Allahabad Court August 2008 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.
Shiv Shankar Lal Tiwari S/O Late Baldhari Lal Tiwari Vs. the Authority ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-07-2008
Reported in: [2008(119)FLR291]; (2009)ILLJ667All
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record. A The petitioner workman filed claim application before the Prescribed Authority appointed under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 under Section 15 of the Act for a direction for payment of his difference of wages along with compensation amounting to Rs. 22,256.50 paise.2. The claim of the workman is that his wages had not been paid for the period 1.7.79 to 1.9.83 which was later on amended in respect of change of period of claim from 1.7.79 to 10.10.80. The claim application of the workman was allowed by the Prescribed Authority vide order dated 14/15/.7.1996 appended as Annexure-3 to the writ petition.3. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by the Prescribed Authority.d D;k oknh dk izkFkZuk i= foyfEcr gS ;fn gka rks bldk izHkko[k D;k oknh Jfed 1-7-79 ls 9-10-80 rd dh vof/k rd dk osru iqujhf{kr osrueku eas ikus dk vf/kdkjh gS A4. As regards first issue the Prescribed Au...
Awadhesh Kumar Son of Sri Budhdhi Ram Prasad Vs. State of U.P. Through ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-07-2008
Reported in: [2008(119)FLR1090]
1. We have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel and the learned Counsel for the respondent No. 4.2. It is not denied that the petitioner, after selection by the U.P. Public Service Commission, joined on 12.6.1997, and underwent requisite training at the Head Quarter of Transport Commissioner, and thereafter at the U.P. Administrative Academy, Nainital. After completion of his training, the petitioner was granted regular posting, and he joined his duties as Goods Tax/Passenger Tax Officer in the Office of Regional Transport Officer, Bareilly and was continuing in that service when the impugned orders dated 23.10.1998 and 21.12.1999 issued by the State Government (Annexure Nos. 2 and 5 to the writ petition) and the order dated 2.2.2000 issued by the Transport Commissioner, U.P. Lucknow (Annexure No. 6 to the writ petition) were passed. By the aforesaid impugned orders, passed after more than two years of the petitioner's working in the Transport Departme...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ratan Lal Agrawal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-07-2008
Reported in: [2009]317ITR336(All); [2009]180TAXMAN573(All)
ORDERSatish Chandra, J.1. The Tribunal (R.A. Nos. 111 to 120/All./1996) referred the following question of law under Section 256(1) of Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act') for the opinion of this Court:Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal was correct in law in allowing the appeal of the assessee holding that the additions made are intangible and it would be improper to impose any penalty on an addition of this nature ignoring the facts that there was very clear quantification of concealed income detected on the basis of entries recorded in the seized books of account of the assessee which clearly attracts the provisions of Explanation (1) to Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 19612. The facts, briefly, are that there was a police raid conducted on the assessee's premises. During the course of search, certain books of account were seized. Later on, these books were taken over by the Income-tax Department. It stood re...
Kashi Ornament House Vs. Commissioner of Trade Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-07-2008
Reported in: (2010)28VST71(All)
Prakash Krishna, J. 1. In these four revisions, common questions of law and facts are involved. The assessment years involved are 1977-78, 1978-79, 1979-80 and 1980-81.2. The applicant is carrying on the business of gold, jewellery, silver ornaments, etc. It is a registered dealer under the provisions of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 as also under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. In these years, the tax was levied under Section 3AAAA of the U.P. Trade Tax Act. The levy of tax was set aside by the Tribunal as in the meantime the aforestated section was declared 'ultra vires' by this Court in Pioneer Tanneries & Glue Works, Kanpur v. State of Uttar Pradesh [1991] 83 STC 1 (All) : [1991] UPTC 585. Thereafter the aforestated section was amended with retrospective effect by U.P. Act No. 8 of 1992.3. An application under Section 22 of the Act was filed before the Tribunal by the Department on the ground that in view of the amendment with retrospective effect carried on in the aforesaid sectio...
Chandrahas S/O Sri Vilapu Singh Vs. State of U.P. Through Secretary, P ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-2008
Reported in: [2008(119)FLR198]
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. It transpires that applications were invited for appointment on the post of Junior Clerk. The petitioner's name was sponsored by the Employment Exchange. The petitioner appeared in the written test and was declared successful, and thereafter, was called for the interview. A select list was published, which included the name of the petitioner, and the respondents thereafter, issued an appointment letter dated 5th of November, 1997. The petitioner joined the services as a Junior Clerk on 06.11.1997 and discharged his duty till 12th of November, 1997, on which date, the services of the petitioner was terminated on the ground that the State Government has issued an order dated 3rd of November, 1997 imposing a ban on all appointments in the State of U.P., and therefore, the petitioner could not be appointed pursuant to the ban order issued by the State Government. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the said order, filed a Writ Petition No. 38644 of 1997. The writ Court,...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and ors ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)AWC358
Bharati Sapru, J.1. Heard Sri Manish Goyal learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Santosh Kumar Singh, who has appeared on behalf of the respondents No. 2 to 4.2. This petition has been filed by the petitioner insurance company seeking a direction to set aside the Judgment and order dated 31.5.2008, passed by the respondent No. 1 in Misc. Case No. 5 of 2007 arising out of M.A.C. No. 61 of 2004. The second prayer is that order or direction may also be issued setting aside the judgment and award dated 23.9.2006, passed by the respondent No. 1 in M.A.C. No. 61 of 2004 and the third prayer is that the respondent No. 1 be restrained from releasing the amount of compensation alongwith interest in favour of the respondents No. 2 to 4 on the basis of the judgment and award dated 23.9.2006.3. The facts of the case are that a claim petition was filed by the respondents alleging that an accident took place on 13.4.2004 when the deceased was going on a Motor Cycle No. UP 14-J-8083 from Baghpat...
State of U.P. Through Divisional Director Social Forestry Division Vs. ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-2008
Reported in: [2008(119)FLR482]
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. List has been revised thrice. Learned Counsel for the respondents is not present. Learned Counsel for the petitioner is present. Heard him and perused the record.2. The fact, in brief, are that Sri Manohar Singh, respondent No. 2 filed an application raising an industrial dispute regarding his termination from services before Conciliation Officer, under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Conciliation proceedings having failed, the following matter of dispute was referred to the Labour Court, Agra where it was registered as Adjudication Case No. 1 167 of 1996, Mohan Singh v. Divisional Director, Social Forestry, Mathura.D;k lsok;kstdks }kjk eksgj flag iq= Jh x.ks'kh dh fnukad 1-2-94 ls lsok,a lekIr fd;k tkuk mfpr ,Oka oS/kkfud gS ;fn ugh rks Jfed fdl mi'ke @ {kfriwfrZ ikus dk vf/kdkjh gS rFkk fdl fooj.k lfgr3. The petitioner's representative appeared before the Tribunal on the date fixed for filing objection against the application. Thereafter 26.12.19...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Satanand Tripathi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)AWC362
Amitava Lala, J.1. This appeal is arising out of the judgment and order dated 1.5.2008, passed by the concerned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jhansi, awarding a compensation of Rs. 1,40,000 alongwith interest @ 6% per annum on account of injuries of the claimant.2. It has been contended before us by the appellant/insurance company that the medical certificate, which has been given by the medical practitioner of the community health centre could not be said to be appropriate medical certificate for the purpose of ascertainment of disability of 45%.3. It is pertinent to mention that normally we consider the validity of the certificate to be issued by the office of the Chief Medical Officer of the district, if there is signature of more than one medical practitioners by following the principle plurality causes genuinity. Learned Counsel has shown us a circular letter dated 26.8.1986 to that extent. After going through the same, we find that the same is not needed for consideration for ...
Ganesh Prasad Singh Patel Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)AWC980
Devi Prasad Singh, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.Present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred against the impugned order of dismissal from service. The question cropped up in the present case is; whether only because of compliance of the judgment and order passed by the High Court without seeking prior permission of the superiors, the services of an employee can be dismissed treating the action as misconduct?2. The brief facts giving rise to the present writ petition is that the petitioner was posted as Registrar Kanungo in Tahsil Sandeela, District Hardoi. One Bhawani Prasad approached this Court by preferring a Writ Petition No. 9892 of 1989, which was allowed by judgment and order dated 22.1.1992, a copy of which has been filed as Annexure-4 to the writ petition. The operative portion of the Judgment and order dated 22.1.1992 is reproduced as under:In view of above, I am of the opinion that the consolidation authorities incorre...
Supreme Packaging Prop. Indian Wrapper Pvt. Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-05-2008
Reported in: (2009)26VST385(All)
Prakash Krishna, J.1. Raising a short controversy the above revision has been filed under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act against the order dated 30th of May, 1996 passed by the Trade Tax Tribunal, Ghaziabad in second appeal No. 261 of 1994 relevant to the assessment year 1989-90 (U.P.) whereby and whereunder the tribunal has held that the sale of packing material (paper) at the hand of the dealer is not exempt under the notification No. 7037 dated 31st of January, 1985.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass and are almost undisputed. The dealer sold packing paper to M/s. Kundan Gramodyog Sansthan Lucknow for a sum of Rs. 2,72, 326/-. The said purchaser claimed exemption in view of the notification No. 7037 dated 31st of January, 1985 as it was holding certificate for the same. The said certificate was filed before the Assessing Authority in support of the claim set out by the dealer with regard to the exemption, but was not accepted on the short ground that the said pac...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »