Allahabad Court April 2007 Judgments

United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Hasan S/O Mohd. Unush an ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2007(3)AWC2744

Amitava Lala, J.1. This appeal is filed by the Insurance Company challenging the award dated 12th Febraary, 2007.2. The initial questions which have been raised before this Court by the learned Counsel appearing for the Insurance Company are as follows:(i) Whether wife of the deceased is entitled to claim compensation on account of her minor daughter when an earlier award to such extent is preexisting? And (ii) whether the second Motor Accidents Claim petition, which is virtually the third one, can be entertained when earlier one is dismissed as withdrawn without granting any liberty to file a fresh?.3. So far as the second point is concerned this is hypertechnical in nature. Before passing of the order of withdrawal of the claim petition No. I of 2001 on 23rd February, 2001, the third claim petition being claim petition No. 114 of 1991 had already been filed on 22nd February, 2001. Therefore, no leave is required to file a fresh petition since the third Motor Accident Claims petition ...

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Gayatri Glass Works

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: [2009]317ITR319(All)

1. The following questions have been referred in this case:1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in coming to the conclusion that there was no apparent mistake of law and facts in the order of the learned CIT (A) dated 3.2.1983 which could be rectified under Section 154(1)(b) and 154(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961?2. Whether the observations of the Hon'ble Tribunal that there is a presumption embedded in the order of the CIT (Appeals) that when he made the earlier order there was no evidence before him to show from the record that the assessment was saved by limitation because of the concealment by the assessee are based on correct appreciation of evidence on record?3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the assessment made by the Income Tax officer on 13.3.1975 was barred by limitation.2. In short, the first two questions above indicate the doubt (a) whet...

Munna Lal Son of Raja Ram Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through Its

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Allahabad

1. The applicant (Munna Lal) has prayed for quashing the order dated 21.8.1998 (Annexure 5) by which the Authority concerned refused to reengage or regularize him and is also praying for directing the respondents to regularize his services in the Department of Archeological Survey of India and to restrain them not to interfere in his working.2. His case in brief is that he was engaged in 1986 on daily wages in the office of Conservation Assistant, Sub Office Sarnath and since then continued working as such. It is said that inspite of repeated representation, the respondents have not regularized his services. It is averred in para 4.9 of the O.A that he filed one writ petition No.16162 of 1998 before the Hon'ble High Court at Allahabad, which the Court disposed of directing the respondent NO.2, to consider his representation. The impugned order dated 21.8.1998 has been passed on the said representation. It is said that in view of judgment dated 16.2.1990 rendered in Raj Kamal and Ors. ...

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Krishna Textiles

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: [2009]315ITR271(All)

1. The following question has been referred in this reference:Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the Income-tax Officer was not justified to intimate proceedings under Section 147(b) of the Act?.2. It appears from the record that the ITO re-opened the assessments under Section 147 because according to him relief under Section 35(B) has been wrongly allowed in respect of certain expenditure.3. The law of Section 147/148 is well settled by now. Re-opening is not permitted on a mere change of opinion on part of the assessing authority on the same material which was available at the completion of the original assessment.4. It has been laid down in a catena of decision that for re-opening the assessment, the Assessing Officer must have 'reason to believe' that income has escaped assessment and the 'reason to believe' must be founded upon some information of fact which was not part of the record on which assessment had ...

P.N. Garg, Engineering and Contractors Vs. State of U.P. and ors.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: AIR2007All154; 2007(4)ARBLR50(All)

ORDERH.L. Gokhale, C.J.1. Heard Mr. K.K. Dubey, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri. C. S. Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, appearing for the respondents/ State of U.P.2. This arbitration petition seeks appointment of an Arbitrator to decide the claim of the petitioner/contractor.3. The short facts leading to this appeal are : Sometimes in the year 2002, the petitioner/Company was appointed as a Contractor for part of the work under the Prime Minister Gramin Sadak Yojana on 24-4-2002. The contracted work was to be completed by 23-1-2003. The petitioner could complete only 25% of the work during that time. He applied for extension on 7-4-2003. His case was that the proper designs were not supplied by the respondents and that it was an area where he was working is affected with dacoits. The respondents started deduction of Rs. 10,000/- per day for not completing the work and ultimately the contract was rescinded on 23-5-2003.4. The petitioner served a notice on 23...

Dharmjeet S/O Prem Yadav Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through Secretary, M ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2007(4)AWC3528

Sudhir Agarwal, J.1. Aggrieved by the order dated 28.9.2005 passed by the Divisional Security Commissioner, Railway Protection Force, Northern Railway, Moradabad (respondent No. 3) canceling the candidature of the petitioner for recruitment as Constable in Railway Protection Force (in short 'RPF') the petitioner has come up in this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with a further mandamus commanding the respondents to send him for training and appoint on the said post.2. The facts in brief as stated in the writ petition are that Railway Protection Force, Northern Railway in 2004 notified recruitment for the post of Constable pursuant whereto the petitioner submitted his application on 1.11.2004. The form was submitted in duplicate and one copy thereof was returned to the petitioner by the commandant. He was allotted Roll No. 205171. He appeared in written examination held at Gorakhpur on 2.11.2004 followed by interview dated 3.11.2004 and by letter dated 1.7....

Hindalco Industries Limited (Formerly Known as Hindustan Aluminium Cor ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: [2007(114)FLR783]

Tarun Agarwala, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner. Inspite of service of the summons on the opposite party no one has appeared.2. The petitioner has challenged the validity and legality of the order passed by the controlling authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act as well as the Appellate Order. Briefly stated, the facts leading to the filing of the petition is, that the respondent No. l was an employee in the petitioner's establishment and had worked upto 6th August 1977 and thereafter his services was discharged. It is alleged that full and final settlement of his dues was paid to him. It transpires that after two years the respondent No. l was given a fresh employment w.e.f. 9.7.1979 and he continued to work till he retired from the service w.e.f. 11.8.1987. The workman filed an application under Section 4 of the Payment of Gratuity Act for payment of his gratuity which included the period from 1967 to 6.8.1977 and from 9.7.1979 till the date of his retirement.3....

Sri Rajpati, Manager Committee of Management, Dr. Lohia Inter College ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2007(4)AWC3445

B.S. Chauhan, J.1. This appeal arises out of the judgment dated 20.03.2007 delivered in Writ Petition No. 38485 of 2005, whereby the learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition and has quashed the order dated 09.02.2005 rendered by the Joint Director of Education recognising the Committee of Management of which the appellant Rajpati was elected as the Manager.2. The dispute is in respect of the Committee of Management of Dr. Lohia Inter College which is m institution duly recognised and aided under the provisions of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 (hereinafter called the 'Act') and Regulations framed thereunder. Under the provisions of Section 16-A of the Act, every institution has to have a scheme of administration which is to conform to the norms prescribed under the statutory provisions coupled with the guidelines indicated in Schedule III of the Schedule appended to the said Act. The Institution presently in question is undisputedly governed by a duly approved sche...

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ved Prakash Agarwal

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: [2009]317ITR330(All)

1. We have heard learned Counsel for the Income Tax Department.2. Apparently a completed assessment was re-opened under Section 147(b) read with Section 148 of the Income Tax Act. The re-opening was upheld by the Tribunal by the order dated 25.1.1985. Subsequently, an application for rectification tinder Section 254 of the Act was moved by the assessee upon which the Tribunal stated as follows:At the time of pasting the original order the 'Tribunal has not seen the original reasons which were recorded by the ITO. The ITO stated that he had information in his possession which showed that income chargeable to tax escaped assessment. In the reasons recorded it was not spelt out as to which of the information was in possession of the ITO. No material was pointed out in the reasons recorded, so it can safely be held that there was no material before the ITO for starting proceedings Under Section 147(b) of the Act. So on this ground alone the reopening of the assessment Under Section 147(b) ...

Smt. Om Wati Widow of Shri Mahendra Singh Tyagi Vs. Dan Singh S/O Shri ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2007(3)AWC2742

H.L. Gokhale, C.J.1. None is present for the appellant. Heard Mr. Vinay Khare, learned Counsel appearing for respondent No. 3.2. This appeal by a widow of a person, who died in a motor accident seeks an enhancement in the amount of compensation, which came to be awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Ghaziabad.3. The short facts leading to this appeal are as follows. The husband of the appellant was driving a scooter when he was hit by a truck, which was insured with respondent no.3/The New India Assurance Company. This happened on 2.5.1985 and the husband of the appellant died thereafter.4. The appellant filed a claim petition for compensation. This claim has come to be allowed by an order of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ghaziabad, vide judgment and order dated 21.9.1988. The Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs. 1,59,209.50/-, as compensation. The appellant is not satisfied with this amount and, therefore, she has filed this appeal.5. Wk Since nobody was present to r...