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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Krishna Satya Narain
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-21-2004
Reported in: [2005]277ITR354(All)
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, 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, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the provisions of Section 43B were not applicable in respect of sales tax liability of Rs. 10,272 ?'2. The reference relates to the assessment year 1984-85. The accounting period of the respondent firm ended on Diwali, 1983. In the last quarter of the accounting period the respondent had collected sales tax from the customers amounting to Rs. 10,272 but the same had not been deposited in the treasury during the accounting period in question. However, it was paid in accordance with the provisions of the U. P. Sales Tax Rules within the prescribed period in the next accounting year. The Income-tax Officer added the said sum of Rs. 10,272 in terms of Section 43B of the Act. The ...
Cit Vs. Raj Kamal Stores
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-21-2004
Reported in: [2005]147TAXMAN125(All)
1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad 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, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the shares of the adult partners in loss were specified in the partnership deed dated 11-12-1972 and, therefore, the assessee was entitled to the benefit of registration?'2. The facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows : The reference relates to the assessment years 1974-75 to 1976-77.3. We have heard Shri Dhananjay Awasthi, the learned standing counsel for the department.4. The assessee-respondent is a firm which was constituted by an instrument of partnership executed on 11-12-1972. There are five partners in the firm. Besides, a minor Shri Raju Barman was also admitted to the benefits of partnership according to section 30 of the India...
Dr. Adarsh Chopra Vs. Smt. Champa Devi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-20-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC424; 2005(1)AWC837
Vikram Nath, J.1. This is a glaring case of the abuse of process of court and the law. A tenant having accepted the award of the Arbitrator dated 6.6.1979 and having enjoyed the conditions for continuing in possession for about five years subsequently retracted and has still not vacated the premises in dispute even after twenty years. Further the petitioner has the audacity to further obstruct to delivery of possession due on 1.4.1984 taking recourse to frivolous litigation.2. The dispute relates to shop No. 12 in the tenancy of the petitioner, situated at, New Gandhi Nagar, Ghaziabad. Respondent is the owner and landlord of the said shop. As there was default in payment of rent, the respondent filed suit, for recovery of arrears of rent and for ejectment of the petitioner which was registered as S.C.C. Suit No. 123 of 1977, Smt. Champa Devi v. Dr. Adarsh Chopra. The said suit was decided, with the consent of the parties, on the basis of award dated 6.6.1979 given by the Arbitrator (An...
Veer Singh Vs. Rent Control and Eviction Officer and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-20-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC521
Vikram Nath, J.1. This present petition was originally filed by the tenant/occupant challenging the order of vacancy dated 27th March, 2002, passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Kanpur. Subsequently by means of amendment the order dated 1st May, 2002 of the Rent Control and Eviction Officer releasing the premises in dispute in favour of landlord under Section 16 of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), was also challenged.2. Dispute relates to a Shop No. 119 (old) 257 (new ) Darshan Purwa, Kanpur Nagar. The petitioner, alleges to be a tenant of the said shop since 1970 and alleges to be carrying on business of Parchoon of general merchandise. The original landlord of the shop in dispute was Durga Prasad. By means of sale deed dated 13th November, 2000 the shop in dispute was sold to Smt. Jyoti Gupta, (respondent No. 2). On an application filed by one R.K. Verma (respondent No. 3) seeking allotment...
Durga Vs. Ivth Additional District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-20-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC679
Vikram Nath, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the tenant for quashing the order dated 17.8.1982 and 26.5.1994 passed in proceeding under Section 21 (1) (a) of U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred as the Act) whereby the application of landlord (respondents 3 to 5) for release of the shop in dispute was allowed and the petitioner was directed to be evicted.2. The dispute relates to a shop situate in Mohalla Vankhandi Vrindavan, district Mathura described at the foot of the release application (hereinafter referred to as the premises in dispute). The respondents 3 to 5 are the owners and landlord of the shop in dispute and the petitioner was tenant. The landlord filed an application under Section 21 (1) (a) of the Act setting up the need of respondent No. 5 Madan Mohan to set up business of stationery. It was further alleged that Madan Mohan was physically handicapped and had been playing the part of Jokar in 'Ras Mandal...
Cit Vs. Jagdish Medical Agencies
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-20-2004
Reported in: [2005]144TAXMAN844(All)
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 opinion to this Court:-'Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in holding that for the assessment years 1978-79 and 1979-80 interest payment amounting to Rs. 7,200 each by the assessee to the two AOPs were not hit by section 40(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961?'The reference relates to the assessment years 1978-79 and 1979-80.Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows:2. The respondent which is a registered firm, consists of 7 partners, namely, Jagdish Chander, HUF, Lajpat Rai, HUF, Narender Kumar (individual), Latish Kumar (individual), Smt. Ram Piari (individual), Smt. Prem Lata (individual) & Smt. Saroj Devi (individual) each having 1/7th share. The Income Tax Officer noticed the following amounts on the liability ...
Smt. Khilla Devi Alias Manju Singh Vs. Smt. Vishwa Mohini Misra
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC253; 2005(1)AWC843
K.N. Ojha, J.1. Civil Revision No, 163 of 2004 is preferred against the order dated 18.10.2004 passed by Incharge District Judge, Etah in Misc. Case No. 9 of 2004 arising out of small causes suit (SCC Suit) No. 10 of 2002 and order dated 28.9.2004 passed by the District Judge. Etah in s.C.c. Suit No. 10 of 2002 Smt. Vishwa Mohini v. Smt. Khilla Devi alias Manju Singh.2. Since both revisions are related to each other therefore they are being finally disposed of by a common order.3. Heard Sri Sashi Nandan learned senior counsel for the revisionist assisted by Km. Pooja Agarwal, advocate and Sri Swapnil Kumar learned counsel for the respondents.4. The fact of the case is that Smt. Vishwa Mohini filed suit for arrear of rent and ejectment bearing S.C.C. No. 10 of 2002, Smt. Vishwa Mohini v. Smt. Khilla Devi. Smt. Vishwa Mohini claimed herself to be the owner and landlady of the house in question and alleged to have purchased the house from one Naresh Chand Saxena and gave information to th...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ramesh Chandra Khandelwal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: (2005)195CTR(All)276; [2005]273ITR363(All)
R.K. Agarwal, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Allahabad, 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 of this court :'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal erred in law in holding that the deduction under Section 80C was claimable by the assessee in respect of NSCs purchased out of sale proceeds of motor cycle and out of loan secured on the basis of the NSCs purchased in the same financial year ?'2. The reference relates to the assessment year 1985-86. 3. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows :4. The respondent-assessee who earned income as an individual is employed with the Punjab National Bank, Daresi No. 2, Agra. Besides the provident fund contribution and insurance premium amounting to Rs. 2,490 and Rs. 590, respectively, the respondent had also claimed the benefit of investment of Rs. 37,000 in t...
Hasmat Ali Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ1956
K.N. Ojha, J.1. Instant appeal has been preferred against judgment dated 16-12-2000 passed by learned III Additional Sessions Judge, Basti, in S.T. No. 68 of 2000 whereby the appellant was convicted under Section 376, IPC and sentenced to undergo 10 years R.I. and also a fine of Rs. 5000/-and in case of default in payment of fine further R.I. of one year.2. Heard Sri V. C. Tiwari, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Manish Tiwari for the appellant and Sri. B. K. Singh, learned AGA for the State and have gone through the record.3. According to prosecution Smt. Phoola Devi wife of Ram Avtar alias Bangur Yadav, resident of village Rajarampur, police station Parasrampur, District Basti, lives along with her granddaughter Manju. On the date of occurrence on 13-12-1999 at 4.00 p.m. Manju was aged about 5 or 6 years. Accused-appellant Hasmat Ali resident of the same village went to her residence and on the pretext of providing sugarcane carried Manju with him inside the field of sugarcane ...
State of U.P. and ors. Vs. Sunil Kumar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ESC621
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. This special appeal has been filed against the judgment and order, dated 7.10.2002, of a learned Judge, by which the petition filed by the respondent has been allowed only on the ground that he had not been given an opportunity of hearing before cancelling his appointment/training on the post of Constable.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the appellants issued an advertisement advertising 5225 vacancies of Constables in Civil Police. The petitioner-respondent applied in pursuance of the same. His candidature was considered and he was selected. However, he was not sent for training on the ground that he was not eligible to be selected in the reserved category of Scheduled Tribes for the reason that he belonged to the Meena community, which is a Scheduled Tribe in the State of Rajasthan, but not in State of Uttar Pradesh. Feeling aggrieved, he filed the writ petition which has been allowed by the learned Single Judge only on the ground th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »