Allahabad Court March 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.
Madan Mohan Bajpayee Vs. Harnam Das Gupta and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)AWC3704
Anjani Kumar, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the plaintiff-petitioner challenging the judgment and decree passed by the trial court dated 18.5.2002 in Suit No. 72 of 1986 and the order passed by the revisional court dated 25.11.2002 in Revision No. 17 of 2002. The petitioner further prays for quashing of the order dated 30.1.2003 passed by the executing court for issuing Parvana Dhakal fixing 13.3.2003.2. The facts leading to filing of the present writ petition are as under :That the petitioner who is the tenant of the accommodation in dispute namely house No. 57, Mohalla-Katghar, district Bareilly on monthly rent of Rs. 40 since 1969 as alleged in the writ petition. That with the coming into force of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972, the rent was enhanced by 25 per cent and petitioner started paying rent at the rate of Rs. 50 per month including water tax as agreed rent. The petitioner further asserts that with effect from 1.1.1980 the...
Cit Vs. Print Pack Industries
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-2005
Reported in: [2006]154TAXMAN500(All)
ORDERThe Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi has referred the following two 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 ITAT was justified in confirming the view of the Commissioner (Appeals) and directing the assessing officer to verify whether amount introduced in the firm was made out of income shown by the parties under Amnesty Scheme when the deposits in the firm were in cash and there was no evidence with the partners to have earned independently2. Whether the ITAT was justified in upholding the decision of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) that the amount disclosed by the partners could explain the deposits in the case of the firm when the same are not acceptable in view of the ratio laid down in the case of Smt. Shakti Rani Devi v. CIT ( 1973) 115 ITR 712.'The present Reference relates to the assessment years 1986-87.3. The respondent-assessee has been assessed for income...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Raj Pal Singh Ram Avtar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-2005
Reported in: (2006)202CTR(All)261; [2007]288ITR498(All)
1. The Tribunal, New Delhi has referred the following two questions 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, the Tribunal was legally correct to cancel the additions of Rs. 1,35,000 and Rs. 14,645 ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is legally correct to hold that the assessee has successfully discharged its initial onus to prove that the paper found and seized from its premises does not belong to it and the contents thereof do not relate to the assessee in any way ?2. The present reference relates to the asst. yr. 1983-84.Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows :The respondent-assessee has been assessed to income-tax in the status of a registered firm. It is engaged in the money-lending business on pawn broking and pledges. It had declared the income at Rs. 25,843. Its premis...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Brigadier Parmanand
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-2005
Reported in: [2006]287ITR142(All); [2006]152TAXMAN123(All)
ORDER1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, New 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 opinion to this Court:1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was in law justified in upholding the decision of the Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) who allowed the assessee's claim for carry forward and set off unabsorbed depreciation of the earlier year2. The present Reference relates to the assessment year 1986-87.3. The respondent-assessee is an individual. He had filed return of income showing loss of Rs. 2,75,850. While completing the assessment, the Assessing Officer observed that the loss for the earlier year could not be allowed to be carried forward and set off as per provisions of section 80 of the Act and he, accordingly, completed the assessment on a total income of Rs. 21,740. Feeling aggrieved the respondent preferred an appeal before the Deputy...
Cit Vs. Ratan Lal Agrawal (Huf)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-2005
Reported in: [2005]147TAXMAN574(All)
ORDERBy the CourtThe 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 to this Court.'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was correct in law in upholding the decision of first appellate authority in restricting the penalty under section 271(1)(a) to 50 per cent of the assessed tax instead of 2 per cent of the tax for every month of default committed, irrespective of the fact that the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Maya Rani Punj is squarely applicable in the assessee's case?'2. The reference relates to the assessment year 1972-73 in a proceeding arising out of the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(a) of the Act.3. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows:'The respondent-assessee was required to file his return of income on or before 31-7-1972 but he filed the ...
Cit Vs. Eggro Paper Moulds Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-2005
Reported in: [2006]152TAXMAN214(All)
ORDER1. 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') at the instance of the revenue for opinion to this Court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the amount of subsidy received is not deductible from the actual cost of the assets whereas in view of the provision as laid down in section 43(1), the amount of subsidy should be deductible for arriving at the actual cost of assets ?'2. At the instance of the assessee, the Tribunal has also referred the following questions of law for opinion of this Court:'1. Whether on the true and correct interpretation of the provisions of section 36(l)(iii) read with section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal was legally correct in upholding the disallowance of interest amounting to Rs. 59,250 attributable to the debit balance appearing in the account ...
Kamata Prasad S/O Shri Basti Ram Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-24-2005
Reported in: II(2005)DMC5
Ravindra Singh, J.1. Heard Sri Mahendra Nath Pandey learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A.2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner filed a complaint against the respondents No. 2 to 6 in case No. 1485 of 2004, in which the cognizance was taken and the petitioner has been summoned to face the trial for the offence punishable under Sections 498A and 306 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act by the learned C.J.M. Mainpuri on 13.5.2004. Against the order dated 13.5.2004 the respondents No. 2 to 6 filed Criminal Revision No. 37 of 2004. The revision was time barred, so the application under Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act was also filed by the respondents No. 2 to 6.3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was not made party as contested respondent in the revision as well as in the application under Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act filed by the respondents No. 2 to 6, but the l...
Moti Lal Nehru Farmers Training Institute (Cordet) Through Its Princip ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-24-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ESC1440; [2005(105)FLR386]
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. This petition has been filed by Moti Lal Nehru Farmers Training Institute (Cordet) Phoolpur, Allahabad through its Principal challenging the validity and correctness of the impugned consolidated award dated 12.4.2002 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, U.P. Allahabad deciding thirteen references in Adudication Case Nos. 59/98 to 71/98. By the impugned award the Labour Court granted relief of reinstatement to the workmen with 25% back wages on the ground that termination of their service was illegal and in violation of the provisions of Section 6-N of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.2. The petitioner is a co-operative Rural Development Trust (CORDET) which is said to be a public charitable trust. Its main object is to educate and train rural farmers about scientific farming in agriculture and animal husbandry without profit motive. It is a training institute.3. The dispute pertains to the training farm at Phoolpur Allahabad where respondent nos. 3 t...
Subhash Chand Goyal Son of Shri Jawahar Lal Vs. U.P.E.C., Through Its ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-24-2005
Reported in: AIR2005All246; 2005(2)AWC2017; III(2005)BC398; 2005(3)ESC1847
R.P. Misra and A.P. Sahi, JJ.1. The petitioner, who had made an offer for purchase of the assets of respondent No. 4 M/s Seema Ice and Cold Storage (P) Ltd. that were put to sale under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 by the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 U.P. Financial Corporation, questions the entire decision making process of the finalization of the sale, made by the financial Corporation in favour of respondent No. 3, on the ground that the decision of the respondent financial Corporation is unreasonable, unfair and is non-transparent and is therefore liable to be struck down as being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.2. The matter was heard and an interim order was passed on 24.3.1995 calling upon the financial Corporation to file counter-affidavit and it was directed that in the meanwhile the auction shall not be finalized without considering the objection of the petitioner. Pursuant to the said interim order, a decision was taken by the respo...
The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Gyan Chand and Sons
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-24-2005
Reported in: (2006)202CTR(All)605
Prakash Krishna, J.1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi has referred the following two questions of law under Section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( here in alter referred to as the Act) for opinion to this Court:-'(1) Whether Sub- section (9) of Section 171 of the Income Tax Act applied to the facts of, the present case.?(2) Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the aforesaid section will not apply because assessments were made after 31-12-1978.'2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present case are as follows:-The reference relates to the assessment years 1981-82 and 1982- 83. The respondent assessee, a joint Hindu family consisting of Karta ,Sri Gian Chand, his wife and four sons. The H.U.F. was partner in a firm M/s Ladulal Kewalchand, Shamli having half share in the profits and the capital of the firm.3. A partial oral partition was claimed on 20-10-1979, which was reduced in writing on 21 10-1979 between the members as regards the share inco...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »