Allahabad Court March 1999 Judgments

Smt. Shobha Sengar Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: [2000]244ITR10(All); [1999]105TAXMAN142(All)

M.C. Agrawal, J.1. By this petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner prays for the following reliefs :'(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari and to quash the impugned order dated September 29, 1997, passed by respondent No. 1 (annexure-16 to the writ petition) ;(ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding respondent No. 1 to forthwith release the jewellery seized from locker No. 47-A, New Bank of India, Unnao, on August 6, 1986 (details contained in annexure-1 to the writ petition) and the two N. S. Cs. Nos. 092455 and 092456 of Rs. 5,000 each ;(iii) issue a writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to compensate the petitioner to the tune of Rs. 20,000 for the loss caused by illegally detaining the N. S. Cs. for a period of more than five years ;(iv) issue a writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to compensate the petitioner for mental agony and harassment caused solely on acc...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Modinagar Paper Mills Ltd.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: (1999)155CTR(All)105; [2000]245ITR652(All)

ORDER--Pre-operational expense--Computation--Unexplained investmentRatio: Non-consideration of issues not raised before the Tribunal does not raises question of law.Held: The question of pre-operational expenses was not at all raised. Further the Tribunal did not consider the question of pre-operational expenses. If had, while upholding the deletion of unexplained expenses in the construction of factory building, held that the cost of construction worked out by the Valuation Officer cannot by any means be called scientific and marginal error of about 5 per cent by such way cannot be ruled out. Thus, the question of law does not arise out of the Tribunal's order.Application :Also to current assessment year.Dt. Ord.: 15-3-1999Decision:In favour of assesseeIncome Tax Act 1961 s.256(2) Reference--MIXED QUESTION OF LAW AND FACT--Depreciation--PlantRatio: The question whether foundation for installation of plant, machinery and water storage tank will constitute plant or not is a mixed questi...

Chhotan Giri and ors. Vs. State of U.P.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 1999CriLJ2986

B.K. Sharma, J.1. This revision has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 1lth January, 1984, passed by Sri Manpokhi Lal Sharma, the then VI Additional Sessions Judge, Bulandshahr in Criminal Appeal No. 126 of 1993, Chhotan Giri and 4 others v. State whereby he dismissed the criminal appeal of all the five accused revisionists and upheld their conviction for the offences under Sections 147, 452 and 323/ 149, I.P.C. and their sentence of 3 months R.I. for the offence under Section 147, I.P.C. each; 6 months R.I. each for the offence under Section 452, I.P.C. and fine of Rs, 100/- each and 6 months R.I. each for the offence under Sections 323/149, I.P.C. In default of payment of fine, each revisionist was ordered to further undergo two months R.I.. as awarded by Sri K.V. Singh, the then Munsif Magistrate VIII, Bulandshahr on 26-3-1983 in Criminal Case No. 1087/156 of 1980, State v. Chhotan Giri and Ors.2. The incident related to 6th Nov., 1979. There were two victims in the...

Devraj Anand Ceramice (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: [2000]111TAXMAN724(All)

ORDERAgarwal, J. -This is an application filed by the assessee under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, seeking a direction to the Tribunal, New Delhi, to draw up a statement of case and to refer the following questions of law for opinion to this Court:'1. Whether, on proper interpretation/ construction of the provisions of section 254(2) of the Act and the Misc. Application dated 10-4-1995 filed by the applicant-assessee, the Tribunal was legally justified in holding that it was an application seeking not only a review of the order dated 23-12-1994 passed by the Tribunal, but an attempt on the part of the counsel to re-argue the appeal itself 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal being a final fact-finding body was legally justified by not re-casting the trading account of the assessee by excluding the purchases of coal and freight thereon held as bogus and also to telescope separate addition of Rs. 1,60,800 with the trading addition on t...

Dr. R.S. Nishad Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Allahabad

1. In this Original Application the relief sought by the applicant is to direct respondent No. 1 to pass an appropriate order regularising the applicant as a Medical Officer with effect from 29.12.1987 and not from the date of issuing order dated 21.9.1994.2. The facts of the case as stated by the applicant that the applicant was appointed as Medical Officer on 29.12.1987 on short-term basis in the office of Welfare Commissioner, Allahabad. Thereafter the applicant remained on the post on ad hoc basis and ultimately he appeared before Union Public Service Commission for regularisation and Union Public Service Commission recommended him for regularisation with effect from 21.9.1994. It is stated by the applicant that the seniority of the applicant is depending upon the initial date of appointment as ad hoc Medical Officer as per policy of policy of Government vide circular No.A-12026/6/93 -CHS-I dated 27.9.94. It is further submitted that under the policy of Government of India, the ap...

Raj Kumar Vs. Collector, Muzaffarnagar and Another

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1353

M.C. Agarwal, J. 1. These two petitions arise out of a common matter. The parties are represented by common counsel. Therefore, they were heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment.2. In Writ Petition No. 497 of 1985, the petitioner is Raj Kumar who was the highest bidder in the auction of a licence for bhang for the year 1984-85 in respect of the Shamli bhang shop in district Muzaffanagar. His bid was for a sum of Rs. 1.86.000 and according to the terms of auction.he was required to pay l/6th of the bid money on the fall of the hammer which he did on the date of the auction, i.e., the 26th March. 1984. On the 4th April, 1984, he deposited another sum of Rs. 15,500 as security. In the same month, he deposited Rs. 15,500 towards licence fee. Another sum of Rs. 15.500 is claimed to have been deposited on 31st May. 1984 as licence fee for the month of May, 1984. According to the petitioner, the licence fee had to be deposited in advance by 20th of the month. For the month ...

ishwar Pal Singh Vs. District Magistrate, Meerut and Others

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1394

Yatindra Singh, J. 1. This is a tenant's writ petition for quashing of the order dated 26.2.1999 passed by District Magistrate, Meerut refusing to entertain the transfer application filed by the petitioner on the ground that he has no Jurisdiction to entertain such application. According to the District Magistrate, the District Judge is appellate/revising authority under the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act. 1972 (the Act for short), the transfer application is maintainable before him only.Facts 2. Sri Prabhat Banerjee was initially owner and landlord of the premises In dispute. He sold it to Sri Om Veer Singh on 11.3.1997. He is now the owner and landlord of the premises in question. Petitioner is a tenant at the rate Rs. 200 per month. The landlord filed an application on 17.6,1998 under Section 16 of the Act, before the District Supply Officer (Respondent No. 2). He brought to his notice that the tenant has removed his belongings from the disputed...

Om Vir Singh Vs. Deputy Inspector General of Police (Karmik), Allahaba ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1437; [1999(82)FLR120]; (1999)2UPLBEC1247

D.K. Seth, J.1. Mr. Akhilesh Singh appearing with Mr. C. B. Yadav, learned counsel for the petitionersubmits that termination of the petitioner's service under U. P. Temporary Government Servants (Termination of Service) Rules, 1975, is in fact a penalty in disguise and has been inflicted with stigma without holding any enquiry and without giving any opportunity to the petitioner, therefore, the same cannot be sustained. He has taken me through the statement made in paragraph 3 of the counter-affidavit as well as Annexure-C.A.-12 and points out that the respondents had terminated services of the petitioner on the alleged ground that the petitioner is in fact Yadu Vir Singh and not Om Vir Singh and Yadu Vir Singh had impersonified Om Vir Singh in order to seek appointment taking advantage of school certificates of Om Vir Singh. On enquiry by Mr. Bhagwan Singh, Circle Officer, Gurusahaiganj, Fatehgarh, it was found that one Rajvir Singh had made a complaint against the petitioner to the ...

Shitla Prasad Dubey and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: AIR1999All260

M.C. Agarwal, J.1. All these petitions that have been filed by the same petitioners are inter linked and the main controversy is the same.They were, therefore, heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The business of exhibition of films in a cinema house is regulated by the statutory provisions contained in U.P. Cinema (Regulation) Act, 1955 and the U.P. Cinematograph Rules, 1951. The exhibition of films in a cinema house involves entertainment and, therefore, the owner of a cinema house is liable to pay entertainment tax under the provisions of the U.P. Entertainment and Betting Tax Act, 1979.3. In order to promote construction of new permanent cinema houses in small towns in the State of U.P., the Government had notified a scheme through a Government Order dated 17th of Oct. 1983 whereunder the entertainment tax realised by owner of a cinema house from the viewers could be retained by him by way of grant in aid. The scheme did not attract sufficient respons...

U.P. Bank Employees Federation Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: [2000(84)FLR24]; (2001)IIILLJ449All; (1999)2UPLBEC905

ORDERD.K. Seth, J.1. As prayed for by Ms. Maurya, leave is granted to correct the prayer (i) to the extent Annexures 5 to 26 instead of Annexures 5 to 21. She will incorporate the correction in the course of today.2. U.P. Bank Employees' Federation, a registered trade union under the Indian Trade Unions Act, 1926 has moved this writ petition seeking a mandamus commanding the State Government to refer the disputes in respect of the services of the workmen mentioned in the Government Orders contained in Annexures 5 to 26.3. The brief facts giving rise to the present case was that the respondent Bank being State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur employed concerned workmen for a period of 80 days purely on temporary measure and did not permit them to continue on the expiry of 80 days or lesser period. This order of termination/ retrenchment, as the case may be has since been sought to be made foundation of a dispute under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act by the individual workman, whose...