Allahabad Court February 2000 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.
Plywood Products Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-07-2000
Reported in: [2002]257ITR433(All)
M.C. Agarwal, J. 1. These are three applications by the assessee under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, praying that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, be directed to state a case and to refer the following questions stated to be of law and to arise out of the Tribunal's common order dated October 30, 1995 passed in I. T. A. Nos. 1062, 1063 and 1064 (All) of 1999 for the assessment years 1981-82, 1984-85 and 1985-86 : 'Assessment year 1981-82 : (i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in confirming the order passed under Section 185(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, refusing to grant regist-ration to the firm for the assessment year 1981-82, when there was a change in the constitution of firm (ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in confirming the order refusing to grant registration merely on technical grounds, which are procedural forma...
Prayag Udyog (P.) Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-07-2000
Reported in: [2000]245ITR288(All); [2001]118TAXMAN68(All)
1. By this petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, an assessee under the Income-tax Act, 1961, challenges an order dated July 29, 1999, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Allahabad, in ITA Nos. 753 and 1335 (Alld) of 1996 for the assessment years 1992-93 and 1993-94 whereby the said appeals have been dismissed on the grounds that the memorandum of appeals were defective inasmuch as they were argumentative. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 has also filed a supplementary counter affidavit.2. We have heard Sri Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Ashok Kumar, learned standing counsel for the respondents.3. The aforesaid appeals were filed by the petitioner through one Sri H.G. Agarwal, a practising chartered accountant of substantial standing. The said appeals were duly registered and posted for hearing. When the appeals came up for hearing on July 29, 1999,...
Prism Cement Limited Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-07-2000
Reported in: 2003(161)ELT93(All); 2006[2]STR291; [2007]6STT107
ORDERM.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 of certiorari quashing the show cause notices, dated 15-12-1999.(ii) issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to grant refunds of Rs. 10,40,938/- and Rs. 9,38,771/- forthwith along with interest upto date at the rate of 18% per annum.2. The peritioner's case is that by the Finance Act, 1994 a tax known as service tax was leviable and by the Service Tax (Eighth Amendment) Rules, 1997 an obligation was placed on the petitioner to collect and deposit the Service Tax from 1-12-1997 to 30-9-1998 from Goods Transport Operators and from 1-7-1998 to 31-7-1999 from Clearing & Forwarding Agents. In pursuance of this, the petitioner deposited Rs. 10,40,938.00 and Rs. 19,38,771-00 along with interest. The petitioner's case is that it did not collect the tax from the transporters and Clearing & Forwarding Agents and paid the amount out o...
Malti Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-07-2000
Reported in: 2000CriLJ4170; I(2001)DMC204
ORDERS.K. Agarwal, J.1. This revision arises against the judgment dated 17.5.1993 passed in Criminal Revision No. 341 of 1991 by IVth Additional Sessions Judge Budaun allowing the revision and setting aside the order passed in Criminal Case No. 6 of 1991 under Section 125, Cr.P.C.2. The present revision is preferred against the aforesaid order setting aside the grant of maintenance allowance to the applicant. Before entering into the merits of the case this Court on 13.12.1999 had directed as under :'Last opportunity is given to the parties to appear and argue the case failing which the case shall be decided on merit.'3. List has been revised. No one has appeared even today on behalf of the applicant to press this revision. Mr. Ran Vijay Singh, learned Counsel for the opposite party is present. The case was listed for delivery of judgment on 18.2.2000. On this day the Counsel for the applicant appeared before the Court and desired to argue. He was heard. Before proceeding I wish to dis...
Banajeet Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-07-2000
Reported in: 2000CriLJ3854
ORDERB.K. Rathi, J.1. By means of this petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. the applicant has requested for permission to file fresh bail bonds in case No. 169 of 1999, State v. Banajeet under Section 304-A, I.P.C. now converted under Section 302, I.P.C, P. S. Akbarpur, district Kanpur Dehat.2. I have heard Sri S. R. Verma, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant was already released on bail, by the Court for offence under Section 304-A, I.P.C. However, the chargesheet have now been submitted under Section 302, I.P.C. That therefore, the applicant may be permitted to file fresh bail bonds for that offence and he is not required to obtain fresh order for bail. Learned counsel for the applicant has referred to the following cases :Leading case on the point is Ugrasen Singh v. State of U.P. (1993) 30 All Cri C 531. This is a Division Bench decision and in this case the bail was granted Under Sect...
Prayag Udyog (P) Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-07-2000
Reported in: [2001]245ITR288(All)
By this petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, an assessee under the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenges an order dated 29-7-1999, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Allahabad, in ITA Nos. 753 and 1335 (All) of 1996 for the assessment years 1992-93 and 1993-94 whereby the said appeals have been dismissed on the grounds that the memorandum of appeals were defective inasmuch as they were argumentative. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 has also filed a supplementary counter affidavit.We have heard Sri Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Ashok Kumar, learned standing counsel for the respondents.2. The aforesaid appeals were filed by the petitioner through one Sri H, G. Agarwal, a practising chartered accountant of substantial standing. The said appeals were duly registered and posted for hearing. When the appeals came up for hearing on 29-7-1999, an applicatio...
Principal, Rastriya Inter College, Mahrajganj and Another Vs. District ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-04-2000
Reported in: 2000(1)AWC831; (2000)1UPLBEC707
M. Katju, J.1.This Special Appeal has been filed against the impugned Judgment of the learned single Judge dated 10.9.1999. We have carefully perused the said judgment and find no infirmity in the same.2. The respondent No. 3 in this appeal was a Daftary (peon) in the Rastriya Inter College, Bali Nichlaul. district Mahrajganj and he was dismissed by the Principal by order dated 8.7.1999 but the said order was disapproved by the District Inspector of Schools by his order dated 23/28.8.1999. Against that order of the District Inspector of Schools, the appellant filed a writ petition in this Court which was dismissed by the impugned judgment of the learned single Judge.3. The short question in this case is whether prior approval/ permission from the District Inspector of Schools is necessary before dismissing a Class IV employee.4. A learned single Judge of this Court (Hon'ble Alok Chakrabarti, J.) in Daya Shanker Tewari v. Principal and others, 1998 (2) UPLBEC 1101, has held that such pr...
Mahesh NaraIn Srivastava Vs. Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corpor ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-04-2000
Reported in: 2000(2)AWC1737; (2000)3UPLBEC2277
Bhanwar Singh, J.1. The petitioner has invoked this Court's Jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by filing this writ petition praying for a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondent to revoke the order dated 26.2.1990, whereby the petitioner was compulsorily retired from service.2. The matrix of the petitioner's case is that he was appointed in the Roadways Department in the year 1948. He always discharged his duties satisfactorily and on the basis of his performance, he was promoted as Station Superintendent/Traffic Superintendent. After the Assembly election in the year 1989, a new Government was installed in the State and the then Chief Minister issued a circular order to weed out the corrupt officials/employees in the State and it was in pursuance of such general direction that a very large number of officials were compulsorily retired from service and the petitioner also fell victim of those circumstances. The respondent vide order dated 26.2....
Prem NaraIn Bajpai Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-04-2000
Reported in: [2000]245ITR129(All); [2000]111TAXMAN210(All)
R.K. Agrawal, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad, has referred the following questions of law under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that income from house property at Plot No. 8, Kandhari Road, Agra, which was claimed by the assessee to have been thrown in the common hotchpot as per declaration made in the return for the assessment year 1968-69 and reiterated in the return for the assessment year 1972-73 onwards, was not liable to be excluded from individual assessment of the applicant ?'2. The aforementioned question of law is said to arise out of the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated November 30, 1978, passed in ITA Nos. 1847 and 843 (Alld.) of 1976-77 relating to the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75.3. The facts giving rise to the aforesaid reference is set out below :4. The assessee is an ...
Anil Kumar Ramesh Chandra Glass Works and anr. Vs. State of Uttar Prad ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-04-2000
Reported in: [2000]119STC305(All)
S. Rafat Alam, J.1. In the instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioners have prayed for the following relief :'(i) that a suitable writ, order or direction be issued quashing the notices dated December 10, 1985 issued by the Sales Tax Officer, Sector 3, Firozabad, respondent No. 2 for the assessment years 1982-83 (U.P. and Central), 1983-84 (U.P. and Central) and 1984-85 (U.P. and Central) for completing assessments as also for provisional assessment for the months April, 1985 to October, 1985 and thereby seeking to impose sales tax on the petitioner's turnover treating the petitioner No. 1 as not a new unit, collectively attached as annexure-5 ;1(a) that a suitable writ, order or direction be issued quashing assessment orders dated December 26, 1985 passed by the Sales Tax Officer, Sector 3, Firozabad, respondent No. 2 for the assessment years 1983-84 (U.P. and Central), 1984-85 (U.P.), and 1985-86 for the months of April to October, 1985 and filed c...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »