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.
Ashwani Dhingra Vs. Chief Cit
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-31-2004
Reported in: [2005]142TAXMAN241(All)
ORDERR.K. Agrawal, J.By means of the present writ petition filed under article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner seeks a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 22-1-2004 passed by the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Meerut respondent No. 1 filed as Annexure 10 to the writ petition and other consequential reliefs.2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present petition are as followsThe petitioner claims himself to be a resident of the Punjab. He owned land in Fazilka District Firozpur in the State of Pun ab which have been acquired by the Government of Punjab under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The petitioner got compensation pursuant to the order passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court on 12-9-1990 and 19-5-1993. Even though he had received the compensation, the State Government did not pay interest thercon forcing the petitioner to approach the Punjab and Haryana High Court once again. The Punjab a...
Ashwani Dhingra Vs. Chief Cit and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-31-2004
Reported in: (2004)191CTR(All)399
R.K. Agrawal, J.By means of the present writ petition filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, Ashwani Dhingra, seeks a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the notices issued by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Noida, respondent No. 4, on 20-11-2003 under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the Act, for the assessment years 1989-90 to 1994-95, collectively filed as Annex. 8 to the writ petition and other consequential reliefs.2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are as follows :According to the petitioner, he was initially residing in the State of Punjab. His land, which was in Fazilka, district Ferozepur, was acquired by the Government of Punjab on 20-8-1973 under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The compensation was awarded to him on 12-9-1990 and 29-5-1993 under the orders passed by the Punjab & Haryana High Court. He was paid interest only on 21-8-2001 fro...
Cit Vs. Kanpur Textiles Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-31-2004
Reported in: [2005]143TAXMAN274(All)
ORDERR.K. Agrawal, J. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad has referred the following questions of law under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act) for opinion to this court:-'1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was in law justified in holding that the liability of gratuity amounting to Rs. 16,45,092 relating to past years accrued in the accounting year relevant to the assessment year 1972-73 and was, therefore, an allowable deduction for that assessment year?2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case when the system of accounting of the assessee was mercantile and when Dr. Sampurnanand Award of 1961 was extended by the U.P. Government year after year, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the liability, of Rs. 16,45,092 relating to the past years arose for the first time in the assessment year 1972-73?3. Whether the Tribunal having found that the assessee-company had ...
Cit Vs. Krashak Sahkari Ganna Samiti Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-31-2004
Reported in: [2005]143TAXMAN310(All)
R.K. Agrawal, J. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad has referred the following questions of law under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the AcC) for opinion to this court:'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessment made by the Income Tax Officer on the basis of the revised return was vitiated under law and the very order of assessment was liable to be quashed?'2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows:-The reference relates to the assessment year 1974-75. The respondent assessee is a co-operative society established with a specific objects mentioned in paragraph 4 of the Pratiman Upvidhiyan. The main object of the society consisted of (i) sugarcane cultivation on specific lines; (ii) obtaining profitable prices for sugarcane growers; (iii) expeditious supply of sugarcane to Sugar Mills, and (iv) expeditious payments...
Union of India (Uoi) and anr. Vs. Mohd. Nayyar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)AWC3643
S.N. Srivastava, J.1. Both the petitions have been tagged on by virtue of consideration of common issues involved in both the petitions. Reliefs sought in Writ Petition No. 47587 of 2003 may be quoted below :'(a) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned orders dated 18.7.1999 passed by courts below and after allowing the application under Order IX Rule 13 of the C.P.C. the court below may be directed to decide the suit afresh after affording opportunity of hearing to the writ petition.(b) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents not to give effect to the impugned orders dated 18.7.2003 and 24.4.1999 passed by courts below and the respondents be directed not to interfere with the possession of the writ petitioners over their land bearing No. 2197 situated at Pukhta Vakye within Nagar Palika limits, Muzaffarnagar.'2. Impugned here in both the petitions are the orders dated 18.7.2003...
Committee of Management, Madarsa Qamrul Uloom Islamiya Samiti Vs. Saha ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)AWC3660
Arun Tandon, J.1. Heard Sri W. H. Khan on behalf of the petitioner and standing counsel on behalf of respondent No. 1. It is not necessary to issue notice to respondent No. 2 in view of the order proposed to be passed today in the present writ petition.2. The petitioner-Committee of Management Madarsa Qamrul Uloom Islamiya Samiti, Kakrala, Budaun, through its Manger Sri Rafi Ahmad Khan, has filed this writ petition, amongst others, for the relief that the objection filed by the petitioner on 31.7.2004 and the representation dated 9.8.2004 may be considered and decided by the Assistant Registrar in accordance with law.3. According to the petitioner the elections of the Committee of Management of the society registered in the name of Madarsa Qamrul Uloom Islamiya, Kakrala, Budaun, were held on 10.9.2001 and in pursuance of the elections so held a list of office bearers was duly registered by the Assistant Registrar under Section 4 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (hereinafter refe...
Committee of Management, Janta Madhyamik Vidyalaya and anr. Vs. State ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-2004
Reported in: (2004)3UPLBEC3005
Arun Tandon, J.1. Heard Sri Yogesh Kumar Saxena, Advocate on behalf of the petitioner and Standing Counsel on behalf of respondents Nos. 1, 2 and 3. It is not necessan' to issue notice to respondent No. 4 in view of the order proposed to be passed in the present writ petition.2. It is not in dispute that a Division Bench of this Court in Special Appeal No. 272 of 2003, passed an interim order on 22.4.2003, whereby it was directed that 'the arrangement for the Management of the Educational Institution in question which was being continued with the concurrence of the concerned Basic Shiksha Adhikari shall continue and further proceedings consequent upon the impugned order shall remain stayed'. The said special appeal is still pending and interim order continues to be operative as stated by the petitioners.3. Thereafter on 24.4.2003,' the Basic Shiksha Adhikari passed an order recognizing the Committee of Management headed by Sri Vivek Kumar Mishra as the lawful Committee of Management of...
Lakhan Singh Vs. Zila Sainik Kalyan Evam Punarvas Karyalaya and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC96
ORDERR.B. Misra, J.1. In this petition prayer has been made to quash the order dated 25.5.1999 (Annexure 5 to the writ petition) passed by Executive Engineer Barh Sagar Nahar Nirman Khand 7, Mirzapur, whereby the petitioner's demand of scale of Rs. 950-1,475 has been rejected on the ground that this scale is of class III category and since the petitioner was born on 8.8.1947 and petitioner's age is about 51 years 8 months and for getting regular employment in the Government service, the maximum age is 32 years' therefore, the petitioner cannot be adjusted in any regular post.2. According to the petitioner he was initially appointed in Indian Army- to the post of Nayak and after completing 22 years of service was retired on 30.4.1988 and again he was deployed by the Chief Engineer, Flood Division, Allahabad, on 8.12.1992 as a security guard by virtue of being retired army personnel. Since the petitioner was deployed on consolidated salary by appointment order dated 17.12.1992 and keepin...
Munna Lal Mishra and ors. Vs. Nagar Nigam and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC945
M. Katju, A.C.J. and R.S. Tripathi, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties.2. An application has been filed to recall the order dated 16.4.2003, by which the petition was dismissed on the basis of judgment passed in Writ Petition No. 16503 of 2001 decided on 16.4.2003. In para 6 of the affidavit filed in support of the restoration application, it is stated that the petitioner's counsel and clerk could not mark the case on 16.4.2003 in the cause list. Hence the learned counsel for the petitioner could not appear and argue the petition. In para 6, it is stated that the petitioner's case is different from the case in Writ Petition No. 16503 of 2001.3. Since learned counsel urged that he was not heard we have heard learned counsel for the applicants/ petitioners on merits today and we are of the opinion that there is no merit in this petition. The petitioners have prayed for quashing the order dated 28.7.2001 passed by Mukhya Nagar Adhikari, Nagar Nigam, Kanpur (Annexure-9 to the writ petition...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Narendra Kumar Gupta and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-2004
Reported in: (2006)203CTR(All)267; [2005]274ITR553(All)
1. August 27, 2004.The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, New 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 the opinion to this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that though the right to exploit a particular film for a particular period is property, it is not such an asset whose value can be added by making adjustments in the balance-sheet while acting under the provisions of Section 7(2)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act ?'2. The present reference relates to the assessment year 1975-76. By a consolidated order, the Tribunal has referred the aforementioned question of law in respect of three assessees, namely, Narendra Kumar Gupta, Prem Kumar Gupta and Smt. Krishna Kumari, who were the partners, in the firm, M/s. Film Angels, hereinafter referred to as the 'firm'.3. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as foll...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »