Allahabad Court December 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.
The Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shri Ganesh Chand Saxena
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-22-2004
Reported in: (2005)198CTR(All)620; [2006]280ITR372(All)
R.K. Agrawal, J.1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New 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:-'Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has been in error in holding that the assessee, a Development Officer, was entitled to 40% expenses in relation to incentive bonus to the tune of Rs. 4,569/-, Rs. 14,558/- and Rs. 19,300/- for the three years under reference respectively, received by him over and above his salary from the Corporation?'2. The reference relates to the Assessment Years 1980-81 to 1982-83.3. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows:-The respondent assessee was a Development Officer in the Life Insurance Corporation of India. During the assessment years in question he received certain incentive bonus from the Corporation amounting to Rs. 4,569/-, Rs. 14,558/- and Rs. 19,300/- respectively, in addition to his s...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Shiv NaraIn Karmendra Narain
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-22-2004
Reported in: (2005)198CTR(All)73; [2006]280ITR355(All)
Prakash Krishna, J.1. The Tribunal, Delhi, at the instance of Revenue has referred the following two questions of law under Section 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for opinion of this Court:'(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the rectification of mistake relating to incorrect depreciation @ 20 per cent on electric installations and generator and bringing it to 10 per cent was not correct as it relates to a debatable point and does not come within the purview of Section 154 of the IT Act, 1961 ?(ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that depreciation on electrical installations and generator was allowable @ 20 per cent instead of 10 per cent under the IT Rules?'2. The facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows. The asst. yrs. 1977-78 and 1979-80 are involved. The IAC (Asst.) during the course ...
Mishri Lal Vs. State of U.P. Through the Secretary Transport, Civil Se ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-22-2004
Reported in: [2005(105)FLR219]
Rakesh Sharma, J.1. Heard Sri Manoj Sahu, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Mahesh Chandra, Advocate who has put in appearance on behalf of opposite parties No. 2 to 4 and,the learned Chief Standing Counsel who has put in appearance on behalf of opposite party No. 1.2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has retired on 31.1.1998 on attaining the age of superannuation. Till date the petitioner's pay fixation, process has not been completed and his final gratuity, leave encashment and part of retiral benefits has not been settled and paid. The representation of the petitioner has submitted several representations to the Managing Director. U.P.S.R.T.C. for payment of retrial benefits.3. With the consent of the parties, the writ petition is finally disposed of with a direction to the opposite parties No. 3 and 4 consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner as contained in Annexure Nos. 1 and 2 and the petitioner's pay fixation shall b...
S.N. Agrawal Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-22-2004
Reported in: [2005]144TAXMAN733(All)
ORDERR.K. Agrawal, J. In the Wealth Tax Reference No. 121 of 1987 which relates to the assessment years 1978-79, 1979-80 and 1980-8 1, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi has referred the following question of law under section 27(1) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act) for opinion to this Court:'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the amounts under the Compulsory Deposit Scheme (Income Tax Payers) Act, 1974 constituted an asset within the meaning of section 2(e) of the Wealth Tax Act and were includible in the net wealth of the assessee for assessment to wealth tax?'2. In the Wealth Tax Reference No. 127 of 1987 which relates to the assessment years 1979-80 and 1980-8 1, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi has referred the following question of law under section 27(1) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act) for opinion to this Court:'Whether the Tribunal was r...
Cit Vs. Himalayan Magnesite Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-22-2004
Reported in: [2005]144TAXMAN830(All)
Prakash Krishna, J. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi, at the instance of revenue has referred the following question of law under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for opinion of this Court:'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee-company was entitled to deduction under section 80J of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows:The assessment year 1981-82 is involved. The assessee respondent is a company and it claimed deduction under section 80J of the Act which was not allowed by the assessing authority as no production took place during previous year relevant to the assessment year 1980-81. The only trial production took place in this relevant assessment year. The regular production had started only in June 1981 i.e., during subsequent assessment year. The claim was also not accepted by the CIT (Appeals). The...
Arundeep Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-21-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC847; 2005(1)ESC496
S.U. Khan, J.1. In some stamp matters learned counsel for the petitioners stated that different officers were given different targets by their higher authorities for realization of stamp duty and penalty. However, the Court could not find any good evidence in support of the said assertion. But, on the basis of experience gained while sitting for the last six months in this jurisdiction I can safely say that in some of the cases which came before me different authorities and officers went out of their way to extract as much amount as possible by way of stamp deficiency and penalty. Provisions of Section 47A of the Stamp Act shall not be overstretched lest they break. During last three or four years there has been enormous rise in stamp deficiency cases. It appears that almost every second or third deed is being impounded. This may result in killing the goose, which is laying golden eggs. If this practice is continued for a longer period execution and all registration of all sorts of dee...
Committee of Management, Dau Dayal Mahila Post Graduate College Vs. St ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-21-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ESC481; (2005)1UPLBEC554
Arun Tandon, J.1. All these writ petitions raise common questions of facts and law and as such have been tagged together and are being decided by means of this common judgment. Writ Petition No. 36619 of 2004 shall be treated to be the leading case and the facts mentioned in this judgment are with reference to the facts as stated in the said writ petition, counter and rejoinder affidavits filed therein.2. The petitioners in all these writ petitions claim to be the Management of unaided non-minority institutions imparting education in professional course of Bachelor of Education (hereinafter referred to as B.Ed.). All the institutions claim to have been granted approval/permission by the National Council for Teachers Education (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under National Council for Teachers Education Act, 1983 (hereinafter referred to as the NCTE Act). They further claim that they have been affiliated to respective Universities (examining bodies) established under the State ...
Ravindra Kumar Vs. Kamlesh Chand Dixit and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-21-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC226; 2005(3)AWC2308
Anjani Kumar, J.1. Heard Counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner, by means of this writ petition, has challenged the order passed by the prescribed authority which has been affirmed by the appellate authority under the provisions of Act No. 13 of 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).3. Brief facts of the case are that respondent-landlord filed an application under Section 21 (1) (a) of the Act for release of the accommodation in question in his favour on the ground that he is employed in defence force and he is retired or likely to be retired at the time the application was filed. He decided to settle down in Agra after his retirement. The application was, therefore, filed for the release of residential accommodation of the landlord. The petitioner contested the application on the ground that he is tenant of only two rooms and the accommodation in question is a big accommodation. In these circumstances the landlord, in fact, does not require the accommodation bona fide. In fact ...
Mannulal Matadeen Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-21-2004
Reported in: [2005]277ITR346(All); [2006]152TAXMAN125(All)
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following two 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 circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in upholding the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, dated March 16, 1985, treating the Income-tax Officer's order as erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue ?2. Whether the Appellate Tribunal was justified to hold that the Commissioner of Income-tax acted within his power to initiate proceedings under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act ?'2. The reference relates to the assessment year 1981-82.3. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows :The applicant is a registered firm. The assessment was completed by the Income-tax Officer on March 19, 1983, under Section 143(3)...
Harbhajan Singh and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-21-2004
Reported in: I(2007)BC551; 2005CriLJ3029
ORDERV.K. Chaturvedi, J.1. Harbhajan Singh and six others have filed the application under Section 482, Cr. P.C. on 13-4-2001 with the prayer to quash entire proceedings in Criminal Complaint No. 2263 of 1995 between Steel Authority of India (opposite party No. 2) v. Harbhajan Singh and Ors. (petitioners), under Sections 138-142 of Negotiable Instruments Act pending in the Court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad. Further prayer made is that the proceedings in the above noted case be also stayed.2. By an interim order dated 30-4-2001, the proceedings were stayed.3. Heard Sri Viresh Mishra, senior counsel assisted by Sri R. P. Singh for the petitioners and Sri G. S. Chaturvedi, senior counsel assisted by Sri Shashank Shekhar for opposite party No. 2 and learned A.G.A.4. Counter-affidavit and rejoinder-affidavit have been exchanged between the parties and I have perused the entire materials on record.5. It is contended by Sri Misra, counsel for the petitioners that it was incu...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »