Allahabad Court April 2003 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.
Cit Vs. Jai NaraIn Binodi Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-25-2003
Reported in: [2003]132TAXMAN91(All)
ORDERHeard Sri A.N. Mahajan, learned counsel for the applicant, and Sri Shakeel Ahmad, learned counsel for the respondent.2. The following three questions have been referred for opinion'1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was legally justified in confirming the Appellate Assistant Commissioners order deleting Rs. 10,000 which was taken by the Income Tax Officer as assessees income for the period from 3-11-1974 to 13-11-1974 ?2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in confirming the Appellate Assistant Commissioners order directing the Income Tax Officer to grant continuation of registration to firm ?3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was legally justified in holding that the matter of registration of the firm can be carried in an appeal filed against the Income Tax Officers order passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, when in fact no separate appeal w...
Cit Vs. Avinash Kumar Maheshwari
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-25-2003
Reported in: [2003]133TAXMAN402(All)
ORDERThe following question has been referred to this court for decision :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the partial partition was legally valid ?'2. Briefly stated the facts are that Shri Avinash Kumar Maheshwari, Hindu undivided family (hereinafter referred to as the 'HUF') (consisting of self, his wife Smt. Lata Maheshwari and his minor son Master Abhishek Maheshwari made a claim for partial partition in the assessment year 1977-78. In the application it was claimed that the partial partition had been affected on 25-5-1976 by Shri Avinash Kumar Maheshwari, the Karta in exercise of his 'patria potestas' and in accordance therewith Shri Avinash Kumar Maheshwari was given Rs. 75,619 and Rs. 65,000 each were given to Smt. Lata Maheshwari and Master Abhishek Maheshwari constituting a new entity called Master Abhishek Maheshwari, HUF. The assessee claimed before the Income Tax Officer that under the H...
Mohd. Iqram (In Jail) Vs. State of U.P. Overruled
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-25-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)ACR2208
HIDAYATULLAH J.-1. This judgment will govern the disposal of Criminal Appeals Nos. 227 and 228 of 1960. In both these appeals the appellant is one Mohammad Ikram Hussain an Advocate of the Allahabad High Court residing in 49, Zero Road, Allahabad. The second respondent in these appeals is one Mahesh Prashad, a resident of 4, Gujrati Mohalla Allahabad City but who has not appeared in this Court. The other two respondents are the State of U.P. on whose behalf a belated appearance was made by Mr. C.P. Lal, Advocate and the Station House Officer, Kotwalli, Allahabad who was not represented at the hearing. The two appeals are in a sense connected and impugn two orders of the High Court of Allahabad made respectively on August 26, 1960 and September 16, 1960. They were passed in a proceeding initiated by Mahesh under s. 491, Criminal Procedure Code and Art. 226 of the Constitution for a writ, order or direction in the nature of a writ of habeas corpus to release his alleged wife Kaniz ...
Dr. K.P. Srivastava Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-2003
Reported in: [2003]262ITR299(All)
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following nine questions purported to arise from the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in I. T. A. Nos. 4037, 4738 and 4737/Delhi of 1988 for the assessment years 1983-84, 1984-85 and 1985-86.'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that income derived by Shri Bhagwan Prasad from running the nursing home was the income of the assessee ?2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the nursing home could be run only by a qualified doctor ?3. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal had any material to hold that the assessee was paying only rental for beds and equipments of the nursing home and in further holding that the nursing home was run by the assessee ?4. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that income from running the physioth...
D.C.M. Shriram Industries Ltd. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)AWC2508
Sunil Ambwani, J.1. This writ petition has been filed against an order dated 25.1.2003 passed by Special Secretary, Sugar Industries, Anubhag-III, Annexe Bhawan, Lucknow by which the State Government has, in exercise of appellate powers under Section 15 (4) of U.P. Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Act, 1953 read with Rule 23 of the U.P. Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Rules, 1954 (in short the Act and Rules respectively), dismissed the appeal, and has upheld the order of Cane Commissioner U.P. at Lucknow dated 27.10.2002, assigning twelve cane centres in favour of S.B.E.C. Sugar Limited, Lovan Malakpur, district Baghpat. 2. I have heard Ms. Bharti Sapru for D.C.M. Shriram Industries Ltd., Unit Daurala Sugar Works, Daurala, Meerut ; and Sri Subodh Kumar for respondent No. 4. 3. The Cane Commissioner by his order dated 27.10.2002 assigned twelve cane centres, namely, Binoli-I Binoli-II, Jiwana Guliyan-I/Makhar Jiwana-II ; Jiwana-III ; Ranchar-I Ranchar-II ; Ran...
Dr. R.C. Chaudhary Vs. Vice Chancellor, B.R. Ambedkar University and o ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-2003
Reported in: AIR2004All95; 2003(3)AWC2582
ORDERB.S. Chauhan, J. 1. This application has been filed to vacate the ex parte interim order dated 17.2.2003, passed by the Court in favour of the petitioner staying the operation of the impugned order dated 1.2.2003 by which the Principal of the college had passed the impugned order removing the petitioner from the post of the Head of the Department.2. Facts and circumstances giving rise to this application are that petitioner had been removed from the post of the Head of the Department by the respondent No. 3 vide order dated 1st February, 2003 and this Court vide order dated 17.2.2003 stayed the operation thereof. The applicant respondent No. 3 filed an application on 12th March, 2003 to vacate the said order dated 17.2.2003. Petitioner's counsel did not make any attempt to get the matter listed and at this stage, we are considering the application dated 12th March, 2003. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that in view of the provisions of Clause (3) of Article 226 of ...
Balwant Singh Vs. Raj Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)AWC2658
B. K. Rathi, J.1. The suit was filed by the appellant for cancellation of the sale deed dated 15.2.1982 alleged to have been executed by the appellant in favour of respondent Nos. 1 and 2. The sole ground taken for the cancellation is that the sale deed is without consideration and obtained by fraud.2. The respondents contested the suit and alleged payment of consideration and that no fraud was committed. They also raised other pleas and also pleaded that the suit is barred by Section 34 of Specific Relief Act and is not maintainable in the civil court and barred by Section 331 of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act. The trial court framed necessary issues and recorded finding in favour of the appellant on all the issues and decreed the suit. Aggrieved by the decree the respondents preferred appeal. In the appeal they further pleaded that their names have been mutated and possession have been delivered and, therefore, the suit for cancellation of the sale deed is not maintainable. The appellate cour...
Ayodhya Singh and anr. Vs. Board of Revenue and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)AWC2970
Janardan Sahai, J. 1. A suit under Section 229B of U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act was filed by the respondent No. 4, which was dismissed by the trial court. The respondent No. 4 filed an appeal before the Additional Commissioner. By order dated 11.5.1999, the Additional Commissioner, Gorakhpur Division, Gorakhpur, allowed the appeal on the basis of compromise and decreed the suit. An application for setting aside the order on the ground that it was ex parte and that the compromise was not signed by them was filed by the petitioners. The said application is still pending. During the pendency of the application, an order dated 7.8.1999 was passed by the Additional Commissioner by which he stayed the operation of the order dated 11.5.1999 passed in the appeal. The order dated 7.8.1999 was challenged by the respondent No. 4 before the Board of Revenue. The Board of Revenue by the impugned order dated 3.5.2000 allowed the revision and set aside the order dated 7.8.1999 on th...
Mahendra Kumar Vs. Smt. Pushpawati (D.) Through L.Rs.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)AWC3018
R.P. Misra, J.1. Heard Sri R.P. Goyal, learned senior counsel for the revisionist assisted by Sri Manish Goyal, and Sri Prakash Gupta, learned counsel for the plaintiff-respondent.2. The first notice dated 18.8.1992 was given by the landlady, plaintiff-respondent, for terminating the tenancy of defendant No. 1 Kewal Krishna Anand. The second notice dated 2.5.1993 was given by Sri M.C. Gupta, advocate on behalf of the landlady demanding arrears of rent and-terminating tenancy of defendant No. 1, Kewal Krishna Anand. The learned II-Additional District Judge, Agra, framed the following issues :'(1) Whether there existed a relationship of landlady and tenant between the plaintiff and defendant No. 1? (2) Whether there existed a relationship of landlady and tenant between the plaintiff and defendant No. 2? (3) Whether the defendant No. 2 is the sub-tenant as alleged by the plaintiff? (4) Whether the defendant No. 2 is liable to be evicted? (5) To what relief, if any, is the plaintiff entitl...
Munkad S/O Iliyas Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ4649
ORDERK.N. Sinha, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and the learned AGA.2. The present revision has been filed against the order dated 22-3-2003 and 15-6-2002 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut, whereby he summoned the revisionist as an accused under Section 319, Cr. P.C.3. It is alleged that a First Information Report was lodged against applicant and others but the chargesheet was submitted against the other accused leaving the applicant. During the trial two witnesses were examined who named the applicant hence on the application of the prosecution applicant was summoned under Section 319, Cr. P.C.4. Learned counsel for applicant had submitted that there should be a reasoned order and based on evidence. He has relied upon Ram Lochan v. State of U.P. (2001) 43 All Cri C 395 : (2001 Cri LJ 4425 : 2001 All LJ 1994) wherein this Court held that 'while giving weight to the statement of a particular witness all facts and circumstances appearing in the case must be take...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »