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.
Motor Sales Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-1997
Reported in: [1998]230ITR44(All)
1. At the instance of the assessee, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, referred the following questions for the opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that on October 15, 1972, the firm stopped doing its business and held the assets of the business thereafter for and on behalf of the company which was stipulated to be formed by the partners of the firm in terms of the deed of copartnery dated October 16, 1972 ? If the answer to the above be in the affirmative- Whether the Tribunal was justified, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, in holding that the firm was liable to be assessed in respect of the profits which arose and accrued to it with regard to itstrading from January 1, 1972, to October 15, 1972, in terms of Section 170 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The facts, as briefly stated, in the order of the Appellate Tribunal are that the asses see-firm comprised three partners ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shree Amrit Cold Storage
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-1997
Reported in: [1998]229ITR641(All); [1997]95TAXMAN529(All)
1. The following question is referred for the opinion of this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal for the assessment year 1976-77 for which the accounting year ended on January 31, 1976 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the deletion of Rs. 52,632 from the total income of the assessee ?'2. The facts as gleaned from the statement of the case are that in Part III of its return, the assessee-firm disclosed an amount of Rs. 52,631.77, which was claimed to be exempt. The particulars of this amount, as disclosed in Part III of the return, are as follows :'Potato rent kept in reserve as per the High Court's order in Writ Petition No. 11066 of 1975 against the Cold Storage Regulation Ordinance, 1975, of the Uttar Pradesh Government.'3. The Tribunal stated in para 3 of the statement of case that it appears that the assessee had charged storage charges for potatoes stored in February, 1975, at Rs. 15 per quintal. On Octobe...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Vivek Kumar Rajendra Kumar.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-1997
Reported in: (1998)146CTR(All)128
BY THE COURT :For the opinion of this Court, the Tribunal referred the following question under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there should have been two separate assessments for the two periods as claimed by the assessee or one assessment for the entire previous year as framed by the ITO ?'2. The facts are that upto 8th May, 1973, the assessee-firm comprised two major partners, namely, Smt. Munni Devi and Shri Ram Nath Gupta and two minors, who were admitted to the benefits of partnership. On 9th May, 1973, two more major partners were admitted and seven minor partners were admitted to the benefits of partnership in place of Km. Asha Devi Gupta and Km. Madhu Gupta. The assessee filed two returns for two periods viz. from 5th November, 1972 to 8th May, 1973 and from 9th May, 1973 to 25th October, 1973 and prayed before the assessing authority that two assessments for two broken periods be made.The assessing authority rejected...
Gaon Sabha, Bhaunakpur, Rampur Vs. Chief Development Officer, Rampur a ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-08-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)AWC140
Ravi S. Dhavan, J.1. The facts of this case reflects on what local Government ought to be and the fact that in the fiftieth year of independence the administration has yet to get attuned and oriented to the aspect that Government is by the people, of the people and for the people and not otherwise an administration by persons in power and officials in position, sans the people.2. The issue reflected upon in this case is simple : There is a small village Bhaunakpur in tehsil Milak, district Rampur. The village has a primary school on plot No. 286. The plot belongs to the Gaon Sabha. The correct terminology would be 'Gram Sabha'. (Article 243(b) of the Constitution of India).3. There is no issue on facts that the school is on the Gram Sabha land and that the school has been therefor a very long time. There is also no issue that the building of the school was dilapidated and on a decision taken by the village body, the Gram Sabha, it was decided by a resolution that the school building wo...
Duncans Industries Limited Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-07-1997
Reported in: AIR1998All72
ORDERS.R. Singh, J.1. The petitioner has approached this Court by means of the present petition, assailing the legality and propriety of the two orders -- one dated 20-2-1995 passed in proceeding under Section 47A(2) of the Stamp Act, 1899, by Additional District Magistrate (Finance and Revenue), Kanpur Nagar, levying stamp duty of Rs. 37,01,26,832-50/- and slapping a penalty of Rs. 30,53,167-50/- and the other dated 4-4-1995 passed by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority in Stamp Revision No. 36,of 1995-96 Kanpur Nagar under Section 56 of the Stamp Act, preferred against the aforesaid order of the Additional Distt. Magistrate (Finance and Revenue), Kanpur Nagar. The revision has been allowed partly vide impugned order dated 4-4-1995 of the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, setting aside the order passed by the Addl. District Magistrate (Finance and Revenue), Kanpur Nagar in so far as imposition of penalty was concerned and slightly modifying the order under revision as regards t...
Vishwanath Singh and anr. Vs. Kumari Kamlesh Priyadarshi, District Ins ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-07-1997
Reported in: (1997)3UPLBEC1554
O.P. Garg, J.1. This is an application under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 with the prayer that the opposite-party Km. Kamlesh Priyadarshi be summoned and punished for her wilful and deliberate disobedience of the order dated 29-9-1994 passed by this Court in Civil Misc. Writ No. 1776 of 1986.2. Counter and rejoinder affidavit have been filed. Heard Sri V.B. Singh on behalf of the petitioners and Sri. R. K. Saxena, learned Senior Standing counsel on behalf of the opposite party.3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the Deputy Director of Education Gorakhpur Region Gorakhpur by order dated 8-6-1979 created three posts of l. T. Grade Teachers in Bhartiya Uchchatar Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Raja Bari Jaswal, Gorakhpur along with other posts. The Committee of Management proceeded to fill up one post of L. T. Grade teacher by promotion and two posts of L. T. Grade teachers by direct recruitment. The petitioners were selected by a Selection Committee. The Committee of...
State of U.P. Vs. Shyam Behari Lal Gupta
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-07-1997
Reported in: (1998)2UPLBEC1397
Sobha Dikshit, J.1. These bunch of writ petitions arise out of the judgment and order dated 27.10.1994 and subsequent order dated 27.11.1995, 30.4.1996, 22.4.1996 and 31.5.1996, passed by the U.P. Public Services Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) in a claim petition No. 81/F/IV/95 filed by one Sri S.B.L. Gupta respondent herein. Writ Petition No. 313 (SS) of 1995 and 3061 (SS) of 1996 have been filed by the State Government challenging the judgment and order dated 27.10.1994 and order dated 29.5.1996 passed by the Tribunal, whereas writ petition Nos. 67 (SS) of 1996, 2341 (SS) of 1996, 2997 (SS) of 1996 and 3169 (SS) of 1996 have been filed by one Sri B.S. Rai being aggrieved by the same impugned judgment and order dated 27.10.1994 and 27.11.1995 and subsequent orders passed by the Tribunal in the same proceedings.2. The controversy centres round the selection/appointment to the sole post of Engineer-in-Chief (Mechanical) (hereinafter referred to as E.I.C. (M) in the d...
Bhagwan Das Khandelwal and anr. Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation Es ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-07-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ651
ORDERS.R. Singh, J.1. By means of the present petition, the petitioners have invoked the procedures of this Court under Section 482, Cr.P.C. for the relief of quashing the proceedings pending in the Court of Spl. Judl. Magistrate, Dehradun in Crl. Case No. 169 of 1980 under Section 120-B read with Sections 420, 471 and 467, I.P.C. A brief summation of the facts as are relevant for resolution of the controversy involved in the case on hand are that upon a written complaint dated 27-5-1972 by Sri R. M. Pradhan, Manager (Advance) Central Bank of India, Bombay addressed to the Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, New Delhi, the matter was investigated by the Dy. Supdt of Police, Central Bureau of Investigation Special Police Establishment, E.O.W. New Delhi and it was unravelled that 'M/s. Gangadhar Ram Chandra had withdrawn through cheques which were credited to their account by the Central Bank of India, Agra, on different dates, against the forged bills as well as those bills they ...
State of U.P. Vs. Ram Swarup and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-07-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ1067
Girdhar Malaviya, J.1. This Govt. Appeal has been filed against the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the Vth Additional District and Sessions Judge, Shahjahanpur in Sessions Trial No. 371 of 1977 whereby the respondents have been acquitted of the charges under Sections 148, 302/149 and 307/149 Indian Penal Code.2. We have heard Sri K.C. Saxena learned Addl. Govt. Advocate on behalf of the State and Sri P.N. Lal learned counel who has put in appearance on behalf of the respondents Ram Swaroop, Parmeshwar Din, Anant Ram, Satya Dev and Radhey Shyam.3. All the respondents are closely related inasmuch as Ram Swaroop is the son of the Anant Ram and the remaining respondents are all brothers being sons of Ram Dayal.4. The oral First Information Report giving rise to this case was filed at police station Khutar on 6-9-1977 at 7.30 a.m. by Rarneshwar, PW 1, which was taken down at the police station by clerk constable S.A. Khan, PW 6, who had prepared the chick report. The First Inform...
Laloo Bharti Vs. Anwar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-07-1997
Reported in: 1998ACJ1067
Binod Kumar Roy and R.K. Mahajan, JJ.1. The memorandum of this appeal, filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, shows that it is against the judgment dated 25.10.1991 and decree dated 15.11.1991 of the VII Additional District Judge, Allahabad, acting as Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, passed in Misc. Claim Petition No. 59 of 1990 and that two-fold reliefs have been claimed: (i) to set aside the order dated 25.10.1991 by which the appellant's restoration application was rejected, and (ii) Misc. Claim Petition No. 59 of 1990 be sent back to the Tribunal for trial and assessment of compensation. The decree dated 15.11.1991 shows that it is a formal order drawn up in Misc. Case No. 60 of 1990 arising out of Misc. Case No. 17 of 1990 and Claim Petition No. 222 of 1987 stating rejection of the appellant's application (3/C) only.2. The appellant filed claim petition under Sections 110-A and 92-A of Motor Vehicles Act on 23.10.1987 before the Tribunal which was registered as C...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »