Allahabad Court September 1997 Judgments
Subhra Motel (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-30-1997
Reported in: (1998)64ITD134(All.)
1. These two appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 1986-87 and 1988-89 are consolidated as these contain common issues. The assessee modified the original grounds of appeal which are taken into consideration for deciding the appeals for assessment year 1986-87 and assessment year 1988-89.2. The first issue common to both the assessment years relates to taxability of entertainment tax realised by the assessee. While in assessment year 1986-87 the same amounted to Rs. 1,24,990, in assessment year 1988-89 it was shown at Rs. 15,36,120. Shri C. S. Jain, the learned AR submitted that the assessee runs a cinema under the name and style of Shubhra Theatre at Mahuabagh, Ghazipur. It collected entertainment tax as payable to the concerned State Authority. Under a scheme as floated by the U.P. Government, any entrepreneur who had built a permanent structure for exhibiting film was to be allowed a grant in aid for three years. This was linked with the entertainment tax. While in the...
Tag this Judgment!Pragatisheel Samoohik Sahkari Krishi Samiti Ltd., Salarpur, Ghaziabad ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-30-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)AWC666; (1998)2UPLBEC886
M.C. Agarwal, J. 1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges an order dated 7.4.1993, copy of which is Annexure-'14' to the writ petition passed by the Collector, Ghaziabad in case No. 3/87-88 under Section 154 read with Section 167 (2) of the U, P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Z.A. Act').2. The provisions of Section 154. 166 and 167 of the Z.A. Act are asunder:'154. Restriction on transfer by a bhumidhar.--(1) Save as provided in sub-section (2), no bhumidhar shall have the right to transfer by sale or gift, any land other than tea gardens to any person where the transferee shall, as a result of such sale or gift, become entitled to land which together with land,if any, held by his family will in the aggregate, exceed 5.0586 hectares (12.50 acres) in Uttar Pradesh. (2) Subject to the provisions of any other law relating to the land tenures for the time being in force, the State Government ma...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Ishrat Bano Vs. Commissioner, Azamgarh and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-30-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)AWC704
M. Katju and J.C. Misra, JJ.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. This writ petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 12.9.1997. Annexure-1 to the writ petition by which an administrator has been appointed in place of the petitioner who was elected Chairman of Nagar Panchayat, Kopaganj, district Mau. By an amendment application, the order dated 15.9.1997 Annexure-1 to the affidavit in support of the said application has also been challenged. This order dated 15.9.1997 is only consequential to the order dated 12.9.1997.3. The petitioner was elected as Chairman of the Nagar Panchayat, Kopaganj, district Mau, and the short question in this case is whether in the circumstances of the case, an Administrator could have been legally appointed. The order dated 12.9.97 purports to have been passed under Section 36 (1) of U. P. Municipalities Act, 1916. In our opinion, the said provision does not have any relevance because that only deals with the extraordinary powers of the...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Sangeeta Pandey Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-30-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ1978
ORDERP.K. Jain, J.1. Heard Sri Anil Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Pankaj Naqvi, learned counsel for respondent No. 2 as also the learned A.G.A. representating respondent No. 1.2. The respondent No. 2 had filed a complaint against the petitioner which is Annexure I to the writ petition. The allegations in the complaint were that the complainant had advanced a loan of Rs. 50,000/- to the accused (petitioner) which was not returned by the accused, on making repeated demands the accused issued an Account payee cheque dated 23-1 -1995. The complainant deposited the cheque with Canara Bank, Civil Lines, Bareilly for realisation of the amount and for crediting the same in the complainant's Savings Bank Account No. 7196. The accused, however, directed the hank to stop the payment. The complainant approached the accused and enquired from her about the reason for stopping the payment and he was told that the cheque was not being issued for payment of the money but ...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Z.U. Ahmad and anr. Vs. State of U.P and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-30-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ2100
ORDERC.A. Rahim, J.1. This revision is directed against the judgment and order of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ballia delivered on 1-12-1992. By the aforesaid judgment and order he allowed the said revision and set aside the order of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ballia dated 16-4-1992 and the case was remanded back with direction to proceed according to ' w. The learned Judge has also directed both the parties to appear before the said Court, for taking part in further proceeding.2. The complainant filed a case in the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ballia against the revisionists for prosecuting them under Sections 161, 167, 217, 218, 409, 467, 468 and 500, I.P.C. On 24-12-1991 the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ballia ordered to register the case and proceeded to examine the complainant, and his witnesses under Sections 200 and 202, Cr. PC. After examining the two witnesses he transferred the case to the Court of the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate...
Tag this Judgment!Sylvania and Luxman Ltd. Vs. Raminder Singh and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-29-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)AWC454
D.C. Srivastava, J. 1. This revision under Section 25 of Provincial Small Causes Courts Act has been filed by the defendant challenging a decree for eviction and arrears of rent amounting to Rs. 3,333 together with pendente lite and future mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 300 per day passed against him.2. The plaintiffs opposite parties filed a suit for eviction of the defendant-revisionist alleging that the revisionist was a tenant in the disputed Ahata No. 195, Delhi Road. Meerut Cantt on a monthly rent of Rs. 2,500. The house is not covered by U. P. Act 13 of 1972, inasmuch as rent exceeds Rs. 2,000 per month. A notice of eviction under Section 106, Transfer of Property Act, was given on 10.4.1996, which was received by the revisionist on 11.4.1996. The notice was replied with wrong facts. The arrears of rent was also demanded but neither the rent was paid nor premises was vacated.3. The suit was contested on the ground that the provisions of U. P. Act 13 of 1972, are applicable to ...
Tag this Judgment!U.P. Co-operative Sugar Factories Federation Ltd. Vs. the Administrato ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-29-1997
Reported in: (1997)3UPLBEC1908
S.P. Srivastava, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned counsel for the petitioner/opposite party.2. Perused the record.3. The writ petition filed by R. N. Misra the petitioner/opp. party challenging the order dismissing him from service dated 18-4-87 was quashed vide the judgment and order dated 28-8-95 allowing the writ petition. It was also provided that the petitioner will be entitled to have half of his salary for the period during which the writ petition remained pending Since the order dismissing the petitioner/opp. party was being quashed on the ground that the same had been passed in violation of Regulation 87 of U. P. Co-operative Society Employees Service Regulations, 1975, the employer was left free to initiate fresh proceedings against the petitioner/respondent in accordance with law.4. The judgment and order disposing of the Civil Misc. Writ petition No, 16381 of 1988 was an appealable order and although a special appeal lay against the same, the...
Tag this Judgment!Krishna Kumar and anr. Vs. Sr. Supdt. of Police and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-29-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ3806
G.P. Mathur, J.1. Large number of Writ Petitions have been filed for quashing the First Information Reports which have been lodged under Sections 3/7 Essential Commodities Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Two such petitions in which leading arguments have been advanced are being disposed of by this order.2. The Petrol Pump of M/s. Bhagwandin Gayaprasad situate at Ghatampur district Kanpur Dehat was inspected on 2-4-96 and sample of petrol and diesel was taken which was sent to Forensic Science Laboratory, Lucknow. The report of analysis showed that the sample of diesel was adulterated with Kerosene. Thereafter, a first information report was lodged by Dinesh Kumar Misra, Supply Inspector, Ghatampur against the proprietor of M/s. Bhagwandin Gaya Prasad and the Manager Sardar Husain under Sections 3/7 E. C. Act and Sections 406, 409, 417, 419 and 420 IPC at P.S. Ghatampur on the basis of which a case was registered as Crime No. 623/96. Writ Petition No. 127 of 1997 has been file...
Tag this Judgment!Rajbir Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-28-1997
Reported in: (1997)3UPLBEC2079
O.P. Garg, J.1. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner-Rajbir Singh has prayed that the orders dated 17-11-1988, terminating his services, 27-2-1989, dismissing his appeal, 20-1-1993 passed by U. P. Public Services Tribunal (for short 'Tribunal'), dismissing his claim petition and 18-7-1994 passed by the Tribunal dismissing the review petition be quashed and the respondents be directed to reinstate him in service with ail consequential benefits.2. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged. Heard learned counsel for the parties.3. Put briefly, the facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as a Constable in U. P. Police and joined at Farrukhabad on 1-9-1981. He continued to serve the Department upto 17-11-1988 on which date his services were abruptly terminated by serving him a notice under the provisions of U. P. Aasthai Sevak (Seva Sampati) Niyamawali, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as 'Rules 1975'). The case of the petitioner is that since he had worked...
Tag this Judgment!State of U.P. and Another Vs. Ram Pal and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-26-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)AWC195
S.C. Verma and Dev Kant Trivedi, JJ.1. State of Uttar Pradesh, through Secretary Institutional Finance (Trade-tax), Anubhag 1 and Commissioner-Trade-tax, U. P., Lucknow have filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order of U. P. State Public Services Tribunaldated 1.6.1996 quashing the adverse entry awarded to the opposite party No. 1 for the year 1988-89.2. The opposite party No. 1 Sri Ram Pal was at the relevant time holding the post of Sales-tax Officer (hereinafter referred to as Trade-tax' also) and was posted at Sector 4, Varanasi. There was a strike in the Sales-tax department at Varanasi from 17.2.1989 to 23.2.1989. The officials of the Sales-tax department were on strike on account of arrest of certain Sales-tax employees for their involvement in the corruption at Naubatpur Check-Post. The explanation of the opposite party No. 1 was called by show cause notice issued by the Commissioner Trade-tax through letter dated 27.10.1989...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »