Allahabad Court October 2004 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.
Hindu Inter College Vs. Prescribed Authority (Minimum Wages Act, 1948) ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-14-2004
Reported in: [2005(104)FLR723]
M. Katju, A.C.J., Sunil Ambwani and K.N. Ojha, JJ.1. Heard Sri P.K. Jain, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri K.P. Agarwal, learned Counsel for respondent No. 2.2. This reference to the Full Bench has been made in view of the order of the learned Single Judge dated 27.4.2001 in which the learned Single Judge has noted the conflict of opinion of two Division Bench decisions of this Court.3. The short question is whether a teacher in a private educational institution is governed by the Minimum Wages Act. This controversy is no longer res integra after the decision of the Supreme Court in Haryana Unrecognized Schools' Association v. State of Haryana : 1996 (73) FLR 1086 (SC).4. Following the said decision we hold that the Minimum Wages Act does not apply to a teacher in a private educational institution. The petition is consequently allowed and the impugned orders dated 11.5.2000 and 30.5.2000 Annexures-7 and 9 to the writ petition are quashed....
Union of India (Uoi) and anr. Vs. B.B. Biswas and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-13-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)ESC985
Jagdish Bhalla, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the judgment and order, dated 3.6.2003, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Lucknow in O.A. No. 41 of 2003, whereby the petitioners have been directed to consider the respondent No. 1 for his appointment on the post of Deputy Director General Military Farms (hereinafter referred to as the DDGMF) holding him to be eligible and competent to hold the said post.2. Brief facts, which are necessary for the disposal of the present writ petition, are stated herein below :3. According to learned Counsel, the respondent No. 1 is an Officer belonging to civilian cadre and is presently posted as Director Military Farms, Headquarters Central Command, Lucknow. Initially the first respondent was appointed on the post of Group 'B' Officer as Farm Officer in the Military Farm Organisation in the year 1974 after being selected through Union Public Service Commission. Thereafter the first respondent was promoted to the post of Deputy ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Smt. Shashi Aggarwal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-12-2004
Reported in: (2006)201CTR(All)48; [2005]272ITR36(All)
R.K. Agarwal, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, has referred the following question of law under Section 256(1) of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for the opinion to this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, could not be levied even if the assessee had not disclosed in their returns of income their agricultural income for the assessment year 1974-75 ?'2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows :3. A consolidated reference in respect of the three assessees, namely, Smt. Shashi Aggarwal, Master Manoj Narain and Sri K. N. Agarwal, has been made by the Tribunal, which relates to the assessment year 1974-75. All the three respondent-assessees own a farm, known as Prag Agricultural Farm, along with one Sri S. N. Agarwal. They were in receipt of their respective share of inc...
U.P. State Brassware Corpn. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-12-2004
Reported in: (2005)194CTR(All)353; [2005]277ITR40(All)
R.K. Agrawal, J.1. The Tribunal, Delhi, has referred the following three questions of law under s, 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the Act, for opinion to this Court :'1. Whether, on facts and in law, the Tribunal was justified in confirming the action of the CIT(A) who upheld the action of the ITO in taking action under Section 148 of the IT Act, 1961.2. Whether, on facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the action of the CIT(A), who confirmed the addition of Rs. 10,417 made by the ITO under Section 143(3)/148 on account of interest payable to U.P. Government on seed loan taken by the company.3. Whether, on facts and in law and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally right in holding that the interest payable to U.P. Government on seed loan taken was not deductible from the interest earned from the investments of the same loan by the appellant.'2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present...
Uma Shanker Vs. Natthir Das and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-12-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC20
Anjani Kumar, J.1. Heard learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the contesting respondent is not present in spite of the notice served.2. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the landlord-petitioner challenges the order passed by the appellate authority under Section 22 of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972, In short the 'Act', whereby the appeal filed by the landlord-petitioner against the order of prescribed authority rejecting his application under Section 21 (1) (a) and (b) of the Act for the release of the shop in dispute, was dismissed.3. The landlord-petitioner has taken up the ground for the release of the shop in question that the building in question is in dilapidated condition and requires reconstruction. The landlord filed application under Section 21 (1) (a) and (b) of the Act. The Prescribed Authority as well as the appellate Authority has considered the matter and has found that no doub...
U.P. Financial Corporation Through Its Managing Director Vs. Joint Com ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-12-2004
Reported in: (2005)199CTR(All)155; [2006]280ITR100(All)
R.K. Agrawal, J.1. By means of UK present writ petition filed under Article 220 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, U.P. Financial Corporation, seeks the following reliefs:-'A- a writ, order or direction, including a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 19.3.1999 passed by the respondent No. 1 (Annexure -V to the writ petition);B - a writ, order 01 direction, including a writ in the nature of mandamus, declaring the provisions of Section 142(2A) of the Income Tax Act as null, void, inoperative and unconstitutional; C - any other suitable writ, order or directions, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.D - award costs of the writ petition.'2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are as follows:-The petitioner, U.P. Financial Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation'), has been created under the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951. It is an undertaking of the Go...
Cawnpore Textiles Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-12-2004
Reported in: (2006)200CTR(All)203; [2005]276ITR612(All)
R.K. Agrawal, J.1. In Income-tax Reference No. 111 of 1985 which relates to the assessment years 1975-76 and 1976-77, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following questions of law under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), 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 depreciation on assets provided to employees of the assessee free of charge required to be included in computing the disallowance under Section 40A(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to weighted deduction under Section 35B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of expenses incurred on export levy and on carriage of goods and insurance, while on transit ?3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal ...
U.P. State Brassware Corpn. Ltd. Vs. Cit
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-12-2004
Reported in: [2005]142TAXMAN601(All)
R.K. Agrawal, J. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi has referred the following three questions of law under section 256(1) of the Incometax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the Act for opinion to this Court:' 1. Whether on facts and in law, the Tribunal was justified in confirming the action of the CIT(A) who upheld the action of the Income Tax Officer in taking action under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Whether on facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the action of the CIT (A), who confirmed the addition of Rs. 10,417 made by the Income Tax Officer under section 143(3)/148 on account of interest payable to U.P. Government on Seed Loan taken by the company.3. Whether on facts and in law and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally right in holding that the interest payable to U.P.Government on seed loan taken was not deductible from the interest earned from the investments of the same loan by the a...
Cit Vs. S.K. Gupta and Co.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-12-2004
Reported in: [2006]146TAXMAN399(All)
1. The affidavit of service filed today may be placed on record:This is an application under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act.2. The present application has been filed on the basis of the following questions of law arising out of the order of Tribunal:'1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was legally justified in quashing the assessment order dated 27-3-1991 in entirety instead of deciding first the issue of status which is pending before it in separate appeal?2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was legally justified in quashing the assessment order dated 27-3-1991 made in pursuance of a legal and valid notices issued under sections 139 and 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961?3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in quashing the assessment order dated 27-3-1991 and in not decidin...
Cit Vs. Smt. Shashi Aggarwal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-12-2004
Reported in: [2005]143TAXMAN199(All)
R. K. Agarwal J. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, has referred the following question of law under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for the opinion to this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, could not be levied even if the assessee had not disclosed in their returns of income their agricultural income for the assessment year 1974-75 ?'Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows2. A consolidated reference in respect of the three assessees, namely, Smt. Shashi Aggarwal, Master Manoj Narain and Sri K. N. Agarwal, has been made by the Tribunal, which relates to the assessment year 1974-75. All the three respondent-assessees own a farm, known as Prag Agricultural Farm, along with one Sri S. N. Agarwal. They were in receipt of their respective share of income from...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »