Allahabad Court July 1997 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. K.P. Gupta and Sons
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-16-1997
Reported in: (1998)144CTR(All)8; [1998]231ITR954(All)
1. At the instance of the Revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal referred the following question for the opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in allowing the assessee's claim for continuation of registration ?'2. The assessee-firm was granted renewal of registration for the assessment year 1973-74 and further applied for continuation of the registration for the assessment year 1974-75 with which we are concerned herein. The Income-tax Officer observed that the books of account produced by the assessee before him showed that the partners' accounts in the ledger did not contain any credit on account of the profit during the year and that the balances shown in the balance-sheet have also been brought forward from year to year and were not tallying with the books of account maintained by the assessee. Having so observed, he concluded that the profits of the firm had not been distributed in terms of the partner...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shrawan Kumar Swarup and Sons
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-16-1997
Reported in: (1998)147CTR(All)305; [1998]232ITR123(All)
1. At the instance of the Revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'B', New Delhi, referred the following questions for the opinion of this court :''1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 265 was bad in law and was without jurisdiction, as no notices were served on the other members of the family ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the partial partition between the two groups effected on January 1, 1971, was valid under the Hindulaw ?' 2. The facts recorded in the statement of facts by the Appellate Tribunal are that the assessee is a Hindu undivided family, headed by Shri Shrawan Kumar Swarup as its karta. Smt. Asha Kumari Swarup is the wife of the karta and they had two minor children, namely, Harish Kumar Swarup and Nandita Swarup. The karta by virtue of powers a...
Vinytics Peripherals Private Ltd. Vs. Commissioner, Trade Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-16-1997
Reported in: [1998]111STC359(All)
S.L. Saraf, J.1. The case of the applicant is that it established its unit and was duly issued an eligibility certificate by the authorities concerned for exemption from payment of tax for a period of four years from the date of starting production, i.e., August 28, 1984. The said period expired some time on August 27, 1988. It is alleged that the Commissioner, Trade Tax, U.P., Lucknow on March 27, 1993 passed an order cancelling the eligibility certificate on the ground that the petitioner did not fulfil the condition for grant of eligibility certificate on the date of starting production, as such the same was cancelled.2. As against the said order the applicant-assessee preferred an appeal before a Full Bench of the Sales Tax Tribunal, Lucknow. The Tribunal considered the matter and held that production was started on August 28, 1984 by the appellant-unit.3. The applicant has contended that the existing conditions for grant of eligibility certificate was the notional date of starting...
Dr. Ashok Kumar Agarwal Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-16-1997
Reported in: (1998)2UPLBEC955
K.C. Bhargava, J.1. Both these writ petitions relate to the same matter, hence they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. The petitioner has prayed for a writ of certiorai quashing the impugned order dated 14.12.1994, contained in Annexure-4 to Writ Petition No. 97(SB) of 1995 and the order dated 19.12.1995 contained in Annexure-1 to Writ Petition No. 49(SB) of 1996. He has further prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding the opposite parties, i. e. the State of Uttar Pradesh and the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission to convene and finalise the selection to the post of Professor-Director. A writ of quo warranto has also been prayed for removal of opposite party No. 4, Dr. A. K. Gupta, and to show under what authority he is holding the post of Professor-Director of Rehabilitation and Artificial Lab Centre, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as RALC). Two doctors are fighting each other for the post of Professor-Director of RALC. According to the peti...
Shital Kumar Vaish Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-15-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)AWC94
S.C. Verma and Dev Kant Trivedi, JJ. 1. Aggrieved mainly by the non-absorption of the petitioner with the department of Ramganga Command Area Development Authority and the repatriation order dated 28.2.1983 by which the petitioner has been directed to join on the original post in the parent department, i.e., Kanpur Co-operative Milk Board, the petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.2. In this case, both the petitioner and respondents have been taking different stands at different stages resulting in confusion from both the sides about the nature of appointment and status enjoyed by the petitioner.3. The petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Sales Officer at Kanpur Sahkari Milk Board Ltd. by order dated 5/9.4.1974 in the pay scale of Rs. 300-900 and was placed on probation for six months subject to approval by the U. P. Co-operative Institutional Service Board, Lucknow. The petitioner received increments of pay and was substantively appointe...
Kailash NaraIn Dwivedi Vs. State of U. P. and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-15-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)AWC559; (1997)2UPLBEC1387
R.A. Sharma, J.1. Petitioner was promoted on ad hoc basis from the post of Tahsildar to Provincial Civil Service (hereinafter referred to as P.C.S.) on 11.6.1985. He was allotted 1986 batch (recruitment year) and was confirmed in 1989. Tahsildars, who were junior to the petitioner and were also promoted on ad hoc basis to P.C.S. In June, 1985, were, however, allotted 1985 batch. Petitioner filed representation before the Government complaining against giving of 1986 batch to him. Not having heard anything from the Government, he filed this writ petition for writ of mandamus directing the respondents to allot him 1982 batch. Relief for grant of time and senior scales with retrospective effect was also claimed. Although in this writ petition, the petitioner has claimed 1982 batch, but his learned counsel has confined his case for 1985 batch only.2. In pursuance of the promotion orders all promotees, excepting the petitioner, joined the P.C.S. before 1.7.1985. The petitioner, however, joi...
Bankey Lal Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-15-1997
Reported in: (1997)3UPLBEC1590
R. Dayal, J.1. These special appeals involve common question of law and arise from the judgments of a learned Single Judge whereby writ petitions filed by the appellants to challenge no-confidence proceedings initiated against them as Pradhans of Gram Panchayats were dismissed, placing reliance on the judgment dated 7-5-1997 passed in writ petition No. 14191 of 1991, Smt. Ram Beti v. District Panchayat Raj Officer, Budaun and Ors. [Reported in (1997) 3 UPLBEC 1583].2. We have heard Sri N. C Rajvanshi and Sri R. C. Singh, Advocates, for the appellants and Sri Pradeep Gupta, Additional Chief Standing Counsel, and Shri H. P. Yadav, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.3. Learned counsel for the appellants submit that whereas under Section 11-B of Uttar Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 (here-in-after referred to as the Act). Pradhan is to be elected by all the persons registered in the electoral rolls far the territorial constituencies of the Panchayat area from amongst themselves, ...
Madan Lal Gupta Vs. Sachiv, Rajya Ganna Sewa Pradhikaran and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-15-1997
Reported in: (1998)1UPLBEC518
R.A. Sharma, J.1. Petitioner, who claims to be an Assistant Secretary, Sahkari Ganna Vikas Samiti Ltd., Munderwa, district Basti, has filed this writ petition, challenging the order of his transfer dated 13.6.1997 passed by Sachiv, Rajya Ganna Sewa Pradhikaran, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow (Respondent No. 1).2. The sole submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that there is no provision in the Rules and Regulations for transfer of the Secretary and Assistant Secretary and, therefore, the Central Cane Authority had no jurisdiction to pass the impugned order. In support of his contention the learned Counsel has placed reliance on the decision of Division Bench case in Rajpal Singh v. District Cane Authority, Writ Petition No. 9613 of 1978, decided on 3.4.1979.3. We have heard Sri Govind Saran, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri H.R. Mishra, learned Counsel for the respondents.4. In para 3 of the petition the petitioner has stated that his services are governed by the U.P...
Jokhu Lal Vs. Central Jail and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-15-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ1052
Giridhar Malaviya, J.1. The Supreme Court, while disposing of the Special Leave Petition No. 1069 of 1985 against an order of the Allahabad High Court dated 4-12-1984 in Habeas Corpus Petition No. 9907 of 1984 of Ram Pravesh Singh, by which an order under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act passed against the petitioner was challenged, passed the following order:-Without entering into the merits of the case, as only 10 days are left for the petitioner to complete his period of detention, we direct that the petitioner may be released forthwith.The petition is accordingly disposed of.2. By yet another order dated 9-3-1988 in Criminal Appeal No. 121 of 1988 arising out of SLP (Crl.) 3253 of 1987 the Supreme Court, in the case of Shiv Ratan Damani v. Supdt. Central Jail. Agra, passed the following order :-Special leave granted.We are informed by counsel for the parties that the period of detention of the appellant will expire on 22 March, 1988. In the circumstances, without expressin...
Suleman Khan and Another Vs. Basic Shiksha Parishad, Allahabad and Oth ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-14-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)AWC93
R.H. Zaidi, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the respondents.2. In all these petitions, the question regarding the determination of seniority of the teachers serving in the Basic Schools run by the Basic Shiksha Parishad. Uttar Pradesh is involved.3. It appears that claim petitions were decided by the U. P. Public Service Tribunal vide its order dated 10.12.1987. Aggrieved by the said judgment and order passed by the Tribunal, these petitions have been filed. Petitions were also filed earlier by similarly situated persons. Some of the petitions were allowed by this court vide its judgment and order dated 7.3.1991. Validity of the Judgment and order passed by this Court was challenged before the Supreme Court by the V. P. Basic Shiksha Parishad and another. Civil Appeal Nos. 5278 to 5282 of 1992 were ultimately decided by the Apex Court of the country by judgment and order dated 7.12.1992. U.P. Basic Shiksha Parishad and another v. Hari D...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »