Allahabad Court August 2007 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 and anr. Vs. J.M. Agarwal Tobacco Co.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-2007
Reported in: [2008]300ITR364(All)
1. This is an appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on behalf of the Department against the order dated May 6, 1999, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Agra Bench, Agra, in I.T.A. No. 4747(Delhi) of 1991.2. The assessment year involved is 1989-90. The assessee is maintaining its accounts in the mercantile system of accounting. It has purchased two machineries worth Rs. 3,35,806. The purchases were made through bills dated July 30, 1988 and December 15, 1988. The machinery purchased through bill dated December 15, 1988, amounting to Rs. 1,74,145 was paid subsequently in the subsequent assessment year. The assessee before the Assessing Officer claimed that he is entitled to get the benefit under Section 32AB of the Income-tax Act on this amount also. The said claim was rejected by the Assessing Officer as well as the first appellate authority. The Tribunal accepted the said claim. The Tribunal has found that the assessee purchased the machineries during the yea...
Sobhit Gupta Son of Gulab Gupta Vs. State of U.P. and
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-24-2007
Reported in: 2008CriLJ478
Saroj Bala, J.1. The order dated 18.2.2003 having been challenged in criminal misc. application No. 2053 of 2003 and criminal revision No. 935 of 2003, both the cases are being decided by a common judgment.2. The applicant Shobhit Gupta and revisionist Gulab Gupta are used in the criminal case No. 1784 of 2002 L.N. Agarwal v. Focus trading Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. The allegations made in the complaint are that in pursuance of an advertisement made in the National newspaper, the complainant came to know that City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra (herein after referred to as CIDCO) owned land in Nerul Mumbai over which Focus Trading Pvt. Ltd. accused No. 1 was authroised to construct flats for the purchaser of the plot, induced by the advertisement the complainant approached the accused persons and offered to purchase plot No. 180 Sector No. 21 Nerul Mumbai for construction of duplex flat No. 5 in proposed Om cottages. The letter of intent for reservation was signed on 2.2...
Brahmpal Singh and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-24-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)AWC614
Janardan Sahai, J.1. The facts are simple. In reference proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, the petitioners were called upon by an order of the District Judge, to deposit a sum of Rs. 1,86,76,652 an amount, which they had withdrawn as compensation wrongly so according to the respondents who claim that the title of the land for which the compensation was awarded has been finally decided in their favour. The order of the District Judge was challenged in writ petition. This Court modified the order of the District Judge and instead of cash deposit permitted the petitioners to furnish security other than cash or bank guarantee to the satisfaction of the District Judge. In compliance with the order of this Court the petitioners furnished security bonds as security of property and also separate undertakings as personal security. By the impugned order dated 22.5.2007 the Additional District Judge found that the security bonds furnished were not valid being unregistered. The petitioner...
Ram Bharat Verma Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-24-2007
Reported in: [2008(116)FLR106]
Pradeep Kant and Devi Prasad Singh, JJ.1. Notice on behalf of opposite parties No. 1 to 3 has been accepted by learned Chief Standing Counsel.2. Under challenge is the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 30.7.2007 disposing the, writ petition of the appellant challenging his order of transfer by only issuing a direction to make representation, which may be decided by the authority competent.3. The appellant's grievance is that he was transferred on compassionate ground because of the serious illness of his wife vide order dated 19.6.2007 to Ambedkar Nagar where he had taken charge on 2.7.2007. The appellant has again been transferred on 6.7.2007 from Faizabad to Dudhwa National Park District Lakhimpur Kheri.4. It is the case of the State that in pursuance of the decision taken by High Level Committee to get back those employees who were earlier working in Dudhwa National Park because of the fact that few tigers had died for which, such an exercise was necessary as a result o...
The Drawing and Disbursing Vs. the Acit (Tds)
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-2007
Reported in: (2008)116TTJ(All.)952
1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the CIT(A)'s order dated 28.5.2007 for the assessment year 2003-04.The brief 'facts of the case are that the assessee is the DDO being an employee in the Mahendra Technical Inter College, Chandauli. While calculating the annual tax of each employee, a few of employees of the college have given the donation receipts issued by M/s. Narendra Educational and Welfare Society and claimed hundred percent exemption of the donation amount under Section 80GGA, The assessee has allowed the deductions as per the donation receipts and deducted the lax thereafter.2. Later, it was found that the said receipts were not genuine and income was computed less by virtue of giving the so called deduction.For filing the wrong TDS certificates, the Assessing Officer levied the interest under Section 201(1A) and also raised the demand under Section 201 for the shortfall of the tax. The Ld.CIT(A) has confirmed the order. Not being satisfied, the assessee is in...
Zia Ashraf Son of Mr. Ashraf HusaIn Vs. Joint Director of Education, K ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-2007
Reported in: [2007(115)FLR689]
D.P. Singh, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties.2. M.M. Ali Memorial Inter College, Kanpur is a duly recognized minority institution imparting education till the intermediate level but receives grant in aid only uptill the High School level. Father of respondent No. 4, Jamil Ahmad, who was working as a permanent clerk in the institution, died in harness on 12.1.2001. This vacancy of clerk was filled up by promoting one Syed Mehmood Ahmad creating a Vacancy on a post of peon, which was advertised by the Management on 2.2.2001 and the petitioner, along with others, applied in pursuance thereof. After following the due procedure, petitioner was selected and papers were forwarded to the District Inspector of Schools on 21.5.2001, he approved the appointment of the petitioner on 22.8.2001 and the petitioner joined the institution on 24.8.2001.3. Upon the death of his father, the respondent No. 4,applied for compassionate appointment on 20.1.2001 whereupon he was given appointment by the educ...
Mohammad Shoaib S/O Sri Shekh Mohammad Vs. Sri Vaishnav Das S/O Late S ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)AWC1673
S.U. Khan, J.1. In spite of sufficient service through publication, no one has appeared on behalf of the six legal representatives of Respondent No. 1, i.e. Respondent No. 1/1 to respondent No. 1/6. (Substitution applications have been allowed today.) Copy of newspaper has been filed in the first revision. Even though in the newspaper only revision No. 85 of 1992 was mentioned, however all revisions are directed against the same order, same points are involved in all the revisions and parties are also same in all the revisions. Service is, therefore, held sufficient in all the revisions.2. The case has got a checkered history, however in the impugned order, history of litigation has been traced in detail and with clarity. Original respondent No. 1 Vaishnav Das in the revisions obtained an agreement for sale of property in dispute, which is a shop belonging to the applicant, from the parents of the applicant as at that time, applicant was minor. Agreement was executed in 1968. It appear...
Dina Nath Gupta and anr. Vs. Commissioner of Trade Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-2007
Reported in: (2008)14VST248(All)
Vikram Nath, J.1. These are bunch of revisions arising out of assessment as well as penalty proceedings under Section 15A(1)(q) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as, 'the Act').2. Revisionists are the owners of the vehicle. According to the assessing officer the goods which entered the State of U.P. and the trip sheets which were issued at the entry check-post were not got discharged at the notified exit check-post, therefore it presumed that the goods have been sold within the State of U.P. The assessing officer on this finding imposed tax liability on the owner of the vehicle as also 10 times penalty as provided under Section 15A(1)(q) of the Act for violation of the provisions of Section 28B of the Act. On appeal the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) after considering the material on record as adduced by the dealer came to the conclusion that the goods in fact had been transported outside the State of U.P., and therefore, there was no question of assessment of tax ...
Shivam Traders Vs. Commissioner, Trade Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-2007
Reported in: (2008)17VST413(All)
Vikram Nath, J.1. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, this revision is being disposed of finally at the admission stage itself, as the matter has not been decided by the Tribunal on merits but the second appeal of the dealer has been dismissed on the ground of delay.2. Heard Sri Nishant Misra, learned Counsel for the applicant and learned Standing Counsel for the opposite party.3. The first appeal of the dealer pending before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) was decided against the dealer by order dated December 18, 2002 relating to the assessment year 1997-98 (U.P.). Against the said order time barred second appeal was filed on March 14, 2007, i.e., beyond the prescribed limit by three years eleven months and seventeen days. The appeal was accompanied by an application for condonation of delay which was supported by an affidavit stating therein that the proprietor of the firm had suffered with a head injury in an accident and was confined to bed from December 20, 200...
Luxco Electronics and ors. Vs. Corporation Bank
Court: DRAT Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-22-2007
Reported in: I(2008)BC93
1. This appeal has been preferred against an order dated 16.4.2007 passed by the DRT, Allahabad vacating the stay order passed by it on 3.1.2007 for the maintenance of status quo of the property said to have been mortgaged. Also while passing the impugned order, the DRT had directed appellant to deposit one lac more and by means of an application dated 29.1.2007 moved by the appellants had requested for keeping the condition of deposit of amount of Rs. 1.00 lac more in abeyance, but it was also turned down.2. The short questions, which arise out of the impugned order in this appeal are: whether the objection said to have been preferred to the notice issued under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of the Financial Assets and Enforcement of the Security Interest Act, 2002 was disposed of before taking up proceedings for the recovery of the amount under the aforesaid enactment, second question, which has been raised, is whether the property said to have been mortgaged...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »