonda detaining the petitioner under National Security Act.2. The petitioner surrendered in the Court on 23- 9-94, in connection with an incident registered at Case Crime No. 148/94, under Sections 396, 436, 427, 353, 186, 376, 342, 504 and 506, I.P.C. and under Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, which is alleged to have taken place on 15-9-94, and since then he is in jail. The detention order is Annexure No. 1 and the grounds of detention is Annexure No. 2. These, Annexures indicate that the petitioner has been detained under the provisions of National Security Act only on account of one incident which relates to Crime No. 148/94 as mentioned above. A copy of the FIR, has also been filed along with the grounds of detention. The petitioner gave a representation against his detentio...
Smt. Anand Bala Bhushan Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-1995
Reported in: (1995)129CTR(All)27; [1996]217ITR144(All); [1995]83TAXMAN548(All)
M.C. Agarwal, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'D', has referred the following question for the opinion of this court under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in confirming the inclusion of capital gains of Rs. 56,287 in the income of the assessee under Section 45 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the receipt of compensation of Rs. 87,887 by the assessee was a capital receipt ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case; the receipt of compensation of Rs. 87,887 by the assessee was a casual receipt ? 4. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sale proceeds of leechee fruits was the agricultural income of the assessee within the meaning of Section 2(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and was exempt from tax ?' 2. We have heard learned counsel for the assessee, Sri R.S. Aga...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Capoor's Hotel Bar and Restaurant (P.) ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1995
Reported in: [1996]217ITR60(All)
1. This is a reference under Section 256(2) 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 Tribunal was justified in excluding the income from the business of hotel, bar and restaurant for the period from June 2, 1968, to December 31, 1968, from the hotel income of the assessee ?'2. For the assessment year 1969-70, a return was filed by the assessee, but income derived from the hotel business including bar and restaurant for the period from June 2, 1968, to December 31, 1968, was not shown. This fact is not disputed that H. R. Capoor was managing and looking after the assessee-company and he breathed his last on March 16, 1968. After his death, the licence which stood in his name was cancelled. Thereafter, certain employees of the hotel and a step-son of the deceased, forcefully took possession of the assessee's bar, restaurant and hotel and carried on the business not on behalf of the assess...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Simbholi Sugar Mills Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1995
Reported in: [1996]217ITR600(All)
1. Sri Bharatji Agarwal, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue, Sri S.P. Gupta, learned counsel representing the assessee-opposite party, are heard.2. This is an application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.3. Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perusing the application in the opinion of this court, the following questions of law do arise out of the order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal :'1. Whether the Tribunal is correct in law in allowing the deduction of Rs. 3,73,841 on account of interest on excess levy sugar price ? 2. Whether the order passed by the Tribunal is not vitiated by confirming the findings given by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) regarding addition of Rs. 2,38,575 credited in Molasses Storage and Maintenance Fund account ?' 4. Accordingly, the Tribunal is directed to draw up a statement of the case and refer the aforesaid questions of law to this court....
Agra Beverages Corporation Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1995
Reported in: [1995]216ITR835(All); [1995]83TAXMAN632(All)
B.M. Lal, J.1. Sri V.K. Upadhyaya, for the petitioner, and Sri Shekhar Srivastava, for the respondents, are heard.2. By this petition, the petitioner seeks an order, direction or writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the notice dated November 12, 1992 (contained in annexure-6 to the writ petition), whereby the petitioner is called upon to show cause as to why an order imposing penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), be not passed against him and also quashing an order dated April 15, 1993 (contained in annexure-11 to the writ petition), whereby the Tribunal, Respondent No. 1, refused to stay proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act initiated against the petitioner.3. The short facts leading to this petition are as under :4. The petitioner is an assessee under the Act and was assessed for the years 1990-91 and 1991-92 by the Assessing Officer, against which he preferred appeals which were decided by a consolidated order dated August 1...
Km. Sushma Raghav and Others Vs. the Secretary (incharge), the Board o ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-16-1995
Reported in: AIR1996All206
ORDER1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel representing the respondents Nos. 1, 2 and 3.2. Perused the record.3. The petitioners had appeared in the High School examination of the year 1994 conducted by the Board of High School and Intermediate Education U.P. The results of the petitioners were initially withheld but later on vide the order dt. 30-12-1994, the petitioners were informed that the Board of High School and Intermediate vide the order dt. 30-11-1994 had cancelled their results.4. From the perusal of the order dt. 30-11-1994 it appears that the results had been cancelled on the basis of the finding that the petitioners were guilty of using unfair means in the said examination. The aforesaid order also indicates that before taking the aforesaid decision the explanations furnished by the petitioners and the reports of the competent committee and other officers and relevant answer books and other evidence and materials including intri...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Smt. Pushpa Mohan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-16-1995
Reported in: (1996)132CTR(All)403; [1996]217ITR273(All)
1. Heard Sri Bharatji Agarwal, learned counsel for the Revenue. None appears for the assessee.2. This is an application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.3. Having heard learned counsel, Sri Bharatji Agarwal, we are of the opinion that the following question of law does arise out of the order passed by the Tribunal :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was in law, justified in upholding the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) action in cancelling the order passed under Section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on February 27, 1989, for the assessment year 1982-83 ?'4. The Tribunal is directed to draw up a statement of the case and refer the aforementioned question of law to this court....
Viswanidhi Dalmia (Raja) Vs. Director, Employees' State Insurance Corp ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-16-1995
Reported in: (1999)IIILLJ140All
Kundan Singh, J. 1. This application under Section 482 Cr. P.C. has been filed by applicant Vishwanidhi Dalmia (Raja) for quashing his prosecution in criminal Case No. 4019 of 1976, pending in the Court of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur alleging that the Employees' State Insurance Corporation through its Inspector Sri K.K. Sharma has originally filed the above complaint against Sri G.D. Bhardwaj and Sri S.P. Saxena, the occupier and Manager and Principal Employer, respectively, of Durga Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Malak Nagar, Ghaziabad for violating the provisions of Section 40 of the Employees' State Insurance Act read with Regulation 29 of ESI (Gen.) Regulations, 1950 and for offences committed under Section 85-A and 85-B of the Act. The sanction for prosecution of Sri G.D. Bhardwaj and Sri S.P. Saxena alone was obtained which is annexed as Annexure-2 to the petition, but later on the names of applicant Vishwanidhi Dalmia(Raja)and Vidyanidhi Dalmia as Directors of the aforesai...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sharvan Cold Storage and General Mills.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-16-1995
Reported in: [1996]222ITR670(All)
Heard Sri Bharatji Agarwal, learned counsel for the Revenue and Sri R. K. Mishra, learned counsel for the assessee.This is an application under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the following question of law does arise out of the order passed by the Tribunal :'Whether the cold storage being not entitled to investment allowance of Rs. 1,20,818 in respect of electrical installations, racks, plant and machinery, in view of section 32A of the Income-tax Act, which is applicable only to the business of manufacture or production of any article or thing hence the mistake was liable to be rectified under section 154 of the Act ?'The Tribunal is directed to draw up a statement of the case and refer the aforementioned question of law to this court....
Bhagwan Deen and Another Vs. Commissioner, Kanpur Division, Kanpur and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-11-1995
Reported in: AIR1996All124
ORDERPalok Basu, J.1. Sri Bhagwan Deen Nishad himself as Adhyakshya, Kshetriya Kewat (Mallah) Vikas Samiti, Village Daulatpur, Tahsil Bhuganipur, Kanpur Dehat along with Kshetriya Kewat (Mallah) Vikas Samiti, Village Daulatpur, Tahsil Bhugnipur, Kanpur Dehat are two petitioners in this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, wereby it has been prayed that the order dated 18-5-1995 passed by the District Magistrate, Kanpur Dehat should be quashed. Further prayer in this writ petition is that all the respondents should be commanded not to interfere in the peaceful exercise of the fishing rights conferred upon the petitioners over water of river Jamuna in the area concerned as was advertised.2. Sri Arun Tandon, learned counsel for the petitioners has been heard at length in support of this petition, which has been opposed by Sri H.R. Mishra, learned Standing Counsel. When this writ petition was filed on 2-8-1995, a counter affidavit was called upon. Sri H.R. Mi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »