Allahabad Court November 1999 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.
Mahabir Industries Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-02-1999
Reported in: [2000]245ITR827(All)
ORDERBusiness loss--AllowabilityCatch Note:The assessee was carrying on business in agricultural products like mustard, groundnut, wheat, gram, etc.--It was also engaged in the business of extraction of oil from mustard seeds and groundnut seeds--During the year under consideration it had claimed a loss of Rs. 58,181 alleged to have been suffered by it in the purchase and sale of tobacco through B and K who carried on business at Cooach Bihar--The case of the assessee was that the said parties acted as commission agents of the assessee for the purchase and sale of tobacco and the assessee suffered losses amounting to Rs. 28,167.50 and Rs. 30,014--The assessee's claim of the said losses was investigated by the assessing officer who found that the losses were not genuine and disallowed the same--On appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner took a different view and allowed the assessee's claim--The Commissioner then approached the Tribunal in the aforesaid second appeal and the Tribun...
Commissioner of Trade Tax Vs. Sterling Machine Tools
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-02-1999
Reported in: [2000]119STC90(All)
P.K. Jain, J.1.These three revisions arise out of the common order passed by the Trade Tax Tribunal in Second Appeals Nos. 215 of 1992 (A.Y. 1979-80), 216 of 1992 (A.Y. 1980-81) and 217 of 1992 (A.Y. 1981-82) allowing the three appeals of the assessee and directing the assessing authority to refund or adjust with interest the excess amount of tax deposited by the assessee as ordered by the Trade Tax Tribunal vide order dated July 27, 1990.2. The factual position of the case appears to be that for the aforesaid assessment years the assessee had taken the matter of assessment to the Tribunal in second appeals. The second appeals filed by the assessee were allowed by the Tribunal against the assessment orders for the years under consideration and after fixing liability for tax the Tribunal had directed that the excess amount deposited by the assessee shall be refunded to him in accordance with the rules. The said order of the Tribunal had become final as the department did not feel aggrie...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. J.K. Bankers
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-02-1999
Reported in: (2001)165CTR(All)513; [2000]245ITR844(All)
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, referred the following questions stated to be of law and to arise out of its order passed in ITA No, 377 (Alld.) of 1975-76 for the assessment year 1971-72 for the opinion of this court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, a second application under Section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, lies when there has been no change in the factual or the legal situation ? 2. Whether a successor-Appellate Assistant Commissioner can entertain an application under Section 154 for adjudication of the same question ?' 2. We have heard Sri A. N. Mahajan, learned counsel for the Commissioner, and Sri R. S. Agarwal, learned counsel for the respondent.3. The Income-tax Officer made an assessment of the total income of the assessee at Rs. 2,42,710 by an order dated March 7, 1972. The total income included an income of Rs. 52,952 as income from property. The assessee claimed r...
In Re: Kamal NaraIn Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-02-1999
Reported in: (2000)1UPLBEC59
N.K. Mitra, C.J. and S.R. Singh, J.1. The proceeding before us is the appartion of the three contempt cases in Re Kamal Narain Singh, referred above. Having emerged from the gravevard in which the composite corpus of the three cases were burned with contemner's comeuppance in each of the three cases disposed of by a common judgment dated 28-5-1999, the ghost is chasing two Advocates namely Sri V.C. Mishra, Senior Advocate and his Advocate son Sri Vivek Mishra, besides some officials of the Copying Section of this Court and the contemner Kamal Narain Singh himself by using the vehicle of contempt of Court jurisdiction of this Court. The proceeding, it appears, has been initiated as a suo motu review by the Bench which had disposed of the contempt cases as aforestated. It is neither necessive nor desirable to speak of the circumstances under which the proceeding was withdrawn from the concerned Bench and places before this Bench for disposal.2. It so happened that one Kamal Narain Singh ...
State of U.P. Vs. Kamal Narayan Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-02-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ2805
N.K. Mitra, C.J.1. The proceeding before us is the apparition of the three contempt cases in Re : Kamal Narain Singh, referred to above. Having emerged from the graveyard in which the composite corpus of the three cases were buried with contemn-er's comeuppance in each of the three cases disposed of by a common Judgment dated 28-5-1999, the ghost is chasing two Advocates namely Sri V.C. Mishra, Senior Advocate and his Advocate son Sri Vivek Mishra, besides some officials of the Copying section of this Court and the contemner Kamal Narain Singh himself by using the vehicle of contempt of Court jurisdiction of this Court. The proceeding, it appears, has been initiated as a suo motu review by the Bench which had disposed of the contempt cases as aforestated. It is neither necessary nor desirable to speak of the circumstances under which the proceeding was withdrawn from the concerned Bench and placed before this Bench for disposal.2. It so happened that one Kamal Narain Singh filed a writ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. J.K. Bankers
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-02-1999
Reported in: [2001]245ITR844(All)
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, referred the following questions stated to be of law and to arise out of its order passed in ITA No. 377 (All.) of 1975-76 for the assessment year 1971-72 for the opinion of this court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, a second application under section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, lies when there has been no change in the factual or the legal situation 2. Whether a successor-Appellate Assistant Commissioner can entertain an application under section 154 for adjudication of the same question ?'We have heard Sri A. N. Mahajan, learned counsel for the Commissioner, and Sri R. S. Agarwal, learned counsel for the respondent.The Income Tax Officer made an assessment of the total income of the assessee at Rs. 2,42,710 by an order dated 7-3-1972. The total income included an income of Rs. 52,952 as income from property. The assessee claimed relief under sectio...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Anil Kumar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-02-1999
Reported in: [2001]246ITR38(All)
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench-Delhi, in compliance with this court's direction dated 17-7-1980, under section 27(3) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957, in Wealth-tax Applications Nos. 47, 46 and 48 of 1980 has referred the following questions for the opinion of this court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the assessee's share in the additions made in the case of the firm in which he was a partner was not includible in his wealth ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the assessee was entitled to exemption under section 5(1)(iv) of the Wealth tax Act, 1957, in respect of his share in Saraswati Ware Housing Corporation ?'The aforesaid questions arise out of a consolidated order dated 7-3-1979, passed by the Tribunal in Wealth-tax Appeals Nos. 1056, 1057 and 1058 (Delhi of 1976-77), for the ass...
M.R. Compound and Allied Products (P) Ltd. Vs. Cegat and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-02-1999
Reported in: 2000(89)LC461(Allahabad)
P.K. Jain, J.1. By order dated 13.9.1999, the above Civil Misc. Writ Petition was decided by me. The petitioner has come-up with the present application for review of the aforesaid order on the ground that while deciding the writ petition, the Court was led away by the submission of Sri S.P. Kesharvani, the counsel for respondents that the demand of duty was to the tune of Rs. 44 lacs whereas it was actually Rs. 19,16,247.00 and further amount of Rs. 9,16,247.00, the amount of penalty. The Tribunal while passing the impugned orders did not take into consideration that the seized goods of the petitioner were lying in custody of the department which could be taken as sufficient security and further plea of limitation specifically raised was not application and the writ petition (sic). On the question of limitation certain findings of the appellate Tribunal could not be looked into which were to the effect that 'after going through the arguments of the department and the party I find that...
Km. Rajni Kumari Vs. Regional Secretary/Additional Secretary, Board of ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-01-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)AWC10; (2000)1UPLBEC95
V.M. Sahai, J.1. The petitioner passed High School in 1989, in first division. She appeared in intermediate examination with rollnumber 007989 as a regular student from Jawahar Inter College, Sheetalpur. Agra in 1991. Her result was withheld under WB category. But provisional marks-sheet was issued to her. The petitioner passed her B. A. in 1994 from degree college affiliated to Agra University as a regular student. She passed her M. A. examination in 1997 from Agra University, She was married in Rajasthan where she applied to be appointed as teacher. She produced her entire testimonials including intermediate Examination mark-sheet of 1991. On 30.9.1999. she approached the Principal of the institution and requested him that she be supplied the certificate of Intermediate Examination, 1991. The Principal refused and asked the petitioner to approach the respondents. On 2.8.1999 the petitioner made a representation in the office of respondent No. 1. On same day. she was served with impug...
Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs. Special Judge (Anti-corruption ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-01-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)AWC15; (2000)IILLJ1575bAll; (2000)1UPLBEC272
Aloke Chakrabarti, J. 1. The order passed by the authority under the Payment of Wages Act has been challenged here by the employer.2. Relevant facts stated In the writ petition are that predecessor of the respondent Nos. 3 to 10, one Anwar Khan was a Development Officer of the petitioner Corporation and the Corporation retired him on 30.4.1979, when he attained the age of 58 years. Anwar Khan filed original suit before the learned Munsif which was ultimately decreed. Appeal filed by the Corporation was dismissed and Corporation challenged the same further filing Second Appeal No. 1662 of 1982 which is pending in this Court. Anwar Khan filed application before the authority under the Payment of Wages Act claimingvarious amount under various heads which was allowed by the order dated 11.6.1993. Petitioner Corporation's appeal against the said order was rejected on 7.5.1999. Hence this writ petition was filed.3. Dr. R. G. Padia. learned counsel for the petitioner Corporation raised severa...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »