Allahabad Court August 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.
G.T. Cold Storage and Ice Factory Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-16-2004
Reported in: (2004)191CTR(All)264; [2005]275ITR340(All)
R.K. Agrawal, J.1. By two separate references, one for the asst. yr. 1976-77 which has been registered as IT Ref. No. 31 of 1982 and the other for the asst. yrs. 1977-78 and 1978-79 which has been registered as IT Ref, No. 215 of 1983, the Tribunal has referred the following two common questions of law under Section 256(1) of the IT Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for opinion to this Court :'1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the salary allowed to Yadav Kishan Goel was adable under Section 40(b) of the IT Act, 1961 ?''2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is not entitled for the claim under Section 80HH of the IT Act, 1961 ?'Following two more questions of law have been referred for the asst. yrs. 1977-78 and 1978-79 :'3. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the claim under Section 80J was rightly disallowed to the assessee '4. Wheth...
Pramod Kumar and anr. Vs. Punjab National Bank and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-16-2004
Reported in: AIR2005All20; 2004(4)AWC3297; I(2005)BC548; [2006]130CompCas187(All); (2006)5CompLJ120(All)
ORDERB.S. Chauhan, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for restraining the respondents from making the recovery from the petitioners, who stood guarantor, and also for restraining them from holding the auction as published in the local newspapers.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that petitioners' brother Gautam Singh purchased a plot in 1998, and he had taken the loan of Rs. 5,90,000 from the respondent No. 1 for constructing the house. The entire amount could not be paid and the principal debtor died of heart attack on 19.5.2004. The notice Under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, was issued to the debtor as well as to the petitioners on 16.10.2003, and in pursuance of the same, the house is being auctioned. Hence this petition.3. The petitioners do not disclose anywhere as to whether the said Gautam Singh has left his widow or any legal heir behind him, as no one has ...
Army School Vs. Smt. Shilpi Paul
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-16-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ESC342
M. Katju, A.C.J.1. This special appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 6.8.2003 in Writ Petition No. 12776 of 1995.2. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have perused the record.3. Before dealing with the facts of the particular case of the respondent in this appeal (the writ petitioner) it is necessary to mention certain background facts. There exists a military establishment called Gorkha Recruitment Depot in district Gorakhpur. Besides the normal functions of carrying out Recruitment for the Indian Army, the aforesaid establishment is also engaged in various welfare measures and activities for servicemen and ex-servicemen. These welfare activities are undertaken without any financial support from the Government of India or State Government. They are financed entirely by raising private funds, primarily from private contributions by the officers and men of various military establishments. The administration of these welfare...
Shri Niwas Agarwal Vs. Up-zila Magistrate and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-16-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)AWC1901
Anjani Kumar, J.1. Heard Sri Anil Kumar Aditya, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned standing counsel representing the State as well as Sri J. P. N. Singh, learned counsel for the contesting respondents.2. The petitioner aggrieved by an order dated 14th July, 2004, passed by Up-Zila Magistrate/Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Hathras, copy whereof is annexed as Annexure-19 to the writ petition, by which a vacancy has been declared under the provision of Section 12 of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 (here-in-after referred to as the 'Act') approached this Court by means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.3. Pursuant to the information received from the report of the Rent Control and Eviction Inspector, the Rent Control Officer issued notice to the petitioner, who it is alleged is in occupation of the accommodation in question without any allotment order. The petitioner filed an objection raising firstly that he is in occupation...
Chandan Lal Vs. Vth A.D.J. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-16-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)AWC1899
Anjani Kumar, J.1. This writ petition filed by the tenant against the order passed by the revisional court dated 5.2.1980 under Section 25 of Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887, whereby the revisional court has decreed the suit filed by the respondent-landlord for ejectment of the tenant.2. The facts leading to filing of the writ petition are as under :'That the plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for eviction of the tenant on the ground of structural alteration as contemplated under Section 20 (2)(c) of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 (in short 'the Act'). The trial court by the judgment dated 25.1.1978, dismissed the suit. Aggrieved thereby the landlord preferred a revision before the revisional court. The revisional court allowed the revision and set aside the order passed by the trial court and decreed the suit throughout filed by the plaintiff-landlord.'3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the suit has been decreed on the ground that the provisions of Section 20 (2)(c)...
Ram Vilas Mani Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-16-2004
Reported in: [2006]280ITR494(All)
1. We have heard Shri Anil Kumar Pandey, learned Counsel for the appellant, and Shri A. N. Mahajan, learned standing counsel for the Revenue.2. We are satisfied that even though the income-tax appeal does not raise any substantial question of law which may be said to have arisen out of the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, dated July 28, 2003, we are of the considered opinion that by the impugned order, miscarriage of justice has resulted for the following reasons :3. Adjournment application moved by the appellant had been rejected on the ground that there are more than one counsel. The view taken may be correct, but taking into consideration that the Tribunal had earlier directed the departmental representative to produce the file of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) for decision of the case before it and the departmental representative, however, did not produce the file of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and adverse view against the appellant has ...
Ram Vilas Mani Vs. Cit
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-16-2004
Reported in: [2005]142TAXMAN204(All)
We have heard Shri Anil Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri A.N. Mahajan, learned standing counsel for the revenue.2. We are satisfied that even though the Income Tax Appeal does not raise any substantial question of law which may be said to have arisen out of the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad dated 28-7-2003, but we are of the considered opinion that by the impugned order, miscarriage of justice has resulted for the following reasonsAdjournment application moved by the appellant had been rejected on the ground that there are more than one counsels. The view taken may be correct, but taking into consideration that the Tribunal had earlier directed the Departmental Representative to produce the file of the CIT(A) for decision of the case before it and the Departmental Representative, however, did not produce the file of the CIT(A) and adverse view against the appellant has been taken on the ground that the appeal was filed by different person...
Commissioner of Wealth Tax Vs. Parmatma Saran (Huf)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-13-2004
Reported in: (2004)191CTR(All)282; [2004]270ITR389(All)
1. The Tribunal, Delhi, has referred the following question of law under Section 27(1) of the WT 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 Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the amended Section 20A of the WT Act inserted by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1980, would not be applicable to the asst. yr. 1979-80 ?'2. Briefly stated facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows :The respondent-assessee is an HUF. According to it, it had effected partial partition of the HUF property on 25th Jan., 1979 effective from 1st Jan., 1979. At the time of filing of the return for the asst. yr. 1979-80, the respondent-assessee excluded the properties partitioned in the said partial partition dt. 25th Jan., 1979. The WTO, however, ignored the claim of the assessee on the ground that according to the provisions of Section 171(9) of the IT Act, 1961 the immovable property belonging to the HUF...
Narpat Singh and ors. Vs. Registrar, High Court of Judicature at Allah ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-13-2004
Reported in: (2004)3UPLBEC2723
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. The District Judge, Mathura prepared a waiting list contemplated under Rule- 12 of the U.P. Subordiante Civil Courts Inferior Establishment Rules, 1955 for appointment of candidates on the post of Process- Servers and Farrash in Class IV establishment. This waiting list prepared on 2-6-1986 consisted of 35 candidates against 5 notified vacancies. Pursuant to the aforesaid list, candidates at serial Nos. 1 to 5 were appointed immediately thereafter in the 5 notified vacancies. Thereafter, as and when the vacancies arose, candidates from serial Nos. 6 to 12 were appointed from the same list between the period 1986 to 1988. On 4-3-1989, the District Judge wrote a letter to the Registrar of the High Court, Allahabad seeking permission to cancel the list of the remaining candidates and for preparation of a new list. The Deputy Registrar of the High Court vide its letter dated 15-4-1989 communicated the decision of the High Court to the District Judge, Mathura intimating...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Saket Krishi Udyog
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-13-2004
Reported in: [2004]271ITR34(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 of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the amount of Rs. 1,00,298 had not accrued to the assessee and could not be taxed as its income for the assessment year 1975-76 ?'2. Briefly stated facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows:The assessee is a firm carrying on business of purchase and sale of fertilisers at Kanpur. During the year under consideration, the distribution of fertilisers was controlled by the State Government and the assessee could charge the sale price as fixed by the U. P. Government from time to time. With effect G from June 14, 1974, the Government of Uttar Pradesh issued an Ordinance through which the fertiliser dealers were required to sell their stocks as on May 31, ...
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- Next ›
- Last »