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.
Raja Ram Vs. District Manager, Food Corporation of India and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-14-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ESC417; [2005(105)FLR496]
Vineet Saran, J.1. Nankoo Ram, father of the petitioner, was a Handling Labourer in the Food Corporation of India, Agra. In terms of the Circular of the Food Corporation of India, dated 3.7.1996, Nankoo Ram applied on 16.6.1999 (wrongly shown as 16.6.1996) for his premature retirement. At that time, he was just below 54 years of age. Alongwith the application for premature retirement, Nankoo Ram also applied for his son Raja Ram, i.e. the petitioner, being appointed on compassionate ground in terms of the Circular, dated 3.7.1996, a copy of which has been filed as Annexure-1 to this writ petition. In response to the said application, Nankoo Ram was medically examined by a team of Doctors of the District Hospital which issued a Certificate dated 24.12.1999 declaring said Nankoo Ram to have become incapacitated for doing the handling work. Nankoo Ram was thus declared medically unfit and was retired with effect from 25.7.2000 when he was 55 years and 7 days old. The said Nankoo Ram there...
Jugal Kishore Vs. Sri Krishna Bhagwan Mandir, Through Its Manager Sri ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-14-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC247
Anjani Kumar, J.1. By means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner-tenant challenges the order passed by the trial Court as well as revisional Court.2. The facts leading to the filing of the present writ petition are that the landlord-respondent filed a suit before the Judge, Small Causes Court for the ejectment of the petitioner-tenant from the shop in dispute in which the petitioner was the tenant of a monthly rent of Rs. 5/- after terminating the tenancy of the petitioner by notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act. The plaintiff-landlord has taken up the case that the property in question vests in Public Charitable Religious Trust, therefore the provisions of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972, which shall here-in-after referred to as the 'Act', are not applicable. Building owned by Public Religious Trust and Public Charitable Trust are exempted from the application of the provisions of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 by virtue of the p...
Regional Manager, Region Iii, State Bank of India Vs. Madan Singh and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-14-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ESC737; [2005(104)FLR599]; (2005)IILLJ594All; (2005)2UPLBEC1238
V.C. Misra, J.1. Ms. Rohma Hammed, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Yashwant Verma, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ashwani Misra, learned Counsel for the respondents are present.2. This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned award dated 11.8.1986, made in favour of respondent No. 1 (Annexure 5 to the writ petition) passed by respondent No. 2-the Presiding Officer of Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Kanpur (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) by which the termination of service of the workman-respondent No. 1 dated 13.11.1978 was declared as an illegal and not justified, reinstating the workman with full back wages.3. The undisputed facts of the case in brief are that the petitioner-bank at its Chata Branch, Agra has engaged respondent No. 1-Madan Singh from time to time as a Badli Guard w.e.f. 1968, and he had worked continuously till 1978, for the specific total 886 days in 10 years, as mentioned in paragraph 3 of the writ petition...
Nanhey Khan (Shri) Vs. Additional District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-14-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC269; 2005(2)AWC1946
Anjani Kumar, J.1. This writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenges the order passed by the Revisional Court under Section 25 of Small Cause Courts Act whereby the revisional Court allowed the revision and set aside the decree passed by the trial Court on the ground that the trial Court has disposed of the suit without looking into the evidence on the record whereas from the evidence on the record it is apparent that the defendant is in default of more than three years' rent and his tenancy has already been terminated by a valid notice. The revisional Court, therefore, allowed the revision and decreed the suit after reassessing the evidence on the record for eviction of the tenant and recovery of arrears of rent for three years and damages of Rs. 252/-.2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted before this Court that in view of law laid down by this Court in the case of Laxmi Kishore and Anr. v. Har Prasad Shukla, 1981 ARC 545 (DB), and also other cas...
Sanjeev Kumar Jaiswal Vs. Vice-chancellor, Mahatma Gandhi Kashi Vidyap ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-14-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ESC679; (2005)2UPLBEC1583
Arun Tandon, J.1. Heard Sri Namwar Singh Advocate on behalf of the petitioner and Sri Ajay Bhanot Advocate on behalf of respondents 1, 2 and 3.2. The petitioner who was admitted as a regular student in M.Com. two years degree course in Mahatma Gandhi Kashi Vidyapeeth (University), Varanasi, in the academic year 2001-2002, had appeared in the examination of M.Com. Part-I examination conducted by the said University in the year 2002 and passed the said examination. Thereafter the petitioner did not seek admission in M.Com. Part-II and pursued his studies in other courses. In the year 2004 he again applied for admission as a regular student for M. Com. Part-II for the academic year 2004-2005. The University has refused admission to the petitioner in M.Com. Part-II relying upon the provisions of para 26 of the Ordinance as framed by the University under Section 51 of the State Universities Act, bearing the heading 'Pravesh Niyamavali'.3. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Chhata Sugar Co. Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-14-2004
Reported in: [2005]277ITR256(All)
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, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in allowing claim of the assessee in respect of deduction under Section 80HH of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. Briefly stated the facts involved in the present case are as under :3. The present reference relates to the assessment year 1982-83. The respondent company filed a return showing the income as follows : Rs.'3. Profits and gains of business or profession. As shown against 26,02,017 col. (d) 7. Deduction : Unabsorbed losses/allowances brought forward 3,84,11,053 from earlier years and investment allowance/development rebate/allowance 8. Gross total income (-) 3,58,09,0364. While completing the assessment at a net loss of Rs. 2,65,12,669, the claim under Section 80HH amounting to Rs. 5,20,402 was n...
Cwt Vs. Smt. Rajmani Devi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-14-2004
Reported in: [2005]145TAXMAN397(All)
1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad 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 of this Court:'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ITAT was correct in law in upholding the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner directing the exclusion of reversionary value of land from the computation of value of the properties by applying income capitalization method.'2. The reference relates to the assessment years 1981-82 and 1982-83. The respondent/ assessee was owner of the two house property Nos. 49/9, Generalganj, Kanpur and 73 /16, Collectorganj, Kanpur (sic). The Wealth tax Officer had made reference to the Valuation Officer who had determined the value of the said properties by applying the income capitalization method and including reversionary value of the land, which was accepted by the Wealth-tax Officer. In appeal the Appellate Assistant Commission...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kashi Nath Chandiwala
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-14-2004
Reported in: [2006]280ITR318(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 justified in deleting the addition made by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) by exercising his powers of enhancement under Section 251 of the Income-tax Act, 1961?2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows :The present reference relates to the assessment year 1983-84. The respondent is a firm and derives income from sale of silver ornaments and silver bullion. It had filed the return of income of Rs. 93,960. The Assessing Officer scrutinized the trading account, which disclosed sales of Rs. 27,11,614 with a gross profit of Rs. 2,53,842, which worked out to 9.36 per cent., as against that of the last year of 10.6 per cent, on sales of Rs. 29,83,638. The Income-tax...
Harbans Lal and Sons Vs. Cit
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-14-2004
Reported in: [2006]154TAXMAN157(All)
ORDERThe 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 Appellate Tribunal erred in law in holding that weighted deduction was not admissible with reference to stationery, printing and postage expenses on the ground that they were relatable to section 35B(1)(b)(iii) which was not operative for the assessment year in question, having been omitted by Finance (No. 2) Act, 1980 and whether the said expenditure was allowable under section 35B(1)(b)(i)?'2. The present reference relates to the assessment year 1982-83.3. We have heard Sri Gaurav Mahajan, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shambhoo Chopra, learned standing counsel for the revenue.4. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows :The applicant is a registered firm, which derives...
Cit Vs. Kashi Nath Candiwala
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-14-2004
Reported in: [2005]144TAXMAN840(All)
1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred 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 justified in deleting the addition made by the Commissioner (Appeals) by exercising his powers of enhancement under section 251 of the Income Tax Act, 196l'2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows:The present reference relates to the assessment year 1983-84. The respondent is a Firm and derives income from sale of silver ornaments and silver bullion. It had filed the return of income of Rs. 93,960. The assessing officer scrutinized the trading account, which disclosed sales of Rs. 27,11,614 with a gross profit of Rs. 2,53,842, which worked out to 9.36 per cent, as against that of the last year of 10.6 per cent on the sale of Rs. 29,83,638. The Income Tax Officer noticed tha...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »