Allahabad Court February 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.
Dinesh Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-07-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)AWC2647; 2005(3)ESC1720
Arun Tandon, J.1. Heard Sri H.N. Shukla, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Sri Kalp Nath Bind, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 4 and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3.2. Respondent No. 4, Manik Chand was appointed as Fair Price Shop Agent in respect of Gaon Sabha Chhechhna, Tehsil Machhalishahr, District Jaunpur. Certain complaints were received with regard to the distribution of essential commodities by the said Fair Price Shop Agent. On the receipt of complaints, an enquiry into the allegations made against the respondent No. 4, as Fair Price Shop Agent was conducted. On the basis of the report of the Tehsildar as also on the basis of certain other materials as have been noticed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Machhalishahr, he passed an order dated 8th September, 1998 cancelling the appointment of the respondent No. 4 as Fair Price Shop Agent. In the order reference has also been made to the resolution of the Gaon Sabha dated 5th July, 1998.3. A day ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. De Marche Enrico
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-07-2005
Reported in: (2005)197CTR(All)394; [2005]278ITR89(All)
1. The Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following question of law under Section 256(1) of IT Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the Act, for opinion to this Court:'Whether the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the assessee is entitled to the benefit claimed by him under Section 10(6)(viia) of the IT Act, 1961, in respect of the salary, including perquisites received by him ?'The present reference relates to the asst. yr. 1979-80.2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows :The respondent-assessee is a foreign national and an employee of M/s Technimont of Italy. M/s J.K. Synthetics Ltd. had entered into an agreement for some technical collaboration with the Italian firm in pursuance of which the said firm had deputed the respondent-assessee for doing some technical work in India with M/s J.K. Synthetics Ltd. The assessment was completed under Section 143(3) of the Act on 25th March, 1985 on a total income of Rs. 1,35,440. The respond...
Cit Vs. Om Prakash
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-07-2005
Reported in: [2006]153TAXMAN11(All)
R.K. Agrawal, J. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi, 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 to this Court:*Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the Tribunal was, in law, justified in holding that no penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was leviable in the present case ?'2. The reference relates to the assessment years 1975-76, 1976-77 in respect of proceedings arising out of penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act.3. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows:In respect of the assessment year 1975-76, the assessing authority had made an addition of Rs. 2,500 as income from iron business and of Rs. 7,500 as income from pawning business. The addition of Rs. 2,500 on account of income from iron business was ultimately deleted by the Tribunal while the addition on account of pawning business...
Cit Vs. Ganeshi Lal Ram Krishna
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-07-2005
Reported in: [2006]154TAXMAN238(All)
ORDERR.K. Agrawal, J. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following questions of law under section 256(l) 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 were justified in cancelling the order under section 263 of the Income Tax Act when the order of the Income Tax Officer was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue on account of his failure to initiate penalty proceedings under section 271B which attracted in the assessee's case due to contravention of the provisions of section 44AB2. The Reference relates to the assessment year 1987-88.3. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows:The respondent is a firm engaged in the execution of the civil contract work. It was required to obtain audit report in terms of section 44AB of the Act by a particular date. The respondent did obtain the report an...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. J.K. Cotton Spg. Mills Co. Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-07-2005
Reported in: (2006)202CTR(All)150
ORDERR.K. Agrawal, J.1. The Tribunal, Allahabad has referred the following three questions of law under Section 256(1) of the IT Act, 196l (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 confirming the order of the learned CIT(A) that where WDV of the assets was not ascertainable, estimated value, i.e., 50 per cent of the sale price be substituted as WDV and the 50 per cent be treated as profits under Section 41(2) of the IT Act, 1961 ?2. Whether, in law and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the order of the learned CIT(A) allowing the assessee's claim of bonus in excess of 8.33 per cent amounting to Rs. 18,92,611 claimed on the basis of an agreement which took place on 16th June, 1980 which relates to the period relevant to the asst. yr. 1981-82, when the same was not quantified in the year under consideration and the provision for the...
Ramesh Chandra Gupta Alias Ramesh Gupta Vs. Laxmi Narain
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-04-2005
Reported in: AIR2005All298; 2005(1)ARC570; 2005(1)AWC907
Anjani Kumar, J.1. By means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner-tenant challenges the order dated 5th April, 2003, passed by the appellate authority under the provisions of the U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972, whereby the appeal filed by the respondent-landlord against the order dated 21st December, 1998, passed by the prescribed authority was allowed by the appellate authority and the accommodation in question was released in favour of the respondent-landlord.2. The facts leading to the filing of present writ petition are that the landlord filed an application under Section 21(1) (a) of the U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', for the release of the accommodation, which is a shop, in favour of the landlord, who wants to settle his son in the business. It is thus stated by the landlord that the accommodation was bona fide required. On the question of comparative hardship, it is stated by the landlord in the applica...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Arunesh Bhatnagar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-04-2005
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC904
O.N. Khandelwal, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by Insurance Company under Section 110D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 read with Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and award dated 15.11.1991, passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/XIIIth Additional District Judge, Moradabad in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 73 of 1987, Smt. Arunesh Bhatnagar v. Kamal Kishore Tandon.2. The claim petition was filed by respondents (widow, daughters and sons) of deceased S.C. Bhatnagar, an employee in B.H.E.L. with respect to an accident which took place on 1.6.1986 at 8.30 a.m. in Moradabad. The deceased, aged about 47 years was standing in the compound of Roadways Bus-stand and waiting for a bus. The bus owned by respondent No. 6 and driven by respondent No. 7 hit S.C. Bhatnagar and crushed him on account of which he died on the spot. After completing the formalities, the claim petition under Section 110A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, was filed in December, 19...
Maifoos Ahmad Vs. Rent Control and Eviction Officer/A.C.M. Iiird and o ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-04-2005
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC897
Anjani Kumar, J.1. Both these writ petitions since arise out of the same set of facts between the same parties, therefore they are dealt with by this common judgment.2. By means of Writ Petition No. 50284 of 2002 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner-tenant challenges the order passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer/A.C.M. IIIrd, Kanpur Nagar, dated 28th October, 2002, copy whereof is annexed as Annexure- VII to the writ petition, whereby the respondent No. 1 have declared the occupation of the petitioner-tenant in house No. 111A/19B, G. T. Road, Najirabad. Kanpur Nagar, to be or an unauthorised occupant and declared the vacancy in the aforesaid accommodation. The aforesaid vacancy was declared when the case was registered by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer on the information of one Surendra Singh and on the basis of the aforesaid information of Surendra Singh, the Rent Control Inspector inspected the accommodation in question on 27th September, ...
Amit Kumar, Son of Amar Nath Katiyar Vs. State of U.P. Through Secreta ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-04-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ESC1081; (2005)2UPLBEC1729
Sabhajeet Yadav, J.1. The brief fact of the case is that the Chief Secretary, Government of Uttar Pradesh issued a notice which was published in news paper in the first week of August, 2001 notifying that the selections to be conducted in all the district of the State for filling up Group 'C' posts in different department. The aforesaid notice was followed by an advertisement dated 29.8.2001 issued by the District Magistrate, Moradabad specifying the vacant posts to be filled up on the basis of such selection in the district Moradabad. The copy of advertisement has been filed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition. The advertisement so notified for district Moradabad indicates that number of posts of Junior clerk/Typist/Junior Assistant and Stenographers are to be filled up in different offices of the State Government. The petitioner being fully eligible and qualified to the post has applied in pursuance of the aforesaid advertisement. The petitioner belongs to the General category and had...
Jagdish Prasad Sharma, Son of Sri Ram Chandra Sharma Vs. U.P.S.R.T.C., ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-04-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)AWC2971
Poonam Srivastava, J. 1. Heard Sri M.K. Gupta, Advocate, counsel for the petitioner.2. The order dated 27.7.2004 passed by Additional District Judge, Aligarh in Misc. Civil Appeal No. 114 of 2003, confirming the order of Civil Judge (Junior Division) Koil, Aligarh dated 24.9.2003 in Original Suit No. 89 of 2003 is challenged in this writ petition. The dispute revolves around an alleged agreement between the petitioner and the contesting respondents U.P.S.R.T.C. through its Managing Director, regarding existence of an arbitration agreement. Facts of the present case is that petitioner has been running an S.T.D Booth at Roadways Bus Stand near Gandhi Park, Aligarh at the rent of Rs. 1,000/- per month. The petitioner claimed to have paid the rent up till 22.2.2002 against the Receipt No. 000946, Book No. 385 dated 29.1.2002. The contesting respondents extended a threat to remove the petitioner from his S.T.D. booth by force. Hence, the petitioner instituted an Original Suit No. 89 of 2002...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- Next ›
- Last »