Madhya Pradesh Court September 2004 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.
Smt. Jamna Bai Mehra Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)MPHT471; 2004(4)MPLJ274
ORDERK.K. Lahoti, J.1. Aggrieved by order of the learned Single Judge dated 23-3-2004 in Writ Petition No. 2966/2001, this appeal has been directed. The appellant was appointed as Anganwadi Karyakarta on 12-2-2001 (Annexure A-3 along with appeal) by the Project Officer, Integrated Child Development Project, Gotegaon. The order of the Project Officer (Annexure A-3) was challenged by respondent No. 4 before the learned Single Judge on the ground that her candidature was not considered and she being widow, she ought to have been given preference as provided under Clause 4 of the Scheme contained in Annexure P-4 (of petition) dated 11-8-2000.2. The appellant and other respondents contested the case before the learned Single Judge on the ground, that as the closed relations of respondent No. 4 were the members of Panchayat, her candidature was rightly not considered.3. The learned Single Judge after appreciating the contentions of the parties allowed the writ petition holding that the refer...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Vippy Solvex Products Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-2004
Reported in: (2005)197CTR(MP)478
ORDER1. This is an application made by the Revenue -under Section 256(2) of the IT Act consequent upon the dismissal of their application made under Section 256(1) of the IT Act by the Tribunal vide its order, dt. 27th May, 1997, in RA No. 28/Ind/1997, which in turn arose out of the ITA No. 201/Ind/1992.2. Having heard, the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record of the case, in our opinion no, referable question of law really arises out of the matter proposed by the Revenue.3. The issue, in our opinion, is really academic because admittedly regular assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act is already in progress and, therefore, we do not find that any useful purpose will be served in calling for a question which even otherwise does not arise in the matter. Moreover, the issue sought to be raised has also been settled by the Supreme Court in a case reported as CIT v. Gujarat Electricity Board : [2003]260ITR84(SC) .4. Under these circumstances and taking into acco...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Malwa Vanaspati and Chemical Co. Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-2004
Reported in: (2005)197CTR(MP)337
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. The decision rendered in this reference application shall also govern the disposal of other two references being IT Ref. No. 69 of 1997 (CIT v. Vippy Solvex Products Ltd., Dewas) and IT Ref. No. 70 of 1997 (CIT v. Vippy Solvex Products Ltd., Dewas) because in all these reference applications, common question of law is involved.2. This is an application made by the Revenue--CIT under Section 256 of the IT Act consequent upon dismissal of their application made under Section 256(1) of the IT Act by the Tribunal vide its order dt. 19th Dec., 1996 in RA Nos. 50 to 52/Ind/1996 which in turn arise out of ITA Nos. 593 to 595/Ind/1992.3. In the opinion of Tribunal, the question of law proposed by the Revenue does not really arise and in any event according to Tribunal, it being a question of fact and having been answered by the decision of the High Court, the same need not be referred to this Court under Section 256(1) of the IT Act. In this view, the application was dism...
Cit Vs. Malwa Vanaspati and Chemical Co. Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-2004
Reported in: [2005]142TAXMAN158(MP)
ORDERThe decision rendered in this Reference application shall also govern the disposal of other two references being CIT v. Vippy Solvex Producis Ltd (IT Reference No. 69 of 1997) and CIT v. Vippy Solvex Products Ltd. (IT Reference No. 70 of 1997) because in all these reference applications common question of law is involved.2. This is an application made by the Revenue-Commissioner Income Tax under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act consequent upon dismissal of their application made under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act by the Tribunal vide its order dated 19-12-1996 in RA Nos. 50 to 52/Ind/96 which in turn arise out of I.T.A. Nos. 593 to 595/Ind/92.3. In the opinion of Tribunal the question of law proposed by the revenue does not really arise and in any event according to Tribunal it being a question of fact and having been answered by the decision of the High Court, the same need not be referred to this court under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act. In this view, the app...
Cit Vs. Vippy Solvex Products Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-2004
Reported in: [2005]143TAXMAN363(MP)
ORDERThis is an application made by the revenue under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act consequent upon the dismissal of their application made under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act by the Tribunal vide its order dated 27-5-1997 in R.A. No. 28/IND/97, which in turn arose out of the I.T.A. No. 201/IND./92.2. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record of the case in our opinion no referable question of law really arises out of the matter proposed by the revenue.3. The issue, in our opinion is really academic because admittedly regular assessment under section 143(3) of the Act are already in progress and, therefore, we do not find that any useful purpose will be served in calling for a question which even otherwise does not arise in the matter. Moreover, the issue sought to be raised has also been settled by the Supreme Court in CIT v. Gujarat Electricity Board : [2003]260ITR84(SC) .4. Under these circumstances and taking into account the law l...
Smt. Kamlabai Khare Vs. Rajiv Acharya
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-2004
Reported in: [2005(105)FLR954]
P.C. Agarwal, J.1. By impugned order dated 14.6.2001 Commissioner for the workmen compensation-cum-Labour Court, Dewns (Labour Court for short) has dismissed the claim of the appellant for compensation.2. The appellant had claimed to be a workman employed in Shivam Textiles of which Rajiv Acharya (the respondent) has been the proprietor or employer. As per claim on 15.6.1997 appellant feeding was wool to the blue machine when her right hand was caught in the machine resulting in loss of her little finger and two pharynges of the ring finger with pulling off the skin from palm to elbow causing to her permanent disability and total loss of earning capacity. A claim for Rs. 2,00,000/- as compensation and Rs. 2,500/- for medical expenses had been submitted. The respondent had denied that the appellant had been workman employed in the unit and had sustained injury while working therein.3. Before the Labour Court Smt. Kamlabai (AW 1-the appellant) herself, Smt. Shantabai (AW 2) and Devendra ...
Pradeep Singh Parihar Vs. Eveready Industries India Ltd. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-22-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)MPHT102
ORDERR.V. Raveendran, C.J.1. The appellant was appointed as Store Clerk on 26-2-1977 by the first respondent. He was posted as Territory Supervisor, Jabalpur, on 1-4-1991. By communication dated 11-12-1997, the services of the appellant were terminated with effect from 12-12-1997 and a cheque for a month's salary in lieu of notice was enclosed with that letter.2. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant filed an appeal under Section 58 (2) of the M.P. Shops and Establishment Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') before the Appellate Authority (Assistant Labour Commissioner, Jabalpur) for setting aside the termination and for reinstatement with back wages and compensation. In the appeal, the appellant contended that his termination, without enquiry and without opportunity to show cause, was invalid. The employer resisted the appeal contending that it was entitled to terminate the services of the appellant without assigning any reason as provided under Section 58(1) of the Act, if rea...
Zulfikar Vs. State of M.P. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-22-2004
Reported in: [2005(105)FLR332]; (2005)IILLJ747MP
A.M. Sapre, J.1. Challenge in this petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is to a RRC (Revenue Recovery Certificate) Annexure P-7. It is for recovery of Rs. 20,000/- issued under the provisions of Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 (for short hereinafter called 'The Act').2. Petitioner is the resident of village Karoli in Tehsil- Manawar in District-Dhar. He gave contract to construct his house to one Radheshyam Patidar. It is said that on April 1, 1997 one Inspector appointed under the Act came on the spot where the house was under construction and found that one girl was working. According to report of Inspector the girl by name Idi was minor and hence, since she was found working in construction activity and hence petitioner was held liable to pay fine of Rs. 20,000/-. The case of petitioner in reply to show cause issued to him was that the girl was not actually working but she had come to meet her father-Jamsingh who was working as labour...
Cit Vs. Ashok Pal Daga
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-22-2004
Reported in: [2005]142TAXMAN27(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.The decision rendered in this case shall also govern disposal of other case being M.C.C. No. 511 of 1995 because both these cases arise out of the same order and secondly they arise between the same parties except the difference is that of different assessment years.2. This is an application made by the revenue (Commissioner of Income Tax) under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act consequent upon the dismissal of their application made under section 256(1) ibid. by the Tribunal being R.A. Nos. 94, 97 and 98/Ind/94 on 12-12-1994 which in turn arise out of an order dated 8-7-1994 passed by Tribunal in consolidated cases being ITA Nos. 288, 289, 781, 557 and 558/Ind/92 arising out of assessment years 1987-88 to 1989-90 in relation to same assessee, i.e., respondent herein. According to Tribunal (ITAT) the questions proposed by the revenue do not really arise out of the order passed by Tribunal in appeal referred supra and they are in fact questions relating to facts. I...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. G.M. Mittal Stainless Steel Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-21-2004
Reported in: (2004)192CTR(MP)18; [2004]271ITR219(MP)
A.M. Sapre, J.1. This is, an IT reference made under Section 256(1) of the IT Act at the instance of Revenue (CIT) to answer following question of law referred to this Court by the Tribunal which arises out of the order of Tribunal, dt. 28th Aug., 1997, passed in ITA No.-426/Ind/1993 : -'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the assessee was correct in claiming power subsidy as capital receipt ?'2. Heard Shri R.L. Jain, learned counsel for the applicant. None, for the assessee despite service and S.P.C. having been sent for hearing of the reference.3. The question arises out of asst. yr. 1988-89. The assessee being a limited company at the relevant time was engaged in the business of manufacture of stainless steel in their manufacturing unit. In its manufacturing activity, the assessee received in the relevant assessment year a power subsidy amounting to Rs. 13,22,884 from the State. The question, therefore, arose befo...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »