Allahabad Court September 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.
Satya Pal Singh Son of Late Chhidda Singh Vs. State of U.P. Through Se ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-26-2007
Reported in: [2007(115)FLR1132]
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.It is alleged that the petitioner was employed with respondent No. 2 as a clerk and was given joining on 2.1.1987. He unfortunately all of sudden became a mentally disturbed person due to some family problems and he left his house in a state of unsound mind. It is stated that after about five years a neighbour of the petitioner had gone to Balaji for pilgrimage saw the petitioner there and informed about him to the wife of the petitioner incident. Thereafter the wife of the petitioner were gone to Balaji and had found the petitioner in a state of unsound mind. She then brought the petitioner to Shahadara Hospital and admitted him there for treatment.2. After medical treatment, it is claimed that the petitioner became fully fit and thereafter getting medical certificate of discharge from District Hospital, Ghaziabad he moved an application to the respondent No. 2 on 8.5.2006 annexing therewith prayed for allowing him to join his ...
NavIn Kumar Goswami Son of Sri Radhey Shyam Goswami Vs. State of U.P. ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-26-2007
Reported in: [2008(116)FLR98]
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1 Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.The petitioner claims to be a member of the backward community. He did apprentice of three years for the trade of Dozar Mechanic w.e.f. 11.9.89 to 10.9 92 from General, Manager, Allahabad Jal Sansthan, Allahabad.2. It appears that an advertisement dated 2nd July, 2003 was issued by the Jal Sarjsthan, Allahabad in Hindi Newspaper 'United Bharat Allahabad for varous posts. Applications were invited in pursuance to the aforesaid advertisement against the said posts. It appears that there was a ban on appointment of Dozer Mechanic which was lifted in 2004 and thereafter the post of Dozer Mechanic was not advertised.3. It further appears that an advertisement dated 14.8.2007 was published in daily Newspaper 'Amar Ujala' inviting applications for making appointment on various posts by which the applications were invited to fill Up the backlog vacancies but no backlog vacancy was advertised in so far as the post o...
Mohd. MohsIn and anr. Vs. District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-26-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)AWC4184
S.U. Khan, J.1. This is an utterly frivolous writ petition. Petitioners defendants are not allowing S.C.C. Suit No. 88 of 1996 to be decided. This is a landlord tenant matter, according to the plaintiff. Earlier, defendants filed an application under Section 23, Provincial Small Cause Courts Act for return of plaint for filing before regular civil court as according to them question of title was involved. On the said application, an order was passed on 8.7.2004 to the effect that the said question would be considered after conclusion of evidence. Thereafter, landlady respondent examined herself. After her examination, defendants petitioners again filed application under Section 23 of Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, which was rejected by J.S.C.C, Meerut on 3.5.2007. Against the said order S.C.C. Revision No. 31 of 2007 was filed, which has also been dismissed by Incharge District Judge, Meerut through order dated 17.7.2007, hence this writ petition.2. Order dated 8.7.2004 was never c...
Bobys' Restaurant Vs. Commissioner, Trade Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-26-2007
Reported in: (2008)17VST286(All)
Rajes Kumar, J.1. Present revision under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') is directed against the order of the Tribunal dated January 14, 2004 for the assessment year 1998-99.2. The applicant was running a restaurant for the supply of foodstuff, ice cream, cold drinks and other eatables and claimed to have maintained books of account in respect of the purchases and sales and disclosed the taxable turnover at Rs. 23,55,309.44. The assessing authority after rejecting the books of account by way of best judgment assessment estimated the taxable turnover at Rs. 28,40,000. The turnover estimated by the assessing authority has been confirmed in first appeal and by the Tribunal.Heard Sri K. Saksena, learned Counsel for the applicant and Sri B.K. Pandey, learned Standing Counsel. With the consent of the parties, the present revision is being disposed of at this stage.3. Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that in this nature of business,...
Commissioner, Trade Tax Vs. New Holland Traders India Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-26-2007
Reported in: (2009)22VST444(All)
Rajesh Kumar, J.1. Present revision under Section 11(1) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') is directed against the order of the Tribunal dated August 18, 2003 by which the Tribunal has confirmed the order of the first appellate authority deleting the penalty under Section 8D(6) of the Act.2. The dealer-opposite party was a foreign company and for the construction of the factory building entered into an agreement with Fiat Engineering, New Delhi. It appears that the opposite party had made some advance payment to the contractor during the year under consideration and deducted one per cent from the payment and deposited the same with the Government Treasury. The assessing authority levied the penalty under Section 8D(6) of the Act on the ground that under Section 8D(1) the opposite party should have deducted four per cent and not one per cent. Being aggrieved by the order of the assessing officer, the dealer filed an appeal before the Deputy Commission...
Asiatic Agro Product Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner, Trade Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-26-2007
Reported in: (2008)14VST230(All)
Rajes Kumar, J.1. Present revision under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') is directed against the order of the Tribunal dated July 17, 2006, relating to the assessment year 1998-99.2. Brief facts giving rise to the present revision are that the applicant established a new unit for the manufacturing of insecticides and pesticides and was holding eligibility certificate under Section 4A of the Act and, therefore, its turnover of insecticides and pesticides were exempted. The applicant was also registered under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Central Act') and was entitled to purchase raw material at concessional rate of tax after issuing form C. During the year under consideration, the applicant had purchased isoprotone and melathine for Rs. 14,16,920 from outside the State of U.P. Instead of using such isoprotone and melathine in the manufacturing of insecticides and pesticides, the applicant had sold such...
Subedar Mishra Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-25-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)AWC297; [2007(115)FLR845]
ORDERRakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner had given a notice dated 10.8.2005 for 'atmdah' for not considering his grievances which have not been considered by the officials which he had communicated to the officials, including some personal grievances also. He thereafter, withdrew his aforesaid notice of 'atmdah' within a week vide letter dated 18.8.2005.3. Pursuant to the notice of 'atmdah' dated 10.8.2005 an enquiry was initiated against the petitioner and a charge-sheet was given to him under covering letter dated 21.9.2005. Subsequently, enquiry report was also submitted by the Enquiry Officer. On the basis of the aforesaid enquiry report, a show cause dated 18.2.2006 was served on the petitioner without appending therewith copy of the enquiry report.4. The petitioner submitted his reply to the show cause dated 18.2.2006, however by an order dated 28.4.2006 he was dismissed from service by the Service Manager Regional Workshop, U.P.S.R.T.C., Allahabad...
Smt. Rizwana and ors. Vs. Civil Judge (Senior Division) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-25-2007
Reported in: AIR2008All54; 2008(1)AWC551
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. Part X of the Indian Succession Act deals with the property in respect of which the succession certificate may be granted, to whom it may be granted, who may grant it, and the procedure for granting a succession certificate. The purpose of granting a succession certificate is to facilitate the collection of debts and afford protection to the parties paying the debt to the representative of the deceased person. The grant of a succession certificate in favour of a particular person does not determine the question of title of the property in respect of which the succession certificate has been granted. It only enables the holder of the succession certificate to collect the debts and security due to the deceased person. The grant of a succession certificate merely confers on its holder an authority to realise the debt of the deceased and give a valid discharge to the debtor. It is the duty of the holder of the succession certificate to dispose of the amount in the prop...
Rajesh Kumar Satish Kumar Vs. Commissioner, Trade Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-25-2007
Reported in: (2008)14VST337(All)
Rajes Kumar, J.1. Present revision under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') is directed against the order of the Tribunal dated June 14, 2007 for the assessment year 2000-01.2. The applicant claimed to have made the purchases for Rs. 38,69,729.50 on behalf of four ex-U.P. principals. Out of which, three were claimed to be from Bombay and one from Calcutta. The applicant claimed that such purchases being in the course of inter-State purchases were not liable to tax in view of the decision of the apex court in the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Bakhtawar Lal Kailash Chand Arhti reported in : [1992]3SCR734 . The assessing authority however rejected the claim on the ground that the dealer was not able to prove that such purchases were made on behalf of ex-U.P. principals and were inter-State purchases. The assessing authority had doubted the existence of the ex-U.P. principals. Being aggrieved by the order, the applicant filed appeal und...
Garrison Engineer Vs. Commissioner of Trade Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-25-2007
Reported in: (2008)17VST279(All)
Rajes Kumar, J.1. Present three revisions under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') are directed against the order of Tribunal dated May 10, 2007 relating to the assessment years 1993-94, 1995-96 and 1998-99.2. The applicant is one of the departments of the Defence Ministry of the Central Government. During the years under consideration, the applicant had engaged contractors for the construction of building, etc., and supplied cement, steel, steel product, bitumen, etc., to the contractors and admittedly deducted the value of the materials while making the payment to the contractors. Admittedly, in all the three years the applicant had imported cement, steel, etc., from outside the State of U.P., which were supplied to the contractors. The claim of the applicant was that the supplies of the materials to the contractors were not sale inasmuch as such materials had been used in the construction of the own buildings of the applicant. The asses...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »