Orissa Court January 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.
Utkal Galvanizers (P) Ltd. Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax and an ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-10-2008
Reported in: 105(2008)CLT533
I. Mahanty, J.1. The Petitioner in this writ application seeks to challenge an Order Dated 14.3.1995 passed under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Cuttack Circle for the assessment year 1991-92, inter alia, exercising his power under Section 154(1A) purportedly seeking to revise the depreciation earlier allowed to the assessee and seeking to levy interest under Section 234B (allegedly on the ground of having omitted to make such levy at the time of passing order under Section 143(3)) and therefore, seeking to rectify the aforesaid mistake by passing the impugned rectification order under Section 154 and raising an additional demand of Rs. 9,89,700/-. The assessee being aggrieved by such order, filed a revision under Section 264 of the Act before the Commissioner of Income Tax, Orissa and the revision having been rejected vide Order Dated 28.2.1996, the present writ application has been filed challenging the said order under Section 15...
Dr. Yudhistira Khatua and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-10-2008
Reported in: 105(2008)CLT669; [2008(117)FLR1145]; 2008(I)OLR890
M.M. Das, J.1. The petitioners in this writ application are all lecturers in aided colleges who were selected by the Service Selection Board and appointed as such in various colleges allotted by the Director of Higher Education, Orissa, Bhubaneswar. Their appointments have been approved by the Director and they are receiving their salary under the direct payment scheme from the Government. The grievance of the petitioners is that although the dearness allowance at the rate of 64% of the basic pay is being given to the lecturers of Government colleges, a discrimination is being made as the petitioners have been paid dearness allowance at the rate of 41% of their basic pay.2. It is the case of the petitioners that prior to 1.1.2001, the percentage of dearness allowance paid to the petitioners as well as the lecturers in Government colleges was same. But from 1.1.2001 onwards, dearness allowance at a higher rate was paid to the State Government employees including the lecturers of Governm...
Voltas Limited Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-10-2008
Reported in: 105(2008)CLT754; (2008)15VST401(Orissa)
B.N. Mahapatra, J.1. In this tax revision petition, the Petitioner has raised several questions of law, but at the time of hearing, the same are confined to the following three modified questions:i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the re-opening of the assessment under Section 12(8) of the OST Act is justified as no reason has been indicated in the notice issued under the said Section and that the re-assessment proceeding has not been initiated on change of opinion of the Sales Tax Officer?ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Sales Tax Tribunal, Orissa is correct in holding that the subsequent sale effected by the Petitioner to Orissa Power Generation Corporation and National Thermal Power Corporation is not in course of inter-state sale but intra-state sale and does not qualify for exemption as contemplated in Section 6(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956?iii) Whether, in the facts and the circumstances of the case, assessing officer is not j...
Saroj Kumar Sahoo Vs. I. Krishna Rao and Eight ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-09-2008
Reported in: 2008(I)OLR338
ORDERS.C. Parija, J.1. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner who is the informant, to set aside the impugned order dated 24.4.2007 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, F.T.C. No. 3, Bhubaneswar in S.T. Case No. 98/537 of 2004, rejecting the petition of the State under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to recall P.Ws. 1, 3 and 9 for their further cross-examination.It is submitted by learned Counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order has been passed without application of mind inasmuch as the provisions of Section 311 Cr.P.C. is to be considered liberally as the same has been enacted to enable the Court to find out the truth and render a just decision, it is further stated that the said provision empowers the Court to exercise its discretionary authority at any stage of enquiry, trial or other proceeding and therefore, the rejection of For Petitioner For Opp. Parties the application for recalling P.Ws. 1, 3 and 9 filed by the State is improper and i...
Motaka @ Daman Majhi Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-09-2008
Reported in: 2008(I)OLR321
L. Mohapatra, J.1. The appellant having been convicted for commission of offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'I.P.C.') and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rairangpur in S.T. Case No. 5/22 of 1999 has preferred this appeal.2. The case of the prosecution as revealed from the F.I.R. is that the wife of the elder brother of the informant and his children were staying along with Masa Majhi, Matka @ Daman Majhi, Badu Majhi, Surei Majhi, Bhakta Majhi and Nunaram Majhi at village Burutala Sahi. The mother of the informant, Raimat Majhi and sister Chudamani Murmu were staying in his house. Raimat Majhi had got some lands on partition from her father and had kept Rs. 8000/- at Bijatala Bank in her name and in the name of Chudamani Murmu. On 22.10.1998 at about 6.30 P.M., the appellant came to the court-yard of the informant and demanded a share in the cash kept by Raimath Majhi. The deceased Chudamani Majhi objected say...
Associates Cement Companies Ltd. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-09-2008
Reported in: 105(2008)CLT778; (2008)13VST90(Orissa)
B.N. Mahapatra, J.1. In this tax revision case the court has formulated the following question of law for adjudication:Whether, in facts and in the circumstances of the case, the stock of cement said to have been moved from the petitioner's factory to West Bengal can be held to be inter-State sales2. The facts in nutshell, relevant to the context are as follows:The petitioner in the present case is Associated Cement Companies Ltd., previously known as M/s. IDCOL Cement Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as, 'the company'). It is engaged in the business of manufacturing and sale of cement. The company has its factory in the district of Bargarh in the State of Orissa. The petitioner has a branch office at Kolkata in the State of West Bengal. Besides, the branch office, the petitioner also maintains nine godowns/dumps in West Bengal. The petitioner is registered under the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as, 'the OST Act') and Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereinafter referre...
Manorama Sahoo Vs. Pramod Kumar Pradhan and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-09-2008
Reported in: 105(2008)CLT516
I. Mahanty, J.1. In the present writ application, the Petitioner has sought to challenge the Order Dated 20.4.2006 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Second Court, Cuttack in C.S. No. 1 of 2003-1 whereby the Learned Civil Judge has been pleased to direct stay of the suit till disposal of the proceedings under the Orissa Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation of Lands Act, 1972 (in short 'Consolidation Act').2. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner asserts that the Trial Court has taken note of the fact that the issues raised in the present suit relate to parentage, adoption, validity of transfer etc. and determination of such issues were not within the purview of the authorities under the Consolidation Act. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that after having given such a finding in the impugned order, yet the Trial Court has directed stay of the suit till disposal of the pending proceedings under the Consolidation Act, purportedly on the ground that the iss...
Baisakhu Kishan Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-09-2008
Reported in: 105(2008)CLT590
B.P. Ray, J.1. The Appellant having been convicted for commission of offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life by the Learned Sessions Judge, Sundergarh in Sessions Trial No. 21 of 1996, has preferred this appeal against the order of conviction and sentence.2. The prosecution case as revealed from record is that the Appellant poured kerosene oil kept in an earthen pot. The wife-Sabitri Kishan protested, as a result of which the Appellant got enraged, dealt Budia (axe) blow on the head of his wife causing fracture and bleeding injury for which she fell down and lost her senses. She was immediately removed to S. Balang hospital for treatment and after some treatment she was removed to Subdivisonal Hospital, Bonai for better treatment where she succumbed to the injuries on 2.10.1995. The son of the Appellant lodged an F.I.R. at Tikayatpali Police Station on 1.10.1995 and a case under Section 307 IPC was registered against the Appellant. After the death o...
State Vs. Duryodhan Rout
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-08-2008
Reported in: 2008CriLJ2876
R.N. Biswal, J.1. Reference made under Section 366 of Cr.P.C. by Addl. Sessions Judge, Angul to confirm the death sentence passed in Criminal Trial (Sessions) No. 80 of 2005/8 of 2005 registered as DSREF No. 2 of 2007 and JCRLA No. 12 of 2007 preferred by the accused challenging the judgment and order of conviction and sentence, were heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.2. Succinctly stated the prosecution case is that, on 11-9-2004 at about 3 p.m. accused Duryodhan Rout, on the pretext that the deceased, Subhasini a minor girl aged about 10 years would talk over phone with his brother, Bamodev Bhoi working at Bargarh from the house of Bijaya Bhoi of Village-Anandpur took her on a bicycle. When the evening set in, the accused alone returned to the village and on enquiry about Subhasini by P.W. 5, her father, he told that she had gone with a woman of Ranibandha to her house. On the next day, as she did not return P.W. 5 again questioned the accused regarding the wherea...
State of Orissa Vs. Sunadhar Khilla
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-07-2008
Reported in: 105(2008)CLT241
L. Mohapatra, J.1. The above reference has been made by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Malkangiri for confirmation of sentence of death passed in Criminal Trial No. 34 of 2003 and the Criminal Appeal has been filed by the Appellant challenging the order of conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentence of death imposed by the Trial Court.The case of the prosecution as revealed from the F.I.R. is that on 22.8.2002, which was Rakhi Purnima Day, there was an altercation between the deceased and the Appellant. It is further alleged that the Appellant being in a drunken state asked the deceased to cook food but the deceased, who was also drunk was not feeling well and requested her husband, the Appellant, to cook food. On this issue, there was an altercation and the deceased went to sleep. The Appellant being enraged by the conduct of the deceased, assaulted her by means of kick and fist blows to her belly and chest, as a result of which, she vomited blood and di...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »