Allahabad Court July 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.
ishwar Alias Bhuri Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)AWC3339
ORDERAnjani Kumar, J.1. The petitioner aggrieved by an order passed by the licensing authority dated 27th March, 2003, whereby the licensing authority has cancelled the fire arm licence of the petitioner, approached the appellate authority under the provisions of the Arms Act, who dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner and affirmed the order passed by the licensing authority vide his order dated 23rd October, 2003. Aggrieved by the aforesaid orders, the petitioner approached this Court by means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. From the narration of the fact in the writ petition, it reveals that the petitioner, a licensee of fire arm under the provision of Arms Act, was served with a show cause notice thereby asking the petitioner to show cause within fifteen days from the date of receipt of notice as to why his fire arm licence should not be cancelled because the petitioner has a criminal history and he is involved in Case Crime No. 282 o...
Shobha Ram Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)AWC3362
ORDERM. Katju, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 9.7.1998 (Annexure-5 to the writ petition) and for a mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession of the petitioner over the land in question.2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.3. The petitioner claims to be a Patta Holder in village-Panari, Gram Sabha-Raghunath Pura, tahsil and district Lalitpur. It is alleged that after completing all the formalities the Gram Panchayat passed a resolution for granting a patta to the petitioner vide resolution dated 27.10.1996 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition).4. Thereafter a notice Under Section 198 (4) of the U. P. Z. A. and L. R. Act was issued (vide Annexure-4 to the writ petition). It is alleged that thereafter an inquiry was held behind the back of the petitioner and the patta was cancelled by the impugned order dated 9.7.1998 (vide Annexure- 5 to the petition). It is alleged that the said order was passed in viol...
Garg Associates Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Trade Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-2004
Reported in: [2005]139STC368(All)
Prakash Krishna, J.1. These two revisions are directed against the common order of the Tribunal dated August 20, 1994 passed by the Trade Tax Tribunal, Aligarh, in two connected Second Appeals Nos. 577 of 1992 (1982-83) U.P. and 578 of 1993 (1982-83) Central. The assessment years involved in these two revisions are assessment years 1982-83 (U.P.) and (1982-83) Central. The applicant is a private limited company, engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling of P.T.F.E. (Teflon) insulated wires and cables, etc.2. The factual scenario which is almost undisputed and leading to the revisions is as follows :The applicant was required to deposit a sum of Rs. 36,000 as security for the release of certain goods which were intercepted at check-post vide notice dated September 30, 1982. The required amount was deposited on October 1, 1982 and the goods were got released. Placing reliance upon a circular letter/notification No. Check Post 376-(81-82)-1402 Sales Tax, dated December 10, 1981...
Ramesh Chandra Tiwari Vs. Addl. Commissioner (Admn.) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)AWC1625
M. Quddusi, J.1. These are two writ petitions challenging the judgment and orders passed in two civil appeals filed under Section 13 of the U. P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Ceiling Act'). 2. Both the appeals have been decided by a common Judgment and order by Additional Commissioner (Judicial), Lucknow Division, Lucknow. Therefore, both the writ petitions are being disposed of by this common order.3. Brief facts of the case are that Late Laxmi Shanker was father of the Ramesh Chandra petitioner of Writ Petition No. 47 of 2004 and grandfather of Rajeev Kumar Tewari and Sanjeey Kumar Tewari the petitioners of W. P. No. 48 of 2004. Notice under Section 10 (2) of the Ceiling Act was issued against Late Laxmi Shanker who filed objections and the case in that respect was registered as 119-State v. Laxmi Shanker, which was decided by the Prescribed Authority holding that Laxmi Shanker tenure holder has no surplus land under the Ceiling Act. It ...
R.K. Dube, S/O Sri Brindaban Dube Vs. the Labour Court and Poysha Indu ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-2004
Reported in: [2005(106)FLR78]
Anjani Kumar, J.1. The workman concerned-petitioner, aggrieved by the award of Labour Court, U.P., Meerut in Adjudication Case No. 23 of 1982 dated 2nd August 1976, approached this Court by means of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. The following dispute was referred for adjudication to the Labour Court:-'KYA SEWAYOJAKON DWARA PRAJTISTHAN KE PHOTQ-LITHO OPERATOR SHRI R.K. DUBE. PUTRA SHRI BRINDABAN DUBE, KO DINANK 7/10/75 SE KARYA SE PRITHAK KAR DIVA JANA UCHIT TATHA/ATHWA VAIDHANIK HAI YADI NAHIN. TO WAH KYA LABHIKSHATIPURTI PANE KA ADHIKARI HAI TATHA KIS ANYA VIVRAN SAHIT ?'3. On receipt of reference the Labour Court issued notices to the workman concerned and the employers who exchanged their pleadings and adduced their respective evidence. After hearing the workman concerned as well as the employers their respective case was under:-4. The case set up by the workman was that the workman, R.K. Dube had started his service with the employers on 2nd S...
R.R. Engineering Co. Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-2004
Reported in: (2008)11VST353(All)
Prakash Krishna, J.1. The short question that arises for determination in this revision is whether a contract of supply M.S. fabricated juice heaters (heating surface 2500 Sq. ft.) is in the nature of supply of material or a works contract.2. The assessment year involved is 1984-85. The applicant is a sole proprietorship concern. It according to the applicant, undertook job-work of fabrication and erection of sugar mill machinery and parts. It disclosed the gross turnover at Rs. 5,78,000 but did not accept any tax liability as it claimed that the said turnover be treated as works contract. The Sales Tax Officer treated the said turnover as contract of sale and imposed the sum of Rs. 34,780 as tax on the turnover of Rs. 5,83,000. This assessment order has been confirmed by the appellate authority with the small modification that the amount of tax was enhanced by Rs. 100. The appellate order has been confirmed by the Tribunal in the second appeal, by the order under revision.3. The appli...
Packard Times Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-2004
Reported in: (2008)11VST513(All)
Prakash Krishna, J.1. This revision is directed against the order of the Tribunal dated April 30, 1992. The controversy relates to the assessment year 1981-82 (Central). The applicant is a dealer and manufacturer of watches. The department for the assessment year 1981-82 has rejected the certain claims of the dealer with respect to the stock transfer.2. The applicant before the assessing authority claimed that it is manufacturing watches for the last 4-5 years. All the sales are effected through the Head Office situate at Delhi. The watches are manufactured within the State of U.P. The stock of manufactured watches was transferred by way of stock transfer to the Head Office. The assessing authority vide its order dated September 29,1983 has treated the turnover of Rs. 12,14,650 as Central Sales. It rejected the claim of the applicant that it was a stock transfer to its Delhi Head Office. The assessment order was confirmed by the appellate authority by the order dated February 23,1990. ...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. B.S. Metal Printing and Pressing Works
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-2004
Reported in: (2008)11VST503(All)
Prakash Krishna, J.1. Present revision under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 is against the order dated February 29,1992 passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Agra, in second appeal No. 12 of 1992 (1981-82) U.P.2. The point involved in the present revision is with regard to the rate of tax on the turnover of tin trays. The dispute relates to the assessment year 1981-82. The assessing authority has accepted the account books of the dealer-opposite party. It has been noticed in the assessment order dated March 29,1986 that dealer has accepted the tax liability on the turnover of tin trays at six per cent but has realised the same from the purchasers at the rate of eight per cent. On first appeal the said order was confirmed by the first appellate authority. The first appellate authority rejected the contention of the dealer-opposite party that tin tray is a classified item and covered within the entry '...iron made kitchen utensils and appliances...' of Notification No. 8223, date...
Tosha International Limited Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise and Cus ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-08-2004
Reported in: 2004(96)ECC172; 2004(175)ELT102(All)
M. Katju, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. In this case on 30.8.2001 learned counsel for the respondents was granted two weeks time to file counter affidavit. Thereafter on 3.1.03 three weeks further time was allowed to file counter affidavit. Till today no counter affidavit has been filed and we are not inclined to grant any further time to the respondents. Hence, we are treating the allegations in the petition to be correct and are disposing it of finally.3. The petitioner is a Company registered under the Indian Companies Act having its registered office in Greater Noida. The petitioner is engaged in the manufacture and sale of black and white picture tubes for television.4. It is alleged in paragraph 2 of the petition that the petitioner used to export these picture tubes to Dhaka in Bangladesh. The petitioner used to remove its excisable goods in Form A.R. 4 and has paid central excise duty on it for the period June 1995 to June 1997. Thereafter the petitioner claimed...
Om Prakash Vs. Prakash Chand and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-08-2004
Reported in: AIR2004All391
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. This writ petition has been filed before this Court to abuse the process of the Court without knowing anything about the law. A suit has been filed against the petitioner for eviction from the premises which was decreed by the Civil Court vide Judgment and decree dated 9-7-1996. Being aggrieved, petitioner preferred the first appeal which was dismissed in default vide order dated 11-10-2000. Application for restoration was filed which was rejected by the First Appellate Court vide order dated 23-10-2002. Against that, the petitioner approached this Court by filing a' Writ Petition No. 3089 of 2003 and this Court vide order dated 16-12-2003 allowed the writ petition, and restored the first appeal. Petitioner filed a copy of the said judgment/order before the First Appellate Court and in order to hear the appeal, notices were issued to the respondents therein. First time the matter was taken up before the First Appellate Court on 3-2-2004 and an application for amendme...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »