Patna Court June 1996 Judgments
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Govind Ram and Co.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-25-1996
BY THE COURT :The Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna, at the instance of the Revenue, has referred the following questions for the opinion of this Court under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act') :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, it was permissible to the assessee to challenge the charging of interest when the order passed by the CIT under s. 263(1) of the IT Act, 1961, setting aside the assessment order with a direction to charge interest was upheld by the Tribunal ?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that no interest was leviable made under s. 147/143(3) and under s. 263 ?'For the facts of this case we may refer to para 3 of the statement of the case which is as under :'3. While making the original assessment under s. 143(3)/148, the ITO had not charged any interest under s. 139(8). Subsequently, assessment was set aside by the CIT, under s. 263(1) with the direction to...
Tag this Judgment!Satish Kumar Singh Alias Sitv (C-2 Singh) Alias Ashok Kumar Singh Vs. ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-19-1996
S.K. Chattopadhyaya, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution has been filed by the petitioner challenging the correctness and validity of the detention order dated 28.10, 95 passed by the District Magistrate, Ranchi detaining the petitioner in exercise of his powers under Sub-section (2) of Section 12 of the Bihar Control of Crimes Act, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') with a view to prevent the petitioner-detenu from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. The said order of the District Magistrate was subsequently approved by the State Government on 8.11, 95 and also by the Advisory Board by its .order dated 22nd December, 1995.2. Before adverting to the contentions raised by the learned Counsel for the parties it will be useful to state the grounds on which the petitioner-detenu was detained. The grounds of detention which are served on the detenu in Jail on 28.10.95 itself are reproduced hereinbelow:1. 'On 17.1.9...
Tag this Judgment!Prabhat Kumar Singh Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-19-1996
N. Pandey, J.1. This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India on behalf of the petitioner is for issuance of an appropriate writ quashing the order of the State Government whereby and respondent Nos. 4 and 5 were granted remission of their sentences as per the provisions of Sub-section (2) of Section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code').2. Before proceeding to adjudicate the crucial contention, it would be appropriate to have a brief survey of some of the facts:On 18.12.1979, informant Kameshwar Singh lodged a first information report alleging that respondent Nos. 4 and 5 variously armed with lethal, weapons, came to the place of the occurrence and assaulted the informant as well as his manager with a view to commit their murder. The Assistant Sessions Judge, I Patna ultimately having found the respondents 4 and 5 guilty of the charges, convicted them and sentenced for a period of five years under Section 307 of th...
Tag this Judgment!Hindustan TIn Box Industry Vs. Adityapur Industrial Development Author ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-11-1996
S.K. Chhattopadhyaya, J.1. Heard Mr. Ram Balak Mahto, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. B.B. Sinha, learned Counsel for the respondents and with their consent, this writ application has been heard at the admission stage itself and is being disposed of by this order.2. The order dated 8.12.1995 (Annexure l)'has been impugned by the petitioner, by and under which the respondents have cancelled the allotment of plot No. 13-B Phase. A prayer has also been made to unseal the factory premises and to restrain the respondents to interfere with the business of the petitioner.3. In order to appreciate the rival contentions of the parties, certain facts are necessary to be stated. According to the petitioner, for establishing the Tin Box Manufacturing Industry at Adityapur, he applied for allotment of the plot at the Aditypur Industrial Area Development Authority in 1970 and an area of 23400 sqr feet was allotted to the petitioner by an under dated 1.7.1972 and...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Kaluram and Company Vs. M/S. Kisan Seeds Corporation
Court: Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
Decided on: Jun-11-1996
B.N. Sinha, President: 1. This appeal is directed against order dated 7th September, 1993 passed by the District Forum, Siwan in Case No. 159 of 1993 in which the appellant here was the complainant and the respondent here was the opposite party before the District Forum. The District Forum has dismissed the complaint of the complainant by the impugned order against which the present appeal has been filed by the complainant. 2. The facts of the case for the disposal of this appeal may be briefly noticed. The complainant had ordered for 180 quintals of seeds of wheat worth Rs. 96,300/- and had paid Rs. 9,300/- through credit memo as advance in respect thereof. The seed which was supplied by the opposite party was defective and there was only 35% germination as a result of which the complainant asserts that he sustained loss of Rs. 80,000/-. 3. On being noticed the opposite party appeared and controverted the claim of the complainant challenging the maintainability of the case under the C...
Tag this Judgment!Estate Officer, H.U.D.A. Vs. Dr. Indira Sharan
Court: Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
Decided on: Jun-11-1996
B.N. Sinha, President: 1. This appeal is directed against order dated 7th June 1995 passed by the District Forum, Patna in case No. 1004 in which the appellant here alongwith the Estate Officer, Haryana Urban Development. Authority (in short HUDA) was the opposite party and the respondent here was the complain, ant before the District Forum. 2. The facts of the case for the disposal of this appeal may be briefly stated. The complainant applied to the opposite party No. 1 the Administrator, HUDA, Gurgaon, Haryana for a plot of land along with earnest money of Rs. 22,826/-. The complainant got an allotment letter dated 12.7.93 from the Estate Officer, HUDA opposite party No. 2, Gurgaon confirming the allotment of plot in Sector IX A and he was directed to pay Rs. 34,254/- more as allotment money within thirty days of the allotment letter. But as the complainant was undergoing treatment for heart desease at Indira Gandhi Institute of Cardeology, Patna and she could not arrange the allotme...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Kamla Devi and ors., Etc. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-03-1996
Naresh Kumar Sinha, J. 1. This batch of seven writ applications questions the legal validity of a general notice issued by the Vice-Chairman of the Patna Regional Development Authority and published in a daily newspaper on 9-2-1996. The notice purported to have been issued in compliance of the judgment of the Apex Court directed the persons in unauthorised occupation of 57.72 acres of land acquired vide Land Acquisition case No. 63 of 1961-62 to vacate the said land from encroachment within 15 days from the date of publication of the notice otherwise the encroachment shall be removed with the help of Collector, Patna. The petitioners are land owners or their transferees claiming to be in possession of some of the acquired plots over which they had built houses and were living therein. The respondents are the State of Bihar, the Patna Regional Development Authority, the Collector and the Budha Grih Nirman Samiti. The petitions seek quashing of the impugned notice and for an order rest...
Tag this Judgment!Asharfi Prasad Saha and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-03-1996
Naresh Kumar Sinha, J.1. The writ petitioners, 192 in all, or the members of their family are businessmen, doctors, teachers, professors, engineers, lawyers and nurses employed in the establishments in around Patna. They claim to have constructed houses on some of the plots of the land acquired by the State for the Patna improvement Trust and now the Patna Regional Development Authority (hereinafter 'P.R.D.A.' in Land Acquisition case No. 63/61-62 and transferred to Budhha Grih Nirman Sahyog Samiti Ltd. (hereinafter 'Society'. They have filed this writ application against the State of Bihar (respondent No. 1), the Collector, Patna (respondent No 2.) the P.R.D.A. (respondent No, 4), the District Land Acquisition Officer (respondent No. 5) and the Society (respondent No. 6) and have prayed for the following reliefs:(i) Issuance of direction, order pr writ in the nature of writ of mandamus/certiorari commanding the respondents to regularise and settle the petitioners on plots of land on ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›