Allahabad Court April 2005 Judgments

Cit Vs. Bithal Das Modi

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: [2006]154TAXMAN145(All)

ORDERThe Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following 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 Tribunal was justified in holding that there was neither any omission or failure on the part of the assessee to disclose the primary facts necessary for completing the assessment under section 147(b) nor there was any information in possession of the Income Tax Officer within the meaning of section 147 whereas it is a fact that the assessee had thrown his individual property into the common hotchpotch after 31-12-1969 and, thus, whole of the income arising from that property will be the individual income of the assessee ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in confirming the order of the Dy. Commissioner (Appeals), whereas it was a sufficient ground for invoking...

State of U.P. Vs. Jagdish Murav S/O Ramanand, Ganga Murav S/O Kanhai, ... Overruled

Court: Allahabad

M.C. Jain, J.1. This appeal came to be filed by the State against the judgment and order dated 13.9.2002, passed by Sri Vimal Chandra, Additional Sessions Judge (Court No. 6), Gorakhpur in Sessions Trial No. 483 of 1999. Jagdish Murav, Ganga Murav, Uday Bhan Pandey and Ram Sahai Pandey have been acquitted of the charge under Section 307 read wish Section 34 I.P.C.2. Under order dated 1.5.2003 passed by this Court, leave to file appeal was granted only against the accused respondent No. 1, Jagdish Murav who was said to be the main assailant. To the remaining three, namely, Ganga Murav, Uday Bhan Pandey and Ram Sahai Pandey, the role of exhortation had been assigned and the evidence was that they were unarmed too. Therefore, in this appeal, the Court is concerned only with accused-respondent No. 1, Jagdish Murav.3. A brief reference to the factual position would suffice. The incident allegedly occurred on 6.3.1993 at about 8.30 P.M. in Mohalla Kauadah, Police Station Rajghat, District Go...

Muradnavi and ors. Vs. State of U.P. Through Judicial Magistrate and S ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: II(2005)DMC191

K.N. Ojha, J.1. Instant application has been moved to set aside the order dated 17.12.1999 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Chaundausi, district Morabad, whereby final report was submitted in Crime No. 151 of 1999 under Section 498A, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act was not accepted. Protest petition of O.P. No. 2 Sabbir Ali was allowed, final report No. 54 dated 24.7.1999 was set aside and direction was for re-investigation of the case.2. Heard Sri Abhay Saxena, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA and have gone through the record.3. List was revised. None appeared for the O. P. No. 2, Sabbir Ali.4. The fact of the case is that the O. P. No. 2 Sabbir Ali moved application at kotwali, Chandausi, district Moradabad, that he married his daughter Afroz Bano with the applicant No. 1 Maradnavi on 21.12.1994, but demand for dowry being not satisfied as a result of which the applicants exercised cruelty on his daughter and compelled Afroz Bano to leave their residence ...

Upper Ganges Sugar and Industries Ltd. Vs. State of U.P. Through Secre ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2005(3)AWC2545

R.K. Agrawal , J.1. The present writ petition had earlier been allowed by the Division Bench of which one of us (R.K. Agrawal, J.) was a member vide judgment and order dated 24.3.1999 which order has been set aside by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Civil Appeal No.6369 of 2000 filed by State of U.P. and others, vide order dated 13.11.2000, on th6 ground that the contentions raised by the appellant herein have neither been considered nor dealt with by the High Court. Pursuant to the direction given by the Apex Court the present writ petition is being heard again.2. By means of the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petition, M/s Upper Ganges Sugar and Industries Ltd., seek the following relief:-a) to issue an appropriate order or direction to declare Sections 4 and 24 of the U.P. Excise Act 1910 as ultra vires the Constitution so far as they provide that rectified spirit is foreign liquor.b) to issue an appropriate order or direction to dec...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kay Kay Family Trust

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: (2005)196CTR(All)376; [2005]278ITR620(All)

P. Krishna, J.1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi at the instance of the Income tax Department 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:-'Wheher on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Tribunal is right in holding that the assessing officer has no jurisdiction to change the status while making the assessment Under Section 143(1) and in that background whether a change in the status is appealable to the first appellate authority?'2. The assessment years 1986-87 to 1988-89 are involved in the present reference. The brief facts of the case are as follows:The assessee respondent had filed the income tax returns and claimed the status as 'specified trust'. The Income Tax Officer completed the assessment for all these years under Section 143(1) of the Act. However, he while making the assessment under Section 143(1) of the Act adopted the status as that of A...

Shitla Prasad Dube Son of Sri Rajitram Dube Vs. State Public Services ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: [2005(107)FLR430]

Amitava Lala and Sanjay Misra, JJ.1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. The petitioner in this writ petition challenged the judgment and order passed by the State Public Services Tribunal, Lucknow. Horn paragraph 27 onwards of such judgment, we find that reasons are given by the Tribunal. What would be the appropriate order to be passed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal held that Seasonal Collection Amins for specific tenure have not acquired any right to Continue as Seasonal Collection Amin. Admittedly, such engagements were made seasonally but not continuously. The petitioner's position in such list of Seasonal Collection Amin was 60. The Tribunal has passed an affirmative order giving general made of appointment taking into account The Uttar Pradesh Collection Amins' Service Rules, 1974 as amended with effect from 23.10.1992. The order is very clear and distinct in respect of giving appointment, relaxation of a...

Bhagwana Singh and Naurang Both Sons of Kallu Singh Vs. State of U.P. ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2005(4)AWC3279

S.N. Srivastava, J.1. The present petition has its genesis in proceeding under Section 122B of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R.Act and has been preferred assailing the order dated 21.3.2005 passed in revision No. 89 of 2003 by Upper Collector Bijnor and also the order dated 1.8.2003 passed by Tahsildar, Tahsil Chandpur District Bijnor,2. It would appear from the record that upon initiation of proceeding under Section 122B of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R.Act by Tahsildar Chandpur, the petitioner preferred objection claiming to be in authorised possession over the land as the same was allocated to him by the Pradhan of the, village on 9,8,1970 and also produced receipt. It would further appear that the receipt was found to be forged by the Tahsildar and damages to the extent of Rs. 22500/- were foisted upon him. Aggrieved by the order, the petitioner preferred revision, which also ended up in dismissal. It is in this perspective that the present writ petition came to be filed.3. The main-stay of arguments of t...

Deo Sunder Sharma Vs. Iind Additional City Magistrate/Rent Control and ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2005(2)AWC2043

Anjani Kumar, J.1. This writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner who claims himself to be tenant of the accommodation in question which is a shop, challenges the order passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Kanpur Nagar, dated 2nd February, 2005.2. The brief facts are that the landlord-respondent No. 2, filed an application before the respondent No. 1, Rent Control and Eviction Officer, with the assertion that the petitioner is occupying the shop in dispute unauthorizedly without any allotment order and, therefore, there is a deemed vacancy under Section 12 of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The landlord further filed an application under Section 16(1)(b) of the Act that the aforesaid shop may be released in his favour as he requires the same for his personal use.3. In short the case set up by the petitioner is that he is tenant since April, 1976 and he is regularly paying rent to the respondent-landlord wh...

Vinod Kumar Vs. Dina Nath Agrawal and ors.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2005(3)AWC2463

ORDERAnjani Kumar, J.1. Petitioner by means of this writ petition has challenged the order dated 23.3.2005, passed by the appellate authority in a pending appeal under Section 22 of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 whereby an application No. 33C filed by the petitioner-tenant has been rejected by the appellate authority.2. The said application was filed by the petitioner with the prayer that because of certain observations made by the prescribed authority in the order appealed against, it is necessary and in the interest of justice that the inspection may be made. An objection has been filed by the respondent to the aforesaid application. The appellate authority has considered the application and the objection and did not find any force in the application for local inspection and therefore rejected. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the provisions of Rule 27 framed under the U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 which is reproduced below and submits that in view of the Rule 27 the appellate au...

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Elitos S.P.A.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: (2005)199CTR(All)439; [2008]296ITR435(All)

Prakash Krishna, J.1. The Tribunal, New Delhi has referred the following identical question of law involved in all the above cases under Section 256(1) of the IT 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 right to hold that the expenditure in question on payment of salaries was not borne by the permanent establishment in India and so the employee in question would not be exigible to Indian taxation laws in terms of Article 16(2)(c) of the DTAA?' 2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present reference are as under:The reference relates to the asst. yr. 1987-88. The assessee-respondent claimed total exemption from tax on the perquisites under the DTAA between India and Italy. There was an agreement dt. 25th April, 1985 between the Oil & Natural Gas Commission (ONGC) (the charterer) and M/s Elitos S.P.A., the Italian company (the contractor). The agreement was to take e...