Allahabad Court January 2005 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.
Sangam Kumar Shukla Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-06-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ESC898; [2005(104)FLR1190]; (2005)2UPLBEC1230
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. The petitioner's father died in service on 6.4.1998 while working on the post of an Auditor in the office of the Controller of Defence Accounts (Central Command). It was alleged that a sum of Rs. 4 lacs was spent on treatment when his father was ill and that his father had taken various loans which had to be cleared. Since the family was facing acute financial hardship, the petitioner's mother moved an application dated 21.4.1998 praying that her son, namely, the petitioner be appointed on compassionate ground. Subsequently, an application in the prescribed form was made by the petitioner in which he stated that he was unemployed and that there was an outstanding liability of Rs. 1,70,000.00 which had to be cleared on account of the loans taken by his father. The petitioner's application was rejected by an Order dated 22.2.2000 against which the petitioner has filed the present writ petition praying for the quashing of the Order dated 22.2.2000 and for a mandamus c...
U.P. State Sugar Corporation Ltd. Vs. the Presiding Officer, Labour Co ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-06-2005
Reported in: [2005(104)FLR839]; (2005)2UPLBEC1809
V.C. Misra, J.Shri Vijai Bahadur Singh Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Vijai Sinha Advocate learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms. Sunita Agarwal learned counsel for the respondent No. 3-workman and learned standing counsel on behalf of respondents 1 & 2 are present.1. The facts of the case in brief are that the respondent No. 3-workman was appointed as Turner in M/s Laxmi Devi Sugar Mills Private Limited on 9.4.1981 and was working continuously as such. His services were illegally terminated on 30.6.1991. The petitioner raised an industrial dispute and a reference was made on 23.4.1985 to the Labour Court. Meanwhile, the U.P. State Sugar Corporation-petitioner acquired the Laxmi Devi Sugar Mills Private Limited, Deoria under The U.P. Sugar Undertaking (Acquisition) Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the Acquisition Act). An impleadment/substitution application was filed on 14.8.1985 by the petitioner before the labour Court seeking impleadment of U.P. State Sugar Corporation havi...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Amrit Foods (P) Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-06-2005
Reported in: (2005)199CTR(All)28
1. The Tribunal, New Delhi, 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 :'Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the profit earned on the sale of margarine plant was profit from an adventure in the nature of trade ?'2. The present reference relates to the asst. yr. 1974-75.3. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows :The respondent-company was engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of Desi Ghee, etc. It had purchased a margarine plant from M/s Margarine & Refined Oil (P) Ltd., Bangalore, for a sum of Rs. 1,00,000 sometime in the financial year 1969-70. After the purchase, it was brought to the notice of the board of directors at the meeting held on 6th May, 1969, that the plant had been imported by the Bangalore party many years ago and buyers may not agree to offer a good price as it may be felt that the plant was bad and not us...
Cit (Central) Vs. Swadeshi Minning and Mfg. Co. Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-06-2005
Reported in: [2005]147TAXMAN614(All)
ORDERBy the Court The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad has referred following question of law under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for opinion to this Court :'Whether, in law and on facts of the case, the claim of Rs. 2,14,694 on account of interest on excess realisation of levy sugar price for the season 1973-74 and thereby dismissing the appeal filed by the department?'2. Briefly, stated the facts in the present case are as follows :The reference relates to the assessment year 1978-79. The respondent-assessee had claimed deduction of Rs. 2,14,694 on account of interest on excess realisation of levy sugar price for the season 1973-74. It may be mentioned here that under sections 3 and 4 of the Levy Sugar Equalisation Fund Act, 1976 the respondent-assessee was liable to pay interest at the specified rate. It is not in dispute that the aforesaid amount relates to the liability of interest which has accrued during the accounting ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Jitendra Kumar (Huf)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-06-2005
Reported in: (2006)205CTR(All)181
1. In IT Ref. No. 62 of 1988, which relates to the asst. yrs. 1981-82 and 1982-83, the Tribunal has referred the following two questions of law under Section 256(1) 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, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the share income from the firm is not assessable in the hands of the assessee-HUF?(2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal was justified in holding that the share income from the firm M/s Ratan Cold Storage is assessable substantively in the hands of the individual?2. In IT Ref. No. 209 of 1988, which relates to the asst. yr. 1983-84, the Tribunal has referred the following question of law under Section 256(1) of the Act for opinion to This court:Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the share income from the firm is not assessable...
Diwan Singh (Huf) Vs. Cit
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-06-2005
Reported in: (2005)199CTR(All)706; (2006)199CTR(All)706; [2005]147TAXMAN227(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 the Tribunal was legally correct in upholding the addition of Rs. 16,100 representing the value of jewellery found by the department at the time of search carried out on 8-10-1974, in the hands of the assessee-HUF, by relying on the provisions of section 132(4A) which were introduced later on?2. Whether the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that legal plea with regard to the question of onus which was not before the authorities below could not have been raised for the first time before it and the addition of Rs. 16,100 was liable to be confirmed?3. Whether there was any material before the Tribunal in upholding the addition of Rs. 16,100 on account of the value of ornaments, in the hands of the assessee-Hindu Undivided Family?'2. The present refer...
Shardadeen Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-05-2005
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC919
S.U. Khan, J.1. This writ petition is directed against orders dated 15.3.2004 and 10.12.2004. First order has been passed by Deputy Collector, Handia, district Allahabad in Case No. 107 under Section 33/39 Land Revenue Act Durvijay Singh v. Shardadeen.2. The said case was initiated on the application of village Pradhan to the effect that certain Gaon Sabha plots were wrongly entered in the name of petitioner in the revenue records and with the prayer that the said plots must be re-entered in the name of Gaon Sabha after expunging the name of petitioner. The Deputy Collector held that on perusal of records it was clear that without there being any order to that effect, Lekhpal illegally recorded the name of petitioner in khatauni. It is also mentioned therein that inquiry was got conducted by Lekhpal and Naib Tahsildar who reported that in C. H. Form No. 45 (prepared at the conclusion of consolidation operation) some plots in dispute were recorded as usar some as Navin Parti and plot No...
Chaturgun and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-05-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)AWC1256
S.U. Khan, J.1. Entry of the name of the petitioner in the revenue records has been set aside after. 30 years without hearing the petitioner. Additional Deputy Collector and Tehsildar, Deoria gave ex parte report dated 7.10.2004 to the effect that case No. 1489 decided on 6.8.1975 was farzy hence entries in C.H. Form 45 on the, basis of said order were recommended to be cancelled. A.D.M (Finance and Revenue), Deoria on 20.10.2004 in case number letter No. 1/RRK-2004 approved the ex parte report dated 7.10.2004 on the basis of legal opinion given by D.G.C. (Revenue), Deoria dated 14.10.2004, in the said order, which is challenged in this writ petition it is mentioned that there are authorities of High Court, Supreme Court and Board of Revenue to the effect that farzy entry can be cancelled without hearing anyone. In several cases such types of orders are being passed. Whether the entries are farzy or not can be decided only after hearing the person in whose name entry is continuing. The...
Shreenath Upadhyay Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-05-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ESC906; (2005)2UPLBEC1822
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the Order passed by the High Court of Allahabad on the administrative side, reverting the petitioner to next below rank, i.e., from the post of Civil Judge (Senior Division) to the post of Civil Judge (Junior Division), as a punishment after holding disciplinary proceedings, vide Order dated 12.11.1997.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that petitioner Joined as a Judicial Magistrate/Munsif in 1981, and while he was working as ACJM, Mathura, in 1994, he had entertained certain bail applications and granted the bail to the accused on 24.12.1994. The complainant in that case had sent a complaint to this Court, whereupon explanation of the petitioner as well as report of the District Judge, Mathura were called for, whereafter an Inquiry was initiated against the petitioner and duly approved charge-sheet dated 9.8.1996 was issued. The petitioner was charged with the allegations that he had acted with...
Anurag Board and Mills (P) Ltd. Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commission ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-05-2005
Reported in: [2005(105)FLR11]; (2005)IILLJ682All
Ashok Bhushan, J.1. Heard counsel for the petitioner.By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing order dated March 12, 2001 passed by respondent No. 2 and the order dated May 20, 2004 passed by respondent No. 2 rejecting the review application.2. An assessment order was passed on March 12, 2001 by the Assistant P.F Commissioner under Section 7A of the Act. Petitioner filed a review application dated May 14, 2004 to review the assessment order dated March 12, 2001 application. The said application has been rejected by order dated May 20, 2004 on the ground that application is barred by time.3. The learned counsel for the petitioner challenging the order contended that petitioner has filed the review application within two days from the date of communication of the order. Petitioner's counsel contended that copy of the assessment order was received by the petitioner on May 12, 2004 and he immediately filed the application on May 14, 2004. The learned counsel for the pet...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »