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.
Cit Vs. Parmatma Saran (Huf)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-13-2004
Reported in: [2005]142TAXMAN194(All)
ORDERThe Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi 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 Tribunal was legally, correctin holding that the amended section 20A of the Wealth Tax Act, inserted by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1980 would not be applicable to the assessment year 1979-80'?2. Briefly stated facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows :The respondent assessee is a HUF. According to it, it had effect partial partition of the HUF property on 25-1-1979 effective from 11-1979. At the time of filing of the return for the assessment year 1979-80, the respondent assessee excluded the properties partitioned in the said partial partition dated 25-1-1979. The Wealth-tax Officer, however, ignored the claim of the assessee on the ground that according to the provisions of section 171(9) of the Income Tax A...
Cgt Vs. Chand Kishore Jaiswal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-13-2004
Reported in: [2005]145TAXMAN543(All)
1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following question of law under the Gift Tax Act, 1958, (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 legally correct in holding that the reversionary value of the property No. 65/135, Moti Mahal, Kanpur, gifted by the assessee be excluded from the value of the property?'2. For the assessment year 1969-70 under the Gift Tax Act the only question placed before the Tribunal related to the valuation of the respondent's 1/3rd share in property No. 65/135, Moti Mahal, Kanpur, gifted by him to Smt. Hema Devi, Smt. Krishna Devi and Smt. Surendra Kumari. The respondent had valued it at Rs. 28,264. The Gift Tax Officer referred the question on its valuation to the Valuation Officer, who valued the same at Rs. 53,312. He had adjudicated the valuation of structure and reversionary value of the land. In appeal the Appellate Assistant Com...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Surendra Kumar Gupta
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-12-2004
Reported in: (2004)191CTR(All)538; [2004]270ITR325(All)
R.K. Agarwal, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following two questions of law under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for the opinion of this court:'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the finding of the Tribunal that the transaction was not a 'transfer' is legally correct ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in deleting the income from capital gains added by the Income-tax Officer ?'2. The present reference relates to the assessment year 1976-77 for which the relevant previous year ended on March 31, 1976.3. The late Shri Prabhu Dayal, the father of the assessee, and one Shri Radhey Shyam Agrawal, had jointly purchased a cinema building from M/s. Bombay Theatres Ltd., on February 20, 1958, for a sum of Rs. 1,22,400. Subsequently, they purchased machines and furniture, etc., also jointly and started running the cinema in partne...
J.K. Traders Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-12-2004
Reported in: [2004]271ITR69(All)
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following two questions of law Under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for the opinion of this court:'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances, the Tribunal was justified in rejecting the assessee's claim that Rs. 23,158 be allowed while computing the assessees' total income as the said expenses had been incurred by it in running the company ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee-company had earned capital gain of Rs. 23,072 on the acquisition of the shares of National Insurance Company Ltd., of the face value of Rs. 5,82,742 by the General Insurance Corporation of India Ltd., for Rs. 6,05,815 on the nationalisation of the general insurance business during the accounting period corresponding to the assessment year 1975-76 ?'2. The applicant company during the assessment year 1975-76 d...
Committee of Management, P.C. Baghla (Post Graduate) College and anr. ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-12-2004
Reported in: (2005)1UPLBEC262
M. Katju, A.C.J and Umeshwar Pandey, J.1. Heard Sri Shashi Nandan and Ms. Pooja Agrawal, learned Counsel for the appellants and Sri Ashok Khare and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.2. The facts of the case are that an advertisement was made in the newspaper for one post of Chowkidar and one post of peon belonging to Scheduled Caste/Backward Class. The writ petitioner applied and was selected, but his appointment was not approved by the Regional Higher Education Officer, Agra on the ground that the First Statute of Agra University provides for inviting applications from Employment Exchange and only if the candidates are not available, the advertisement is required to be made in newspapers.3. The disapproval order of Regional Higher Education Officer, Agra dated 27.9.2002 is Annexure-1 to the Stay Application along with this appeal. A perusal of the order shows that the disapproval has been done because the names of candidates were not called from the District Employment Exch...
Om Prakash Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-12-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)AWC1179
ORDERM. Katju, A.C.J. and Umeshwar Pandey, J.1. Heard Sri A. M. Zaidi, learned counsel for the appellant and learned standing counsel. 2. This special appeal has been filed against the impugned order of learned single Judge dated 10.5.2004. By that judgment, the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition on the ground of alternative remedy before the U. P. Public Services Tribunal. 3. It may be mentioned that the U. P. Public Services Tribunal Act, 1976, was amended in the year 2000. According to the amendment there must be some order against which the petitioner can go to the Tribunal. If there is no order, a party cannot go to the Tribunal. This view was also taken by the Supreme Court in Public Service Tribunal Bar Association v. State of U. P. and Anr., 2003 (2) AWC 968 (SC) : (2003) 1 UPLBEC 780. 4. Following the said decision, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 10.5.2004 is set aside. We remand the case to the learned single Judge for passing a fresh decisi...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Jangi Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-11-2004
Reported in: (2004)191CTR(All)139; [2005]275ITR61(All)
R.K. Agrawal, J.The Tribunal had referred the following questions of law under Section 27(1) of the WT Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act, for opinion to this Court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the cases and on a correct and true interpretation of Section 15 of the Voluntary Disclosure of Income and Wealth Act, 1976, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that immunity was available against penalty with reference to the wealth disclosed in whomsoever's hands it came up for consideration ?'2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the cases, the Tribunal was justified in law in cancelling the penalties imposed by the WTO under Section 18(1)(a) of the WT Act, 1957, for the asst. yrs. 1964-65, 1965-66 and 1966-67 in question ?'2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows :The assessee is Jangi Lal HUF. For the assessment years in question returns of wealth became due on the 30th of June each year. However,...
Bir Bahadur Singh Vs. Shyam Sunder Shukla and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-11-2004
Reported in: (2004)3UPLBEC2348
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. The plaintiff filed a suit alleging that in 1974 there existed a vacancy on the post of lecturer in History and Hindi in B.R. Inter College, Harriya, district Basti,. The selection was held on 12.10.1974 in which the plaintiff was selected as a Lecturer in History and the defendant No. 1 was selected as a lecturer in Hindi. The Committee of Management issued an appointment letter on 18.10.1974. Whereas the plaintiff joined as a lecturer in History on 18.10.1974 itself, the defendant No. 1 joined as a lecturer in Hindi on 10.11.1974. It was further alleged that the Committee of Management sent the recommendations of the Selection Committee to the District Inspector of Schools on 21.12.1974 for approval. The District Inspector of Schools vide letter dated 17.1.1975 granted approval to the appointment of the plaintiff and the defendant from the date of joining of their service. The plaintiff alleged that in order to give the selection grade, the Committee of Managemen...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Dharam Prakash
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-11-2004
Reported in: (2004)191CTR(All)526
1. The Tribunal has referred the following question of law under Section 256(1) of the IT 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 upholding the alleged partial partition of the l/3rd share of the assessee-HUF in the capital of the firm M/s Singhasini Engineering Works, 3/2, Vishnupuri, Kanpur, on 1st April, 1976 ?'2. During the course of assessment proceedings for the asst. yr. 1977-78, the assessee, Dharam Prakash HUF, claimed that a partial partition took place on 1st April, 1976 in respect of its l/3rd share in the capital of the firm M/s Singhasini Engineering Works. The HUF consisted of the Karta, Shri Dharam Prakash, his wife, Smt. Kamini Srivastava, his three daughters and his minor son Rohitesh. The partial partition was said to have taken place between Dharam Prakash smaller HUF consisting of himself on the one hand and his three daughters and his wife a...
Shakir Khan Vs. Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, through ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-11-2004
Reported in: (2004)3UPLBEC2825
R.B. Misra, J.1. Heard Sri H. S. Jain, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Sri K. R. Sirohi, learned Standing Counsel for the High Court, Allahabad, and Sri Neeraj Upadhyaya, learned Standing Counsel for the State of UP.2. The petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 12.5.2004 (Annexure-I to the writ petition) of the Chief Justice of High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (hereinafter in short called as the 'High Court') (on the Administrative Side) issued by the Registrar General of High Court, whereby in reference to the alleged charges of owning chauffeur driven 'Maruti Esteem Car' wearing similar dress as other drivers of the High Court and for using clips and red-blue light on the top of vehicle, and for inscribing 'HIGH COURT1 on the front and rear part of the car and for unauthorisedly parking the same in the area prescribed for Hon'ble Judges only. The petitioner in view of inquiry report was held guilty of misconduct and while punishing and stopping one annual increme...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- Next ›
- Last »