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.
Rajesh Kumar Singh Vs. Smt. Rekha Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-05-2004
Reported in: AIR2005All16; 2005(3)AWC2259
Yatindra Singh, J.1. This is an unfortunate case and we are deciding it with heavy heart.THE FACTS2. The appellant is the husband of the contesting respondent. The appellant and his two brothers are in Defence Services. However they are not in the officer category. His father was in defence services and has now retired. They have rural background. The appellant has a married sister who resides in the city of the same district. The father of the contesting respondent resides in the adjoining district. The contesting respondent also has rural background and has studied up to High School. Their residences are within the distance of 20 Kms. from each other.3. The parties were married on 11th May 1999 and lived together for some days after their marriage. The appellant joined his duties but could not take the contesting respondent along with him. The parties again lived together for some time in the month of October November, 1999 when the appellant had come to his home district. The time w...
Gajodhar Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-05-2004
Reported in: [2005(1)JCR459(All)]
Ghashyam Dass, J.1. By means of the instant appeal the appellant Gajodhar has challenged the conviction order recorded on 13.5.1992 by the then learned Sessions Judge, Barabanki in Sessions Trial No. 413 of 1988, State v. Gajodhar, whereby the accused-appellant Gajodhar has been found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 19 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 which shall in brevity hereinafter referred to as the Act and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay fine of Rs. 1.00 Lac only.2. According to the prosecution, the accused-appellant is licence holder for cultivation of poppy and to produce opium in village Itauhua Police Station Ram Sanehighat District Barabanki. He is alleged to have extracted 3.400 Kgs. Poppy from his field in the year 1986-1987 w.e.f. 19.3.1987 to 26.3.1987 but actually produced before the department 300 grams and thus he is alleged to have embezzled 3.100 Kgs. poppy. The trial of the accu...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Oriental TIn Printing Works
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-05-2004
Reported in: [2005]273ITR240(All)
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi, has referred the following question of law under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for the opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the assessee was entitled to registration under the Income-tax Act, 1961?'2. The present reference relates to the assessment year 1968-69. Assessment was originally completed on the assessee-firm granting it continuation of registration in terms of Section 184(7) of the Act. (The relevant accounting year had ended on November 1, 1967). It was noticed that the assessee had filed an application in Form No. 11 on March 19, 1968, and a copy of partnership deed dated June 8, 1968, and June 23, 1968. From the facts on record, it was gathered that Ashok Kumar, a minor who had been admitted to the benefits of partnership in the firm, had attained majority on Apr...
Harish Bami Vs. Dr. Anurag Chaudhary and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-05-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC553
Anjani Kumar, J.1. This revision was heard by me on 5th August, 2004 and after hearing learned counsel for the parties the revision was dismissed for the reasons to be recorded later on. Now here are the reasons :2. This revision under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Causes Court Act is directed against the judgment and decree of the trial court dated 17th April, 1999, whereby the suit filed by the plaintiff-landlords was decreed for eviction and arrears of rent.3. According to plaint allegations, the plaintiff-landlords let out the premises in question to the applicant-tenant on a monthly rent of Rs. 600 plus house and water tax. On 30th May, 1981, a rent deed was executed between the plaintiffs and defendant, according to which the premises in question was let out with effect from 1st January, 1981, at the rate of Rs. 600 per month plus house and water tax. The tenant-defendant has paid rent up to 30th July, 1988 and the water tax was paid only upto 1981-84. Thereafter, neither re...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Rakesh Cold Storage
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-05-2004
Reported in: [2005]274ITR102(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 the opinion to this court :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in upholding the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's order directing the Income-tax Officer to work out depreciation for the assessment year 1978-79 by adopting the W.D.V. as per the assessment order for the assessment year 1977-78 dated June 3, 1978 ?'2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows :The present matter relates to the assessment year 1978-79. The respondent-assessee is a registered firm and ran a cold storage, called M/s. Rakesh Cold Storage. It maintained its account on mercantile basis. It purchased a generator for Rs. 2,18,035 on November 17, 1974, falling in the assessment year 1976-77. The Income-tax Officer had allowed depreciation of...
Major Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-05-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ1001
Mukteshwar Prasad, J. 1. Accused Major Singh has filed this appeal against the judgment and order dated 31-7-1995 passed by Sri S. B. Balveer, the then Additional Sessions Judge, Jhansi whereby he convicted the accused under Section 20 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and to pay a sum of Rs. one lakh as fine. In default he was ordered to undergo further ten years rigorous imprisonment.2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case giving rise to this appeal are as under:--P.W. 1 S.I. Sobaran Singh was posted at Police Station Gursarain in district Jhansi in the month of September 1993. On 15-9-1993, S.I. Sobaran Singh accompanied by three constables Ram Pal Singh, Shiv Raj Singh and Jitendra Awasthi left the Police Station for patrolling in Gursarain Town vide entry in G. D. at serial No. 34 at 9.30 p.m. The police force was proceeding towards mohalla Narain...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Brahm Swarup Tandon and Co.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-05-2004
Reported in: [2006]283ITR320(All)
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi, has referred the following question of law for opinion to this Court under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' :Whether the learned Tribunal was justified in law in entertaining the appeal against refusal of registration when no separate order under Section 185 was passed by the Income-tax Officer ?2. The reference relates to the assessment year 1976-77. The Income-tax Officer while making the assessment under Section 143(3) took the status of the respondent-assessee as association of persons instead of a registered firm claimed by the respondent-assessee. The assessee preferred one single appeal against the assessment order and challenged the findings regarding status also.3. The appeal was entertained by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) who held that the firm should be treated as an association of persons entitled to registration. The appeal filed by the Commissioner before the Tribunal ...
Cit Vs. Brahm Swarup Tandon and Co.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-05-2004
Reported in: [2005]142TAXMAN569(All)
ORDERThe Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi has referred the following question of law for opinion to this court under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the Act :'Whether the learned Tribunal was justified in law in entertaining the appeal against refusal of registration when no separate order under section 185 was passed by the Income Tax Officer?'2. The reference relates to the assessment year 1976-77. The Income Tax Officer while making the assessment under section 143(3) took the status of the respondent assessee of association of persons. instead of a registered firm claimed by the respondent-assessee. The assessee preferred one single appeal against the assessment order and challenged the findings regarding status also.3. The appeal was entertained by the CIT(A) who held that the firm should be treated as an association of persons. entitled to the registration. The appeal filed by the Commissioner before the Tribunal failed.4. We have heard ...
Cit Vs. Oriental TIn Printing Works
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-05-2004
Reported in: [2005]144TAXMAN641(All)
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi, has referred the following question of law under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for the opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the assessee was entitled to registration under the Income Tax Act, 1961?'The present reference relates to the assessment year 1968-69. Assessment was originally completed on the assessee-firm granting it continuation of registration in terms of section 184(7) of the Act. (The relevant accounting year had ended on 1-11-1967). It was noticed that the assessee had filed an application in Form No. 11 on 19-3-1968, and a copy of partnership deed dated 8-6-1968, and 23-6-1968. From the facts on record, it was gathered that Ashok Kumar, a minor who had been admitted to the benefits of partnership in the firm, had attained majority on 8-4-1967. The date fell in th...
Cit Meerut Vs. Jagdish Medical Hall
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-05-2004
Reported in: [2006]154TAXMAN130(All)
ORDERThe Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi has referred the following identical question of law for the assessment years 1978-79 and 197980 under section 256(1) of the Income Tax 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 legally correct in holding that the interest payments amounting to Rs. 14,400 were not hit by section 40(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961?'2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present writ petition are as follows :The respondent-assessee firm derived income from purchase and sale of the medicine. The Income Tax Officer found that the respodnent-assessee had paid interest to the following association of persons1. M/s. Jagdish Chand Investors Corporation Rs. 7,2002. M/s. Hukumchand Investors Corporation Rs. 7,2003. The Income Tax Officer found that Sri Jagdish Chand and Sri Hukum Chand were partners in the firm having 45 per cent and 55 per cent ...
- ‹ Prev
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- Next ›
- Last »