Allahabad Court November 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.
Fizz Drinks Limited Vs. the Labour Court (2) and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-17-2004
Reported in: [2005(104)FLR1196]; (2005)1UPLBEC595
V.C. Misra, J.1. Heard' Sri Ravi Agarwal learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri K.P. Agarwal, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Siddharth, learned Counsel for respondent No. 2-workman.2. This writ petition has been filed challenging the award-dated 14th May, 1992 (Annexure No. 8 to the writ petition) given by the Labour Court-respondent No. f on the grounds, inter alia, that respondent No. 1 had no jurisdiction to entertain the reference made by the State. Government under Section 4-K of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and since no part of cause of action arose within the territory of the State of U.P. the impugned award is non-est, illegal and without jurisdiction.3. Facts of the case in brief are that respondent No. 2-workman was appointed on the post of Accountant on salary of Rs. 1,000/- per month on temporary basis at petitioner's Company, namely, M/s. Fizz Drinks Ltd., Faridabad and was deputed to work at Meerut in the Sales...
Prem Dayal Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-17-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ESC78
V.C. Misra, J.1. Heard Sri S.C. Tripathi, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.D. Dubey, learned Counsel for the respondents.2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner-workman for quashing the award dated 30.6.1998 (Annexure-2 to the writ petition) passed by the respondent No. 1-Labour Court, Agra published on 13.9.1988 with a prayer for being reinstatement in service with full back wages.3. The facts of the case in brief are that the petitioner was an employee in the establishment of the respondent No. 2 M/s Guru Charan Industrial Works, District Mainpuri (for short 'the employers') and he left the services on leave from 25.8.1976 to 30.8.1976. Thereafter the petitioner again unauthorisedly absented himself from the service w.e.f. 31.8.1976 without submitting any application for leave. The respondent No. 2 after waiting for 15 days time treated the petitioner-workman to have abandoned his service and lost his lien on the basis of the provisions of Clause 10 (j) of ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Rampur Distillery and Chemical Co. Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-17-2004
Reported in: [2005]277ITR416(All)
R.K. Agrawal J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi, has referred the following questions of law under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for opinion to this court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the liability of Rs. 5,81,534 for the export duty was allowable as a deduction in the year in question 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in allowing the assessee's claim for investment allowance on the ground that the products manufactured by the assessee was not hit by item No. 1 of the Eleventh Schedule to the Income-tax Act ?'2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows : The reference relates to the assessment year 1980-81. The respondent is a public limited company and is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of rectified spirit and Indian made foreign liquor....
Chater SaIn Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-17-2004
Reported in: [2005]277ITR68(All)
R.K. Agrawal, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, 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 opinion to this court :'Whether the Tribunal was correct in upholding levy of penalty of Rs. 6,000 under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in relation to the assessment year 1975-76 ?'2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows :3. The reference relates to imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act for the assessment year 1975-76. For the assessment year in question, the applicant has returned income of Rs. 13,049 in the status of an individual. The Income-tax Officer, vide order dated March 13, 1978, determined the taxable income at Rs. 25,060 which included an addition of Rs. 1.2,000 to the gross profit returned in respect of the business carried on under the name and style of M/s. Jindal Textiles. The aforesaid addition has bee...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Bharat Nepal Timber Traders
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-17-2004
Reported in: [2006]152TAXMAN652(All)
1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad has referring question of law under section 256(1) of the Income-tax hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for opinion to this Court:'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Appellate Tribunal was justified in upholding the order of the C directing the Income Tax Officer to compute the assessee's income in acco the previous year adopted by the assessee?'Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference as follows :2. The reference relates to the assessment year 1978-79. Duri year relating to the assessment year 1976-77, the respondent-firm underwent a change in the constitution with effect from 2-11-1975 firm was being reconstituted the partners decided to close the basis of Diwali year instead of financial year which was be before. The Income Tax Officer did not accept the change holding that the department had not allowed it. He completed the assessments for assessment years 1976-77 and 1977-78 by making se...
Chater SaIn Vs. Cit
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-17-2004
Reported in: [2005]144TAXMAN828(All)
R.K. Agrawal, J. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 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 opinion to this Court:'Whether the Tribunal was correct in upholding levy of penalty of Rs. 6,000 under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in relation to the assessment year 1975-76?'2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows:The reference relates to imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for the assessment year 1975-76. For the assessment year in question, the applicant has returned income of Rs. 13,049 in the status of individual. The income Tax Officer, vide order dated 13-3-1978, determined the taxable income at Rs. 25,060 which included an addition of Rs. 12,000 to the gross profit returned in respect of the business carried on under the name and style of M/s. Jindal Textiles. The aforesaid addition has been reduced to Rs. 6...
Birla Aircon Vs. Commissioner, Excise and Customs and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-16-2004
Reported in: [2005]272ITR476(All)
R.K. Agarwal, J.1. By means of the present writ petition filed under article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, M/s. Birla Aircon, seeks the following reliefs :'(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned orders dated July 27, 2004, and March 29, 2004, passed by the Commissioner, Excise and Customs, Range I, Meerut, respondent No. 1 and Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle I, Meerut, respondent No. 2, respectively (annexures Nos. 8 and 11 to the writ petition).(ii) Issue any other writ, order or direction, which, this hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.(iii) Award cost of the petition to the petitioner.'2. The petitioner claims to be a manufacturer of air-conditioners, air-conditioner kits, water coolers, water cooler kits and geysers in its factory situated at 149, Delhi Road, Meerut. A search operation was undertaken by the Central excise authority on August 21, 2000, when ...
Nathunee and ors. Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-16-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC443a
S.K. Singh, J.1. Challenge in this petition is the order of Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 9.1.2004 by which revision filed by the opposite party has been allowed and necessary changes has been made in the chaks of the parties.2. As the pleadings are complete, on the request of learned counsel for the parties, matter has been heard and is being finally decided.3. In the light of the submission as advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the Court has dealt with the matter.4. Proceedings are under Section 20 of U.P.C.H. Act which is in respect to allotment of land/plot in the respective chaks of the chak holders.5. It is not to be repeated again and again that in the allotment of chak proceedings, both parties can never be satisfied. Unless the claim of both parties is accepted they cannot claim to be satisfied. This may not be possible rather, it is impossible. Every chak holder wants best quality of land near abadi, minimum number of chaks, near roadside etc. and thus both...
Nandganj Sihori Sugar Company Limited, Through Its Executive Director ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-16-2004
Reported in: (2005)1UPLBEC627
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. This petition is directed against award dated 31.7.1996 passed by Labour Court, Varanasi in Adjudication Case No. 19/1990.2. Heard Sri Rajesh D Khare, learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel and Sri Iqbal Ahmad for the respondents. With the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, the case is finally decided at the admission stage.3. The petitioner is a subsidiary Company of the U.P. State Sugar Corporation Limited and is engaged in manufacture of white crystal sugar by vacuum pan process. Vakil Ahmad Khan-respondent No. 2 was given permanent appointment on 28.8.78 on the post of Switch Board Attendant in the petitioner's Company. On 17.12.1987, when respondent No. 2 was on duty as Switch Board Attendant along with one Mohammad Shamim Idrishi, Electrician, the main panel board of the electric line of the petitioner-Company was damaged and burnt out due to fire caused by short circuit sparkling, respondent No. 2 was dismissed from servi...
Basant Lal Vs. Chairman, Nagar Palika Parishad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-16-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ESC560; [2005(104)FLR347]
Vineet Saran, J.1. Late Prem Lal was an employee of Nagar Palika Parishad, Jaunpur. He died in harness on 29.6.2002. Petitioner Basant Lal is one of the three sons of late Prem Lal through his first wife Smt. Sundari Devi. The controversy in this writ petition is with regard to the employment to be given under the Dying in Harness Rules, 1974.2. Respondent No. 3 Smt. Chanda Devi claims to be the second wife of late Prem Lal through whom she has one minor son and one minor daughter. The petitioner as well as respondent No. 3 Smt. Chanda Devi filed applications for appointment under the Dying in Harness Rules. By an order dated 29.8.2002 passed by the Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad, Jaunpur, Smt. Chanda Devi, Respondent No. 3, was given appointment on compassionate ground. The said order was challenged by the petitioner Basant Lal in Writ Petition No. 37859 of 2002 which was allowed by this Court vide Judgment and Order dated 1.11.2002 and the order dated 29.8.2002 was quashed....
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »