Allahabad Court May 2014 Judgments
Anand Prakash Agrawal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (Central)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-29-2014
Tarun Agarwala, J. 1. By means of this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for the quashing of the notices dated 15.12.2004 and 16.12.2004 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Varanasi for the assessment years 1999-2000, 2000-01 and 2001-02. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition is, that the petitioner filed his return for the assessment year 1999-2000, 2000-01 and 2001-02 under Section 139, which was accepted and intimation was given to the petitioner under Section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, a search and seizure operation was conducted under Section 132(1) of the Act at the residence of the petitioner as well as at his business premises at Varanasi and at Kolkata. Based on this search and seizure, block assessment order dated 20.12.2004 was passed under Section 158 BC of the Act for the period 01.04.1996 to 03.10.2002 which covered the assessment years 1999-2000, 2000-01 and 2001-02. 2. After passing of th...
Tag this Judgment!Ganesh Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-26-2014
1. In these two connected Applications under Section 482, Cr.P.C., being Application Nos. 6803 of 2003 and 7318 of 2003, two relative applicants Ganesh Singh and his sister-in law Smt. Manju Singh have prayed for quashing of prosecution of complaint case No. 2535 of 2002, Meera Devi v. Ganesh Singh and Others, under Section 138, N.I. Act pending before 1st Judicial Magistrate, Jaunpur. Since the facts and prayer in both the applications are common and it both emanates from the same complaint case, hence by this common judgment they are being decided. Mr. T.B. Pandey, learned Counsel for the applicants, Mr. V.K. Tiwari, learned Counsel holding brief of Mr. P.N. Tiwari for the complainant-respondent No. 4 and learned AGA for the State have been heard in extenso and record of both the Applications have been scrutinized carefully. A priory, preceding facts generating these Applications revealed that a complaint was filed by complainant Smt. Meera Devi/respondent No. 4, before 3rd A.C.J.M.,...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Manoj Kabra Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-22-2014
1. The petitioner is a medical doctor and purchased a property by means of a registered sale deed on September 25, 2007, from Sri Ajay Kumar Agrawal on a consideration of Rs. 7 lakhs. The stamp duty was paid in accordance with the circle rate which was Rs. 12 lakhs. Pursuant to the said sale deed, the petitioner contends that he came in possession. It transpires that assessment proceedings for the assessment year 2005-06 was pending against the seller, namely, Sri Ajay Kumar Agrawal, which culminated when an assessment order under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act was passed on July 31, 2007, and certain demand was raised against him. 2. Based at this assessment order, a notice dated January 3, 2008, under section 281 was issued to the petitioner to show cause as to why the sale deed executed by Ajay Kumar Agrawal in favour of the petitioner should not be treated as a void document. The petitioner, on receipt of the said notice submitted his reply contending that he was a bona fide ...
Tag this Judgment!R.S.D. Academy Thru' Director Dr. Vinod Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and Ot ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-22-2014
Amreshwar Pratap Sahi and Rajan Roy, JJ. Heard Sri Nipun Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Vivek Varma, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 and Sri Ashok Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the respondent No.3. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner, i.e. college, under which the respondent No.3 was employed as lecturer on contract basis under the self finance scheme, has challenged the judgment of the Vice Chancellor, Mahatma Jyotiba Phule, Rohil Khand University, whereby he has declined to accord approval for removal of the respondent No.3 from service and has disapproved such action of the petitioner. The undisputed facts are that the contractual appointments of lecturers are made under the self finance scheme in accordance with the Government Orders issued from time to time and their terms and conditions of service are also regulated by the said Government Orders. Such appointments are not made under the U.P. State Universities Act, 1973 nor the conditions...
Tag this Judgment!Sunbeam Academy Educational Society Vs. Chief Commissioner of Income-t ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-21-2014
Tarun Agarwala, J. 1. Heard Sri Ashish Bansal, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Shambhu Chopra, the learned counsel appearing for the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax. 2. The petitioner is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and is providing education by setting up centres for educational excellence and schools under the name and style of "The Sunbeam Academy Educational Society". Initially the Society was imparting education upto the 8th standard and the same was increased to 12th standard from the academic year 2003-04. Considering the aims and objects of the Society, the petitioner applied and was duly granted a registration under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). 3. The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, by an order dated 20.12.2007, granted approval under Section 10 (23C)(vi) of the Act after being satisfied that the educational institution was existing solely for educational purpose and not for the p...
Tag this Judgment!Shobhai Ram and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-21-2014
Heard Sri H.R. Misra, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri K.M. Mishra for the petitioners and Sri K.N. Mishra for the respondent bank. By means of this writ petition the petitioners are challenging the order dated 13th July, 2010 passed by the Managing Director of the respondent bank whereby the claim of the petitioners for enhanced gratuity amounting to Rs. 10 lacs w.e.f. 1.1.2006 has been turned down on the ground that the said benefit is admissible under the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Amendment Act, 2010 w.e.f. 6.7.2010 when the respondent bank took a decision to enhance the same from Rs. 3.50 lacs to 10 lacs. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Payment of Gratuity Act being an Industrial Law is not applicable to the employees of the Co-operative Societies in view of the U.P. Co-Operative Society Act as also the pronouncement of the Supreme Court in the case of Ghaziabad Zila Sahkari Bank Ltd. Vs. Additional Labour Commissioner and othe...
Tag this Judgment!Chokhani Brother Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income-tax, Range-I, Kanpur
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-16-2014
Dr. Satish Chandra, J. 1. By this writ petition (amended) the assessee has made following prayers. (I) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari and to quash the order dated 23.3.2000 passed by learned Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-I, Kanpur (Annexure-1 to the writ petition). Further, to quash the re-assessment proceeding initiated against the petitioner vide notice dated 21.3.1997 for the assessment year 1988-89, (Annexure-2 to the writ petition) "and the approval granted by the Commissioner of Income Tax dated 21.3.1997". (II) award cost of this petition to the petitioner.' 2. Sri S.D. Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Krishna Dev Vyas, learned counsel for the assessee submits that assessee is engaged in the manufacturing and sale of the yarn. He purchased the raw materials from various sources including the Government undertakings. For the assessment year under consideration, the notices were issued under Section 148, but the same were droppe...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax (Central) Vs. Umang Agarwal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-16-2014
1. The present appeal is filed against the judgement and order dated 26.05.2006 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad in ITR No. 464/Alld./05 for the block period 01.04.1996 to 04.09.2002. 2. On 15.05.2012, a coordinate Bench of this Court has admitted the appeal on the following substantial question of law: "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the case of the Assess (Respondent) was covered by clause (c) of sub-section (1) of Section 158BB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and not under clause(ca) of sub-section (1) of Section 158 BB of the said act, and in setting-aside the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and in upholding the reduction made by the Assessing Officer in respect of the income shown in the belated return for the assessment year in question from the block assessment in respect of the Assess (Respondent)?" 3. The brief facts of the cas...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Ghaziabad Vs. Simbhaoli Industries (P.) Lt ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-15-2014
Dr. Satish Chandra, J. 1. The present appeal is filed by the department under Section-260-A of the Income Tax Act against the judgment and order dated 16.01.2001, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi in Appeal No.6408 of 1993 for the assessment year 1990-91. 2. On 17.03.2010, the appeal is admitted by a Co-ordinate Bench on the following substantial questions of law: "(a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal has erred in law in allowing the deduction of Rs. 17,10,011/- on account of provision for interest as it is a fictional liability?" 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a limited company deriving the income from manufacturing and sale of sugar and I.M.F.L. During the assessment year under consideration, the assessee has exported the country sprit, I.M.F.L. to Delhi. The excise duty was payable on these items as per the U.P. Excise Act. The assessee has not paid the duty payable to the government on export the goods ...
Tag this Judgment!Sunita Sharma Vs. Dy. Registrar, Chits Funds Society and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-14-2014
This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, has been filed by a practicing Advocate of this High Court who has been enrolled in 1995. The name of the petitioner has been registered at Serial No. A/S-1600 in the Advocates' Roll prepared by the Registrar General of this Court. Her name is borne on the voters' list for the ensuing elections of the High Court Bar Association. On 3 April 2014, the General Body of the High Court Bar Association adopted a resolution to hold elections for the Executive Committee on 19 May 2014 as the term of the Executive Committee was to come to an end on 4 April 2014. Subscriptions of advocates were to be paid by 25 April 2014 for the period up to 31 June 2014. Under the provisions of of the Rules of the High Court Bar Association, Allahabad ( "the Rules"), the meeting of the Annual General Body of the High Court Bar Association Association ("the Association") has to be convened at least a month before the expiry of the term of the office bearers by...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »