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. Th. Mahatam Rao Jagdish Narain
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-03-2004
Reported in: [2005]144TAXMAN905(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 authorities below were not justified in refusing to register the assessee-firm ?'2. Briefly stated facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows:The assessee, opposite party, applied for registration in the assessment year 1977-78. Relying upon the order passed for the assessment year 1975-76, the Income Tax Officer refused the registration. The ground taken for refusing the registration was that Shri Pramod Kumar who was inducted as partner in his individual capacity did not have any independent source of income and his explanation that the deposits were out of presents and gifts received from relations on various occasions was not supported by any e...
Cit Vs. Subhash Chand
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-03-2004
Reported in: [2005]144TAXMAN389(All)
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following three 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 Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the investments made with the firm, M/s. Jahanganj Cold Storage, by the minors, Ajit Kumar and Sujit Kumar, were not on capital account but were mere deposits ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in law, in holding that the interest derived by the minors, Ajit Kumar and Jahanganj Cold Storage was not as a result of their admission to the benefits of partnership and that it could not be included in the assessees income under section 64(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ?3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in not upholdin...
Union of India (Uoi) Through General Manager, Northern Railway Vs. San ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-03-2004
Reported in: II(2005)ACC126
U.K. Dhaon, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment and award dated 23rd October, 2002 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Luclwow, thereby awarding a sum of Rs, 4,00,000/- by way of compensation to the respondent.2. The case of the respondent in brief had been that he was travelling by Amritsar-Howrah Express on 17th September, 2000 with a second class journey ticket. He started his journey from Ambala to Patna on 16th September, 2000 by purchasing a second class journey ticket. On 17th September, 2000, when the train was passing near Tilhar Railway Station in District Shahjahanpur, the respondent was going to toilet in the railway compartment and fell down from the compartment due to sudden and violent jerk of the train, as a result of which he sustained severe and grievous injuries in both of his legs, which were ultimately amputated. According to him, he lost his journey ticket during the course of the incident in question.3. The appellant-Railways filed written statement an...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Plastic Products Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-02-2004
Reported in: (2004)191CTR(All)23
1. The Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following questions of law under Section 256(2) of Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to 'the Act'), for opinion to this Court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the plastic manufactured by the assessee was petro-chemical within the meaning of item No. 18 of the Sixth Schedule and, hence, entitled to the relief under Section 80I r/w Section 80B(7) of the IT Act 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally justified in holding that the assessee was entitled to the allowance of development rebate at the higher rate of 35 per cent under Section 33(1)(b)(B)(i)(a) of the IT Act ?'2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows :The respondent-assesses is a company engaged in manufacture of plastic goods and certain machinery parts for the use by sister-concerns. The matter relates to the...
Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Hindustan Traders
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-02-2004
Reported in: (2004)191CTR(All)405; [2005]272ITR413(All)
1. The Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following question of law under Section 256(2) of the IT 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, was the Tribunal justified in setting aside the order of the AAC and remanding the case after giving the requisite notice and instead annulling the order of the ITO ?' 2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows :The respondent-assessee is a firm and was assessed as a registered firm upto the asst. yr. 1964-65. For the asst. yr. 1965-66 a declaration in Form No. 12, as required by Section 184(7) of the Act, was filed. In the course of the assessment proceedings, the assessee, however, did not comply with the notice under Section 143(2) of the Act, therefore, the ITO while making assessment under Section 144 of the Act, held that, since the assessee failed to produce the account books, it is not known whether th...
Commissioner of Wealth Tax Vs. Phool Chand
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-02-2004
Reported in: (2004)191CTR(All)528; [2005]272ITR239(All)
1. The Tribunal, New Delhi, has referred the following question of law under Section 27(2) 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 correct in law in cancelling the order under Section 25(2) of the WT Act, 1957, passed by the CWT, Agra, and in restoring the order under Section 16(3) of the WT Act, 1957, passed by the WTO?'2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows :The assessee opposite party is an individual, who owned a cinema building, the construction of which was completed on 31st March, 1970. It started running the cinema w.e.f. 20th April, 1970. While framing the assessment under the Act, the WTO referred the valuation of the cinema building to a valuation officer. According to the valuer the value of the property as on 31st March, 1970, and 31st March, 1971, was taken at Rs. 3,63,330 in each of the two asst. yrs. 1970-71 ...
Bharat Pumps and Compressors Limited Vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh an ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-02-2004
Reported in: [2004(102)FLR869]; (2004)3UPLBEC2900
Anjani Kumar, J.1. This writ petition filed by the employer under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenges the award dated 21.7.1981 passed by the Industrial Tribunal (1), U.P. at Allahabad in Adjudication Case No. 67 of 1980.2. The following dispute was referred for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal.'KYA SEVAYOJKON DWARA APNE SHRAMIK RAMCHANDRA SAROJ (PUTRA SRI SITARAM) FITTER KO DINANK 7.8.1979 SE SEVA SAMAPT KIYA JANA UCHIT TATHA/ATHVA VAIDHANIK HAI. YADI NAHIN, TO SAMBHANDHIT SHRAMIK KYA LABH/ANUTOSH (RELIEF) PANE KA ADHIKARI HAI TATHA KIS ANYA VIVRAN SAHIT ?'3. On the receipt of the reference, the Tribunal issued notices to both the parties. Both the parties submitted their written statements. The parties have also adduced evidence. Thereafter considering the entire pleadings and material on record the Tribunal arrived at the conclusion that the termination of the services of the workman concerned with effect from 7,8.1978 was improper and illegal and unjust and T...
Laxmi Kant Girdhar Lal and ors. Vs. Prescribed Authority/Munsif and or ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-02-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC57
Y.R. Tripathi, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners. None responds for the respondents even on revision of the list.2. This writ petition has been filed for issue of writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 15.7.1986 contained in Annexure-XIII of the writ petition passed by the Prescribed Authority, Kheri.3. Brief facts, leading to the filing of this writ petition, are that one Smt. Anardevi, original respondent No. 2 filed an application under Section 21 of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 for release of shop situated in Mohaila Galiamandi, City Lakhimpur, District Kheri on the ground of bonafide need. The writ petitioners putting in their appearance in the aforesaid case, made an application for stay of the proceeding. They pleaded that earlier Lala Murlidhar, the admitted owner of the shop in question, had filed a Civil Suit No. 113 of 1975 in the Court of VIIth Additional Munsif, Kheri and during the pendency of that suit, he died and three parties claiming to be his succes...