Allahabad Court September 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.
Atma Steel Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-04-2000
Reported in: [2001]122STC629(All)
R.K. Agrawal, J.1.The applicant has filed the present revision against the order dated December 13, 1990 passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Bench-3, Ghaziabad, in cross appeals Nos. 595 of 1986 and 33 of 1987 relating to the assessment year 1981-82 (U.P.).2. The facts giving rise to the present revision are that the applicant is a registered dealer under the provisions of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 (now U.P. Trade Tax Act) (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of iron and steel goods. For the assessment year 1981-82, the assessee had disclosed the taxable turnover at Rs. 46,05,184.05 which was disbelieved by the assessing authority who had determined it at Rs. 1,33,47,460. In the first appeal filed by the applicant, the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) vide order dated May 30, 1986, had partly allowed the appeal and determined the taxable turnover at Rs. 55,23,559.40. Feeling aggrieved thereby both the applicant and the Commissioner...
Kamla Sharma (Smt.) Vs. Deputy Director of Education and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-04-2000
Reported in: (2001)1UPLBEC171
A.K. Yog, J.1. This petition under Article 226, Constitution of India has been filed by one Smt. Kamla Sharma seeking to challenge the impugned order dated November 1/2, 1993 passed by Respondent No. 1/Dcputy Director of Education deciding appeal regarding seniority in favour of Respondent No. 3 (Smt. Usha Varshaney, both working as lecturers in a recognized Intermediate Girls Institution called Chiranji Lal Girls Inter College, Aligarh (called the 'College'), which is, admittedly governed by the provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 (as amended up to date) and Regulations framed, thereunder. Copy of impugned order has been filed as (Anncxure-1 to the Writ Petition).2. For appreciating the controversy raised by the parties, following undisputed dates are being given ;Sl. Dates EventsNo.01 08.07.1966 Smt. Kamla Sharma the Petitioner wasappointed as a Lecturer (English) atAgrasen Balika Inter College, Mathura(where the Petitioner worked up to 13thJuly, 1970).02 08.07.1969 S...
Stamp Venders Association, Varanasi Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-01-2000
Reported in: 2000(4)AWC2829; (2000)3UPLBEC2537
ORDERBinod Kumar Roy and Lakshmi Bihari, JJ. 1. Whether the proviso added to Rule 156 of U. P. Stamp Rules, 1942 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules] ultra vires Articles 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India is the solitary question which requires our adjudication in this writ petition filed by the Stamp Vendors Association, Varanasi, with twoprayers (i) to quash the proviso added to Rule 156 aforesaid and (ii) to command the respondents to allow the stamp vendors to sell stamp papers of any denomination available in the Treasury within the limits of their licence.2. Rule 156 of the Rules before the impugned amendment read as follows :'Sale of stamps to non-official vendors weekly.--Licensed vendors shall be allowed to purchase stamps from the local or branch depot ordinarily once a week equal to their estimated demand for one week, based on the average sales of the last few weeks. If after a weekly purchase, the sales of any vendor have been heavy and his stock have run shor...
Jan Hitai Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-01-2000
Reported in: 2000(4)AWC3083
S. H. A. Raza and R. P. Nigam,JJ. 1. In the recent years, the ambient noise level in public places from various sources infer alia industrial activity, construction activity, generator sets, loud-speakers, music systems, vehicular horns and sirens and other mechanical devices which make hazardous Impact on human life and psychological well-being of the people, have increased to a considerable extent.2. Shri Kamlesh Singh appearing on behalf of the U. P. Pollution Control Board. Lucknow, submitted that in the congested market area of the city, the noise pollution is around 90 decibels which is not in accordance with the norms and provisions of the Act and the rules framed thereunder. In no case, the noise pollution should be more than 75 decibels in the Industrial area, 65 decibels in the commercial areas, 55 decibels in the residential areas and 50 decibels in the silence zone.3. It is a matter of great concern that due to increase of vehicular traffic in the recent years, horns and si...
Commissioner of Trade Tax Vs. Hukum Chandra
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-01-2000
Reported in: [2002]127STC327(All)
R.K. Agrawal, J.1. The Commissioner of Trade Tax, U.P., Lucknow, feeling aggrieved by the order dated May 17, 1998 passed by the Trade Tax Tribunal Bench, Dehradun, in Second Appeal No. 230 of 1992 (Assessment year 1991-92) (penalty) had filed the present revision under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the assessee-opposite party is a registered dealer under the provisions of the Act and is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of lime. The coal is used as fuel by the assessee-opposite party. The application for issuing form XXXI, filed by the opposite party had been rejected by the assessing authority on the ground that the assessee-opposite party was in arrears of tax. The assessee had already placed the orders for coal to be sent by railway wagons. It took delivery of the said coal in order to avoid payment of heavy demurrage to the railways. When form XXXI was issued by the assessing authority to the assessee-oppo...
State of U.P. and anr. Vs. (Mushamat) Begum Sabira
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-01-2000
Reported in: (2001)2UPLBEC1871
I.M. Quddusi, J.1. Heard learned Counsel, for the appellants, Shri R.S. Tripathi and Shri M.A. Khan, learned Counsel, for the respondent.This second appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 14.5.99 passed by the Special Additional District Judge, Kheri in Civil Appeal No. 124/98 (Musammat Sabira Begum v. State of U.P. and Anr.) setting aside the judgment and decree dated 6.8.97 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Lakhimpur Kheri in original suit No. 131/91 (Musammat Sabira Begum v. State of U.P. and Anr.) alongwith CM. Application No. 1645 (S) of 1999 for condonation of delay in filing the appeal under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The aforesaid application has been allowed today by this Court vide orders dated 1.9.2000, therefore, the appeal has been heard for the purpose of admission.2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent Musammat Sabira Begum had filed a Civil suit in the Court of Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Lakhimpur Kheri as pauper suit, sta...
Y.K. Gupta Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-01-2000
Reported in: 2001CriLJ339
ORDERDev Kant Trivedi, J.1. The two appellants, namely, Y.K. Gupta and Mohd. Hanif were convicted Under Sections 420 & 471 I.P.C. while appellant Y.K. Gupta was also convicted Under Section 5(2) of prevention of Corruption Act by means of judgment dated 25-6-1995 delivered by Sri Raj Veer Singh, the then VII Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Meerut in Criminal Case No. 8/1988. Both the appellants were sentenced to one year's R.I. each under Section 420 I.P.C. and two years R.I. each under Section 471 I.P.C. Fine of Rs. 5000/- each was also imposed on the two appellants Under Section 471 I.P.C. Appellant Y.K. Gupta was further sentenced to two year's R.I. and a fine of Rs. 5000/- under Section 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act. All sentences were directed to run concurrently. In case of default of payment of fine, appellant Y.K. Gupta was directed to undergo R.I. for one year and appellant Mohd. Hanif was directed to undergo R.I. for six months.2. Feeling aggrieved from the said ord...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›