Allahabad Court April 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Prem Heavy Engineering Works P. Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-25-2005
Reported in: [2006]285ITR554(All)
1. 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:Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the hon'ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in confirming the deletion of Rs. 1,81,000 being disallowance of interest ?2. The present reference relates to the assessment year 1984-85.3. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows:4. The respondent-assessee has been assessed to income-tax in the status of a company. During the assessment year under consideration, it had advanced a sum of Rs. 37,47,583 to its sister concern, namely, M/s. Prem Engineering Works P. Ltd. on various dates. Whereas the services provided by the said sister concern for job work came to the extent of Rs. 21,58,191. The respondent-assessee had also an opening debit balance of Rs. 30,34,337 in the name of the...
Cit Vs. Raj Rice Mills
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-25-2005
Reported in: [2006]155TAXMAN5(All)
ORDERThe Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi has referred the following question of law under section 256(l) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, hereinafter refer-red 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 cancelling the penalty levied under section 271B of the Income Tax Act, 1961?'2. The present Reference relates to the assessment year 1989-90 in proceeding arising out of imposition of penalty under section 271B of the Act.3. Briefly, stated the facts giving rise to the present Reference are as follows:-The respondent-assessee is a registered firm. The assessment year involved is 1989-90. For the assessment year in question the respondent-assessee filed its return on 16-1-1990 declaring the total turn over of Rs. 68,76,563. The respondent-assessee was required to get its accounts audited under section 44AB of the Act before the specified date i.e., 3 1 - 101989 for the assessment year in question. T...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Western Company of North America and or ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-25-2005
Reported in: [2006]286ITR662(All)
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi has referred the following two questions of law under Section 256(1) 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 Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was legally correct to hold that the salary paid to the assessee for the laid off period outside India was not chargeable to the Indian Income-tax Act in terms of Section 9(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was legally correct to hold the order of the lower authorities as erroneous and unjustified 2. The present reference relates to the assessment year 1984-85.3. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows:4. The respondents-assessees are foreign residents and employees of M/s. Western Company of North America. The above non-resident company entered into contra...
Cit Vs. Manmohan Goel
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-25-2005
Reported in: [2005]149TAXMAN578(All)
ORDER1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi has referred to following question of law under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') for opinion of this Court:'Whether in the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ITAT was justified in holding that conditions laid down in Explanation 5(2) to section 271(1)(c) were fulfilled and no penalty was leviable under section 271(1)(c)?'2. The present reference relates to the assessment year 1989-90.Brief facts of the case are that a search was conducted at the residential as well as business premises of the assessee-respondent ('assessee') on 30-8-1988 and during the course of which cash, jewellery and other valuable articles and things were found and seized. The assessment was completed on an income of Rs. 17,68,000, which included unexplained cash of Rs. 1,30,000, unexplained jewellery of Rs. 15,67,981, unexplained investment in pawned articles of Rs. 60,900, unexplained investment to advance debtors amounting to...
Dhananjai Singh S/O Shiv Nath Singh Vs. Mukhya Suraksha Ayukt (Chief S ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-21-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)AWC2860; (2005)6CompLJ375(All); [2005(106)FLR635]
Shishir Kumar J.1. By means of the present writ petition, petitioner has approached this Court for issuing a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 3.1.2000 passed by the respondent No. 1 and for issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to give effect to the order; dated. 3.1.2000.2. The fact arising out of the present writ petition, is that the petitioner was selected as constable in Railway Protection Force, Northern Eastern Railway in the pay scale of Rs.825-1200 by the Recruitment Committee constituted under Rule 49.2 of the Railway Protection Rules 1957. A written test and interview was held in the month of July 1997 in pursuance of the advertisement of the respondent No. 2. The petitioner was selected and directed to be present himself on 20.9.1997. The petitioner was directed to fill up the required form before the appointment subject to verification by the police authorities, about the character of the petitioner under Rules 52.1 and ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shri Radha Kishan Goel
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-21-2005
Reported in: (2006)200CTR(All)300; [2005]278ITR454(All)
Rajes Kumar, J.1. Tribunal has referred the following question under Section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for opinion of this Court relating to the assessment year 1989-90:'Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, I.T.A.T. was justified in holding that conditions laid down in explanation 5 (2) to Section 271(1)(c) were fulfilled and no penalty was leviable Under Section 271(1)(c)?'2. The brief facts of the case are follows:3. A search was conducted at the residential as well as business premises of the assess Opposite party (hereinafter referred to as 'Assessee') on 30.08.1988, during the course of which cash, jewellery and other valuable articles and things were found and seized. It appears that during the course of the assessment proceedings to settle the dispute on agreed basis assessee moved an application before CIT on which direction was issued by Commissioner of Income-tax, Kanpur, in which it was remarked that penalty pro...
Har Prasad Vs. Kamla Devi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-21-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)AWC3628
Anjani Kumar, J.1. This writ petition filed by the petitioner-tenant under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenges the order passed by the trial court dated 6.12.2004 and the order passed by the revisional court dated 24.3.2005.2. The facts leading to filing of the present writ petition are as under :That the petitioner who is the tenant of the accommodation No. 17/41 situated at Padaw Jaiganj, district Aligarh was served with a notice to quit the shop in question on the ground that the petitioner is in arrears of rent and hence not paid the same inspite of the notice being served to quit, therefore, the tenancy of the petitioner stood terminated and the suit is filed. Before the trial court the landlord plaintiff applicant specifically pleaded that the provisions of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 (in short the Act') are not applicable to the accommodation in question. The petitioner contested the suit by filing the written statement and disputed the claim of the landlord that th...
Om Prakash Singh Son of Shri Sharda Prasad Singh Vs. Union of India (U ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-20-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ESC1869
Sabhajeet Yadav, J.1. Brief facts leading to the case are that the petitioner was recruited as Constable on 22.3.1983 in Central Reserve Police Force. While he was undergoing Counter Insergency Anti Terrorists Course at Awadi (1 Madras) after completing the aforesaid requisite training on the last day when the petitioner was appearing in swinging jump (Jhoola jump), the rope was broken and the petitioner met with an accident and suffered fracture at knee and also at back bone in the year 1994. On account of aforesaid serious injuries sustained by the petitioner he was admitted at CRPF Base Hospital on 25,4.1994 for his treatment. The petitioner remained under treatment in ,CRPF Base Hospital upto 8.8.1994. By the order dated 26.4.1994 he was referred to All India Institute of Medical Science, New Delhi and on 27.4.1994 his treatment at All India Institute of Medical Science was started and the petitioner was admitted for his operation on 19.8.1994 and was discharged on 27.8.1994. In Al...
Niranjan Lal Son of Late Kanha Vs. Board of Revenue and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-20-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)AWC3136
S.N. Srivastava, J.1. Present petition has been instituted assailing of the order dated 7.3.2005 passed by Division Bench of Board of Revenue whereby Application No. 30 of 1996-97 was allowed and order dated 24.2.1997 of the learned Single Member of Board of Revenue passed in Revision No. 18 of 1989-90 was set aside and the matter was remitted to the trial court for decision afresh of substitution application after affording opportunity of hearing to both the parties.2. I am constrained to say that this case presents a dismal picture of how ingenuity is exercised to procrastinate the matter for years together by recourse to unmerited technicalities. The instant case furnishes obtrusive instance how hapless widow has been harassed for years together who ultimately left for heavenly abode with forlorn hope of seeing fruits of her labour during her life time. The litigation in the instant case erupted with the institution of suit under Section 229/209 of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act for declar...
Committee of Management Uchchatar Madhyamic Vidyalaya, Through Its Man ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-20-2005
Reported in: [2006(106)FLR1149]
D.P. Singh, J.1. This writ petition is directed against an order dated 13.12 1995 by which payment of salary by the State Government to the teachers of the primary section of the institution has been refused and a further mandamus has been sought for release of the salary of the teachers of the primary section and further to include the petitioners institution in the Government Order dated 6.9.1989 and to pay all the arrears. 2. When this writ petition was filed, learned Standing Counsel was granted four weeks to file counter affidavit on behalf of all the respondents vide order dated 23.1.1996. Again on 13.3.1996 four weeks and no more time was granted to file counter affidavit. Again on 1.5.1996 four weeks further and no more time was granted to file counter affidavit. In pursuance thereof a counter affidavit on behalf of the respondent No. 4 only was filed in August, 1996 but no counter affidavit on behalf of the State respondent has been filed. When this matter was taken up on 30.3...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »