Allahabad Court September 2012 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.
Raghvendra Mani Tripathi Vs. Commissioner Commercial Tax Gomti Nagar L ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-14-2012
Satish Chandra, J. 1. ALL the three revisions have been filed under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948, against a common order dated 27.04.2012 passed by the Trade Tax Tribunal, Gorakhpur, in Second Appeal Nos. 215, 216 and 217 of 2011 for the assessment years mentioned above. 2. IN all the three revisions, the facts and circumstances are identical except the dates and amounts. For this purpose, the assessment year 1999-2000 has been taken as an illustrative year in this order. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Society who imports the coal from outside the State and supplies the same to its Members, who are the brick-kiln owners. During the assessment years under consideration, the assessee has imported the coal and supplied to its Members. It is alleged that the Members have collected the coal directly from the Railway yard. Thus, the freight charges were not included in the total turnover and the same were shown separately by the assessee. The short issue...
Sohan Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-14-2012
1. Challenge in the present revision is the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2 Agra, dated 9th September, 2010, whereby the revisionists have been summoned to face trial for the offence punishable under sections 498-A IPC and of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 2. The facts giving rise to the present revision are that Shrimati Rajni presently O.P. no. 2, on 11.3.2010, filed an application under section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which shall hereinafter be referred to as 'Cr.P.C', with the prayer for the registration of the criminal case against the present revisionists with the facts that she was married with Sohan Singh, present revisionist no. 1 on 14.5.2007. After the marriage, the accused persons, who are the husband, parents-in-law, sister-in-law (Nanad), Brother-in-law (Jeth) extended the dowry demand in terms of one Motorcycle, Colour T.V., Refrigerator, which her parents could not fulfill. On account of non-fulfillment of dowry demand, she was m...
C/M Sri Ram Krishna Bal Niketan Vs. Assistant Registrat Firms Soci
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-14-2012
1. Heard Sri R.C. Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Dileep Kumar Srivastava for the respondent No. 2, and the learned Standing Counsel for the Respondent No. 1. 2. This petition has been filed assailing the order passed by the respondent - Assistant Registrar, Firm, Societies and Chits, Gorakhpur dated 10.9.2010. The petitioner Awdhesh Singh contends that he is a valid member of the society and further the declaration of membership by the impugned order is against the weight of evidence on record. Sri Dwivedi contends that the finding in relation to the petitioner is erroneous and so far as the contesting respondents are concerned the infirmity pointed out in the membership list of the respondent No. 2 has not been considered in correct perspective. The dispute in relation to the society and its Management had earlier come up before the Assistant Registrar who had passed an order on 11th March, 2005 holding that since there was no validly constituted Committee continu...
Sri Ram Vs. Additional District Judge
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-13-2012
1. BY means of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash judgment and order dated 19.10.2011 passed by Additional District Judge (Court No.1), Hardoi in Rent Appeal No.07 of 2006 and the judgment and order dated 25.11.2006 passed by the learned Prescribed Authority/Civil Judge (S.R.) Hardoi in Prescribed Authority case no.6 of 2001, contained in Annexure Nos.1 and 2 respectively to the writ petition. Brief facts, relevant for the purposes of deciding this writ petition, are that the petitioner is admittedly tenant at the rate of Rs.200/- per month as rent in the shop in question at Cinema Road, Hardoi, of which the opposite party nos.3 and 4 are the landlords. The landlords moved application for release under Section 21 (1) (A) of U.P. Act No.14 of 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") for release on the ground that the applicant no.1 is the father and the applicant no.2 is the son ...
Shyam NaraIn Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-13-2012
1. This petition assails the order of the Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Allahabad who had been entrusted to decide the said dispute in relation to the District of Basti on account of an order transferring the proceedings from Gorakhpur to Allahabad. 2. The petition has been filed praying for quashing of the impugned order dated 31st August, 2012 whereby the Assistant Registrar has arrived at the conclusion that the elections of the managing body of the Society deserves to be held under Sub- Section (2) of Section 25 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 as the tenure of the earlier Committee has come to an end. He has further proceeded to decide the electoral college of the society in terms of Section 15 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 whereby he has authorised the participation of 46 members in the elections which are proposed under the impugned order to be held on 14th September, 2012. Sri R.K. Ojha, learned counsel for the petitioners advancing his submi...
Suryajeet Rajbhar Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-13-2012
1. Heard Sri L.D. Rajbhar and Sri Tara Chand Kaushal, learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the records. 2. These two petitioners before this Court are aggrieved by the action of the Respondents not allowing the petitioners to attend the counselling which was scheduled to be held with effect from 14th July, 2012 in relation to engineering courses to which admission is granted under a joint entrance examination conducted by the respondent-State Government. The petitioners contend that they have qualified in the entrance examination but they further claimed the benefit of reservation claiming themselves to be belonging to the "Bhar" caste which according to them is a denotified tribe and is of the same status and equivalent to a Scheduled Tribe. The brochure under which the said entrance examination has been conducted notifies that reservation for denotified tribes in the entrance examination is not permissible and denotified tribes are not recognized as scheduled tribes. The p...
Aayushi Stock Brokers Private Limited Vs. Assistant Commissioner of In ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-13-2012
1. The petitioner is a private limited company incorporated on 25.9.1995 in the State of U.P. under the Companies Act, 1956. The company was initially incorporated in the name of 'Cosmos Financial Services Private Limited'. The name of the company was changed as 'Aayushi Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd.' w.e.f. 15.11.2000. The company has two directors namely Shri Ravindra Kumar Agarwal and Shri Satish Chandra Agarwal. It is alleged that till mid June, 2000 the company's principal place of business was at Agra. On 19.6.2000 the Board of Directors of the Company decided to set up a corporate office at Delhi as its principal place of its business operations. Accordingly in June, 2000 the corporate office was shifted to Delhi. It is alleged that by a special resolution dated 12.6.2002 passed by the shareholders of the company the registered office of the company was also shifted from U.P. to Delhi. The change was approved by the Company Law Board by its order dated 24.1.2003. It is alleged that up...
Ram Karan Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-13-2012
1. Heard Shri Brijesh Kumar Saxena, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Vinay Bhushan, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel and perused the record. 2. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the impugned order dated 16.09.2002 (Annexure No.1) passed by the Prescribed Authority (Ceiling)/Additional Collector, Sitapur/opposite party no.3 and order dated 11.2.2003 (Annexure No.3) as well as order dated 4.4.2003 (Annexure No.5) passed by the Additional Commissioner (J), Lucknow Division, Lucknow in Appeal No.28 of 2001- 02. Facts in brief as submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners are that the land in dispute initially belonged to one Shri Vishwa Nath Singh who was the original tenure holder. On 12.8.1959, he executed a registered sale deed in respect of plot nos.377 and 382 (new number) situated in village Kariyamau, Pargana Ram Kot, Tehsil, District- Sitapur in favour of Smt. Kamla Shukla, Smt. Ram Devi and in favour of Smt. Prem Kumari, Smt....
Ram Autar Agarwal Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Alld
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-13-2012
Aditya Nath Mittal, J. 1. Both these appeals contain common questions of law regarding gifts to both the assessees by same donors, hence are taken together. 2. Income Tax Appeal No.124 of 2001 has been admitted on the following questions of law:- "(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, in view of the fact that the Assessing Authority has not found entries in the diary correct and reliable and, therefore, referred the matter to the departmental Valuation Officer for the value of the cost of construction and once, departmental valuer has estimated cost of construction at Rs.5,04,100.00 it was not open to the Assessing Authority to determine the cost of the construction on the basis of entry of diary which was rough and not reliable? (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, once, matter has been referred to the departmental valuer for the determination of the cost of the construction and once, departmental valuer has determined the cost of co...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-13-2012
Aditya Nath Mittal, J. 1. These Income Tax Appeals have been admitted on the following substantial questions of law:- "1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is legally correct in allowing relief to the tax deductor by cancelling the TDS liability imposed by the ITO (TDS) on the amount of interest paid on delayed payment of compensation for all the assessment years 1998-99 to 2002-03? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Hon'ble Tribunal is legally correct in holding that the interest paid on delayed payment of compensation under MACT does not come with in the ambit of section 2(28A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and therefore, the tax deductor was not under any legal obligation to deduct Income-tax at source (TDS) on the amount of decree which is known as interest on delayed payment of compensation?" 2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent Insurance Company paid compensation and interest thereon under the Motor Vehicle Act...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »