Allahabad Court April 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.
Kabul Dry Fruits Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-2004
Reported in: (2008)11VST227(All)
Prakash Krishna, J.1. Both the above revisions relate to the same assessee and similar controversy are involved therefore are being disposed of by a common judgment. The dispute relates to the assessment year 1981-82 in Sales Tax Revision No. 173 of 1992 and assessment year 1982-83 in Trade Tax Revision No. 1099 of 1994.2. The applicant is a registered dealer of kirana and dry fruits, etc., both under the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 as well as under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The dispute relates in these revisions with regard to the levy of penalty under Section 10A of the Central Sales Tax Act for wrongly issuing form C in respect of purchases of garigola from outside State of U.P. Both in these assessment years the levy of penalty has been confirmed up to the stage of Tribunal under Section 10A of the Central Sales Tax Act. The Tribunal on the basis of third quarterly return of turnover for the assessment year 1981-82 has come to the conclusion that the tax was deposited on garigo...
Girdhar Gopal Gulati Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-2004
Reported in: (2004)188CTR(All)532; [2004]269ITR45(All)
M. Katju, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for a writ of certiorari to quash the reassessment proceedings against the petitioner for the asst. yrs. 1996-97, 1997-98 and 1999-2000 initiated vide notices dt. 3rd March, 2003 for asst. yrs. 1996-97 and 1997-98 (Annexs. 7 and 8, respectively) and notices dt. 27th June, 2002 and 5th Feb., 2003 for asst. yr. 1999-2000 (Annexs. 6 and 9).2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.3. The facts of the case are that Girdhar Gopal Gulati, Sat Pal Gulati and Jagdish Kumar Gulati are real brothers who derive income from property. The petitioner Girdhar Gopal Gulati has l/3rd share in the property at 199, Transport Nagar, Kanpur-24, Chak Road, Allahabad, and United Tower at 2/1/3, Minhazpur Garhi, Allahabad.In asst. yr. 1994-95 the petitioner along with his two brothers started construction of the building at Minhazpur Garhi, Allahabad, and the construction was completed in asst. yr. 1998-99. The total required investment made in the construction ...
Shesh Mani Shukla Vs. the District Inspector of Schools and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)AWC2407; (2004)3UPLBEC2560
Dilip Gupta, J.1. The controversy to be determined in the present petition is whether theCommittee of Management of an Intermediate College can ignore the recommendation of the District Inspector of Schools for making an ad hocappointment in the CT grade under the provisions of the Uttar PradeshSecondary Services Commission (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 1981(hereinafter referred to as the 'First Removal of Difficulties Order, 1981) bydirect recruitment on a resultant substantive vacancy and proceed to make anappointment of a person of its own choice completely defying the provisionsof the aforesaid Order.2. Briefly stated, the facts are that on 15.10.1985 a substantive vacancy arose inthe CT grade in Satya Prakash Vivekanand Inter College, Musahari, districtDeoria (hereinafter referred to as the 'College') since Sri Bansh GopalMishra left the Institution. The Committee of Management intimated thevacancy to the District Inspector of Schools but when the District Inspectorof Schools d...
Committee of Management, Jagat Taran Girls Degree College Vs. State of ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-2004
Reported in: AIR2004All267; (2004)3UPLBEC2437
M. Katju, J. 1. Heard Shri R.P. Tripathi learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Bijendra Singh learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the respondents.2. Since there is no factual controversy in this case, we are disposing off this case without calling for any counter affidavit.3. The petitioner is the Committee of Management, Jagat Taran Girls Degree College, Allahabad, which is a reputed Institution in Allahabad, imparting education to the girls in Allahabad.4. The petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 8-4-2004 passed by the District Election Officer/District Magistrate, Allahabad copy of which is Annexure 1 to the writ petition. That order states that for the purpose of election for Lok Sabha which is scheduled to be held on 5-5-2004, the college premises is required from 3rd to 5th May for lodging 1000 employees who will be doing election work.5. Section 160 of Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), states:160. Requisiti...
Manoj Kumar Tiwari Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)AWC2325
ORDERM. Katju and R.S. Tripathi, JJ.1. Heard Pramod Bharadwaj, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel.2. By means of this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a mandamus directing the respondent not to issue any fresh wine shop licence in pursuance of the notification dated 2.4.2004.3. Admittedly the petitioner has a country liquor shop and it appear that he does not want another country liquor shop to be opened in the locality.4. In our opinion, the petitioner has no locus standi in the matter. In Mithilesh Garg v. Union of India and Ors., AIR 1993 SC 443, the Supreme Court observed following its own decision in M/s. Rice and Flour Mills v. State of U. P. and Ors., AIR 1971 SC 46 and Jaspal and Ors. v. State and Ors., AIR 1976 SC 578, that a rival businessman has no locus standi to file a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution even if grant of licence to his rival is illegal. This view has been followed by this Court in Hari Prasad Gupta v....
Jagdish Kumar Gulati Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-2004
Reported in: (2004)191CTR(All)25; [2004]269ITR71(All)
M. Katju, J.1. This appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, has been filed against the judgment of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, dated October 18, 2002, relating to the assessment year 1998-99.2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.3. The appellant owns properties at 199, Transport Nagar, Kanpur, and 24, Chak Road, Allahabad, jointly with his two brothers, Sri Girdhar Gopal Gulati and Sri Sat Pal Gulati. The appellant has a 1/3rd share in the said properties.4. In the year 1993, the appellant and his brothers started construction of a building in a plot situate at 2/1/3, Minhajpur, Allahabad. The said construction was completed in the year 1997. In January, 1998, this building was let out to a society known as Shivram Das Memorial Society on rent for running an educational institution. On the basis of the rent received by the assessee, the income from the property was disclosed by the three brothers.5. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment unde...
Ram Nath Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)AWC2392; [2004(102)FLR263]; (2004)3UPLBEC2508
Sunil Ambwani, J.1.The petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 24.4.2002 passed by Labour Commissioner, U.P. in exercise of powers under Fundamental Rule 56 (c) of Financial Hand Book Vol. II, Part II to IV, compulsorily retiring petitioner from service serving as Welfare Superintendent in the office of Labour Commissioner, U. P. in public interest with effect from the date of the issuance of the order with entitlement to three months pay and allowance.2. I have heard Sri Dinesh Pathak for petitioner and learned standing counsel,3. The facts giving rise to this petition are that the petitioner was appointed on 8.7.1972 as clerk in the Labour Department. He was promoted to the post of Welfare Superintendent vide order dated 2.10.1986 and thereafter as Labour Enforcement Officer on 19.12.1989 in pursuance of orders passed in Writ Petition No. 5744 of 1986 in the State of U.P. v. O.N. Awasthi, determining seniority the petitioner was reverted to the post of Welfare Superintende...
Rajesh Kumar Vs. Committee of Management, Rashtriya Higher Secondary S ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)AWC2396; (2004)3UPLBEC2502
Dilip Gupta, J.1. This petition has been filed by a teacher claiming to have been appointed in the L.T. grade on ad hoc basis under Section 18 of the Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education Services Commission and Selection Boards Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') for a direction not to interfere in the performance of his duties and for payment of salary including the arrears of salary w.e.f. 28.2.1996.2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel appearing for respondent No. 3.3. Briefly the facts as stated in the petition are that on 30.6.1994 a substantive vacancy in the L.T. grade in the Rashtriya Higher Secondary School, Jinehra, Mirahchi district Etah (hereinafter referred as the 'College') fell vacant on account of the retirement of Sri Ramesh Dutta Sharma. The Committee of Management notified the vacancy to the Commission through the District Inspector of Schools on 9.8.1995 but since the post actually remained vacant for more than tw...
Smt. Sarwari Begum Vs. Viith Addition District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)AWC2405
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. The petitioner is the landlady and owner of the premises in question which consist of a room, a varandah and an open space. Respondent No. 3 is the tenant in the premises in question. The petitioner moved an application under Section 21 (1) (a) of the U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 for the release of the accommodation in question on the ground that the premises in question was required for the purpose of residence for herself and for her sons who are members of her family. The petitioner alleged that she was presently residing in the house of her brother as a licensee in a single room on the ground floor and that her brother was residing on the first floor, which also consisted of one room. The family of the petitioner's brother comprises of his wife and three sons. The family of the petitioner's brother was growing and he was having difficulty to adjust his family in one room. On the other hand the petitioner alleged that she also has 3 sons, two of them are married and...
Uma Shanker Vs. Prescribed Authority/Munsif and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)AWC2390
ORDERTarun Agarwala, J.1. The petitioner is the landlord of the shop in question and had filed an application under Section 21 of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 for the release of the shop. It was alleged that the original tenant had died in the year 1979 and after his death, the sons of the original tenant being respondent Nos. 2, 4, 5 and 6 were neither living in Chandausi nor were carrying on any business from the shop in question and that the said shop had been sublet to another person. It was also alleged that the shop in question was required for the petitioner's son, who was unemployed. Notices were sent to the respondents in accordance with the provisions of Rule 28 of the Rules of the Court. The process server submitted a report that the respondent No. 3, mother of the respondent Nos. 2, 4, 5 and 6 refused to accept the notice and accordingly the notice was served upon the respondents by affixation. Thereafter, the prescribed authority further directed the petitioner to publish the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »