Jammu and Kashmir Court July 2000 Judgments

Riaz Construction Co. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: AIR2001J& K7

ORDERG.D. Sharma, J.1. The petitioner is a partner-ship firm and engaged in executing various kinds of civil works including earth works. The firm is registered as 'A' Class Contractor by the State Government; M.E.S. Department; Hindustan Petroleum Corporation and State Bank of India. Respondent No, 1 has sanctioned Rail link between Qazigund to Baramulla within the Kashmir Valley. The execution of the project has been entrusted to respondent No. 2 which is a Government of India undertaking. To start with the execution of the project respondent No. 2 published tender notice No. ircon/Co/ NR.Stn. Yard (E/W) 97061 dated : 20-1-2000. The tender notice provided three packages namely, package A-1, package A-2 and package A-3, these packages are reproduced hereunder ;'(1) Package A-l ; Earth work etc. In embankment for the construction of Railway yard at KAKAPORA. Estimated cost Rs. 4.00 Crores (Approx.) Earnest money Rs. 2.00 Lacs. Tender Cost Rs. 2.500/- Time of completion 14 (Fourteen) Mo...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jammu and Kashmir Tourism Development C ...

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: [2001]248ITR94(J& K)

B.P. Sarap, C.J.1. By this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar (the 'Tribunal'), has referred the following question of law to this court for opinion at the instance of the Revenue :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the assessee is entitled to depreciation under Section 32 in respect of the immovable properties, even though their ownership has not been transferred to the assessee under any registered written instrument ?'2. The material facts giving rise to this reference are as follows : In the year 1967, the Government of Jammu and Kashmir found that it was not possible on their part to look after the management of the tourist homes, etc. With a view to encouraging tourism in the State, the State Government decided that a corporation be put in charge and made responsible for the management of the tourist homes. Accordingly, a corporat...

Ashok Kumar Vs. the Commissioner of Income Tax

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: [2000]246ITR261(J& K)

B.P. Saraf, C.J.1. By this reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('Act'), the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar ('Tribunal') has referred the following three questions of law to this Court for opinion at the instance of the assessee :'1. Whether, on facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that agreement between the assessee, karta of the HUF and his wife is an invalid agreement?2. Whether, on facts and circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Officer as an outsider, has a right to challenge the validity of an agreement entered between the assessee as karta of H.U.F. and his wife and whether the Tribunal was right in looking into the validity of the said agreement?3. If the above questions are answered in affirmative, whether on facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in disallowing salary paid to the assessee in his individual capacity by the H.U.F. for looking after the interests of H.U.F. i...

Ashok Kumar Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: [2001]246ITR261(J& K)

Dr. B. P. Saraf, C. J.By this reference under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), has referred the following three questions of law to this court for opinion at the instance of the assessee :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that agreement between the assessee, karta of the Hindu undivided family and his wife is an invalid agreement?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Officer as an outsider, has a right to challenge the validity of an agreement entered between the assessee as karta of the Hindu undivided family and his wife and whether the Tribunal was right in looking into the validity of the said agreement 3. If the above questions are answered in the affirmative, whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Trib...

Riyaz Jan Mast Vs. Asif Javid and anr.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: AIR2001J& K2

ORDERG.D. Sharma, J. 1. Through the medium of this revision petition the petitioner has challenged the order dated : 21-6-2000 passed by the Ld. Sub Judge (CJM. Srinagar) whereby he allowed the application of the respondents made therein under Order 13, Rule 10 CPC and directed the Assessing Authority of the sales Tax Department to send the record of the firm known as 'M/s Indian Metal Mart, Hari Singh High Street. Srinagar. 'The record comprised of form-C and statementsof accounts from 1984 to 1998. in the alternative, to supply the certified copies of the above stated recorded was also ordered. This order was passed in the suit which was filed by the respondents on 1-5-2000 for the reliefs of declaration, partition and possession. The suit was accompanied by application made under Order 13, Rule 10 CPC wherein the impugned order was passed. The petitioner made application for the vacation of the above said order by pleading that High Court had stayed the operation of the order dated ...

Mohammad Shafi Shah and ors. Vs. State of J. and K. and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: 2001CriLJ580

Syed Bashir-Ud-Din, J.1. In this appeal judgment and order dated 15-9-1999 of writ Court (learned single Judge) dismissing at pre-admission stage the writ petition is under challenge. By impugned judgment prayer of quashment of FIRs 119/98, 120/ 98 and 121/98, registered at Police Station Vigilance Organisation Kashmir; investigations of these cases; sanction to prosecute granted in the FIR 119/98 & 121 /98; sought sanction to prosecute in other FIR(s) and intended prosecution of appellants/writ petitioners has been declined. The writ Court has come to the conclusion that during investigation of FIR 87/97, VOK, the Investigating agency had reason to suspect the commission of offences by the accused and found basis for registration of the cases, followed by subsequent investigation of the cases. In investigating these cases, no provision of law has been breached. The claim of infraction of rules or salutary provision meant for investigation of cases, is without any basis. Note was taken...

Commissioner of Income-tax, Amritsar Vs. Jandk Co-operative Supply and ...

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

B.P. Saraf, C.J.1. By this reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('Act'), at the instance of the revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar ('Tribunal') has referred the following question of law to this Court for opinion:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that the income of the assessee from commission-cum-incidental charges for handling of chemical fertilizers as the sole agent of the J&K; State Govt. is exempt from the charge of tax under the provisions of section 80P(2)(e) of the Income-tax Act, 1961?' 2. The assessee is a co-operative society. It was appointed by the Government of Jammu and Kashmir its sole agent for the import and distribution of chemical fertilizers allotted to it by the Central Government or purchased by it from the approved manufacturers. Under the terms of the agreement dated 19th February, 1967 entered into between the assessee- society ...

Commissioner of Wealth Tax Vs. Jawahar Lal Mehra

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: (2001)165CTR(J& K)347,[2001]246ITR603(J& K)

Dr. B. P. Saraf, C. J.By this reference under section 27(1) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') (erroneously numbered as income-tax reference), the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), has referred the following three questions of law to this court for opinion at the instance of the revenue .'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in considering in the course of and for the purpose of disposing of an appeal with regard to levy of penalty for default under section 18(1)(a) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957, a challenge to the validity of the assessment order which was in fact final and conclusive ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the assessment for the relevant year made in the assessee's case was invalid and non est in the eyes of law on the authority of the decision of t...

The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Broadways Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

B.P. Saraf, Chief Justice 1. By this reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('Act'), the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal ('Tribunal'), Amritsar Bench, Amritsar has referred the following question of law to this Court for opinion at the instance of the revenue :'Whether the Hotel Building owned by the assessee constituted plant within the meaning of section 43(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and whether the assessee is entitled to depreciation thereon at the rate as admissible on the plant?'2. The assessee firm derives income from hotel business. Its return of income for the assessment year 1980-81 was filed on 29th July,1979 declaring an income of Rs.10,01,840/-. Subsequently, the assessee revised its return on 3.11.1981 declaring net loss of Rs.9, 96,806/-. In the revised return, the assessee claimed that the hotel building was plant and machinery and claimed depreciation on hotel building at a higher rate. The Income-tax Officer did not accept the assessee's claim on...

The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. the Hotel Highland Park

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: [2000]246ITR130(J& K)

B.P. Saraf, C.J.1. By this reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('Act'), the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar ('Tribunal') has referred the following questions of law to this Court for opinion at the instance of the revenue :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the assessment for the relevant year, made in the assessee's case, was affected by the rule laid down in the case of S. Mubarak Shah Naqshbandi , even though the tax payable by the assessee was duly determined in the separate sheet, namely, Assessment Form (ITNS-150), which had been prepared and signed by the Income-tax Officer simultaneously with the assessment order? 2. Whether, in the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in considering in the course of and for the purpose of disposing of an appeal against levy of penalty under section 271(1)(a), a challenge to the validity of...