Patna Court June 2008 Judgments
Food Corporation of India Vs. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-30-2008
Chandramauli Kumar Prasad and Shailesh Kumar Sinha, JJ.1. Petitioner-Food corporation of India is a statutory Corporation created by an Act of Parliament and a dealer within the meaning of Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1959, hereinafter referred to as the Act. In the assessment year 1974-75, it was assessed to Sales tax vide order dated 16.9.1983 by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes.2. While working out the tax liability the Assessing Officer observed as follows:The dealers sale which would be subject to addl. tax works out as under:Taxable Rs. 75, 49, 22, 650.11 foodgrains Sale to Flour Rs. 1,52,43,173.36MillsProcured rice Rs. 15,36,075.19Casual sale Rs. 92,163.75Damaged grainsdo-Gunny bags. Rs. 16.21.876.22 Rs. 77,34,15,938.63Total Addl. Tax on Rs. 2,26,47,679.50foodgrains-do- Damaged Rs. 2,7 64.95 grains-do-gunny sale Rs. 97,312.56This amount of Rs. 79,61,63,695.64 would be subject to addl. tax at the rate of Rs. 1/2%3. Tax is assessed as under:Taxable Rs. 75,49,22,650.11 Rs. 2...
Tag this Judgment!Food Corporation of India Vs. the Commissioner of Commercial Tax
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-30-2008
Chandramauli Kumar Prasad and Shailesh Kumar Sinha, JJ.1. Petitioner-Food Corporation of India is a statutory Corporation created by an act of Parliament and a dealer within the meaning of Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1959, hereinafter referred to as the act. In the assessment year 1973-74, it was assessed to Sales tax vide order dated 23.5.1983 by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. The Food Corporation of India, hereinafter referred to as the dealer, claimed deduction of Rs. 4,42,17,174.21 on account of sale of wheat to Flour Mill for use of manufacture of Maida & Suji etc,. In support thereof, it furnished 428 declaration in Form IX to the extent of Rs. 4,14,71.114. 23. Out of 428 declarations in Form No. IX, two declarations of Rs. 72,900/- i.e. Rs. 1,45,800.00 in total were not original but Photostat copies. In the opinion of the Assessing Officer 'production of declaration IX is mandatory, and no collateral evidence however convincing it may be can be a substitute for this m...
Tag this Judgment!Bhukan Sah and anr. Vs. Radha Devi and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-30-2008
Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.1. The second, appeal has been listed for orders on petition. The appellant was the defendant in the suit below and appellant in the first Court of appeal. The plaintiff is the respondent and has appeared. The interlocutory application is for stay of the preparation of final decree under appeal, insofar as it relates to the residential house.2. In my view, as plaintiff is the only contesting party and has appeared, the other respondent being defendant who has chosen not to appear nor has filed the appeal, it will serve no purpose in keeping the appeal pending.3. In my view, a substantial question of law thus arises on which both parties have already been heard. The substantial question of law is whether in my view the provisions of Section 23 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 as prior to its amendment in the year 2005, was the trial Court and the appellate Court correct in law in awarding a share to the plaintiff, who was a Class-I female heir of late Jibu Sah...
Tag this Judgment!Naresh Yadav Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-27-2008
Syed Mohammad Mahfooz Alam, J.1. This criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the judgment and order dated 27-7-1993 passed by Sri R.K. Chotidhary, 12th Additional Sessions Judge, Munger in Sessions Case No. 105/89 whereby he has been pleased to convict the appellant (Naresh Yadav) under Sections 376/511 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo three years' rigorous imprisonment besides fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. The appellant being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said judgment and order has preferred this appeal.2. The prosecution case, as per fardbeyan of the informant Harni Devi (P.W. 5) recorded by A.S.I. Garj Narain Singh of Sangrampur Police Station on 26-6-1988 at 4 a.m. at village Bhandara within Sangrampur Police Station, District Munger is that in the night of 25th/26th June, 1988 at midnight while the informant was sleeping at the verandah of her house and her hus...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Bihar Vs. Md. Akhtar @ Kari,
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-27-2008
Sudhir Kumar Katriar and Samarendra Pratap Singh, JJ.1. The instant Government appeal is directed against the judgment dated 18.6.1988, passed by the learned 2nd Additional District & Sessions Judge, Begusarai, in S.T. No. 107 of 1985/4 of 1988, whereby and where under he has acquitted Opposite Parties 1, 2 and 3, namely, Md. Akhtar @ Md. Kari, Md. Jamal @ Fakira and Md. Sanjat, charged under Sections 148 and 302 read with Section 149 of the Penal Code. A criminal revision was also filed at the instance of the informant to the same effect which has been tagged with the instant Government Appeal.2. The prosecution case, as made out in the Fardbeyan of Md. Abu Daud (P.W.6) of village Saidpur, P.S. Matihani, District Begusarai, recorded on 5.1.1984, at 9 P.M., by Shri B. Das, Officer Incharge Matihani P.S., Village Saidpur, in short is as follows:i) The informant stated that he along with his younger brother Md. Nadir Sah @ Jumma went to the place of co-villager Md. Mobin (P.W.4) to coll...
Tag this Judgment!Vijay Kumar Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-26-2008
V.N. Sinha, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the State.2. Petitioner is the Headmaster of Nationalized Middle School, Hisua, Nawada (hereinafter referred to as 'the School') and has been placed under suspension under orders of the District Magistrate, Nawada bearing Memo No. 3116 dated 27.12.2007, Annexure-1 which has been assailed by filing this writ application on the ground that the District Magistrate had no jurisdiction to pass the impugned suspension order as Block Level Committee constituted in terms of Bihar Panchayat Elementary Teachers (Employment and Service Condition) Rules, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules') as vested with disciplinary control over the petitioner and other teacher of the school and the District Magistrate had no jurisdiction in the matter at all. In support of such submission learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on Rule 17 of the Rules which empowers the committee constituted under Sub-rule (7) of Rule 9 of th...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Binod Kumar Choudhary Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-26-2008
Navin Sinha, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, for the State and for respondents 3 and 4.2. The petitioner seeks quashing of the notification dated 20-12-2005 bearing No. 1140(17), cancelling the nomination dated 26-2-2005 of the petitioner made by the State Government to the Dental Council of India in exercise of powers Under Section 6(1) of the Indian Dentist Act, 1948 (hereinafter called 'the Act').3. To appreciate the controversy it is necessary to set out the relevant extract of Sections 3 and 6 of the Act.4. Section 3. Constitution and composition of Council. The Central Government shall, as soon as may be constitute a Council consisting of the following members.(e) One member to represent such State or a Union Territory nominated by the Government of each such State from amongst persons registered either in a Medical Register or a Dental Register of the State.Section 6. Term of Office and Casual vacancies.(1) Subject to the provisions of this Section an electe...
Tag this Judgment!Shib Nath Jha Vs. the Bihar State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-26-2008
V.N. Sinha, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board').2. This writ application is directed against the punishment order dated 25.7.2001, Annexure-2 whereunder sum of Rs. 5,60,784=45/- has been directed to be recovered from the petitioner as also his pension has been fixed at Nil. Further prayer is to quash the appellate order dated 11.1.2005 as communicated to the petitioner under memo No. 183 dated 29.1.2005 contained in Annexure-3 to the writ application, whereunder the appeal against the aforesaid punishment order has been dismissed.3. Petitioner superannuated while serving the Board as a Senior Store Keeper at the Central Store Saharsa with effect from 28.2.1999. One day prior thereto he was served with Memo No. 889 dated 27.2.1999, Annexure-1, enclosing the charge sheet imputing shortage in the store while petitioner served as Assistant Store keeper...
Tag this Judgment!Rajesh Kumar Agrawal and ors. Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-25-2008
Barin Ghosh and Jayanandan Singh, JJ.1. In 1917 revisional survey was done. Upon conclusion thereof, it was reported that R.S. Plot No. 1454 belongs to the then British Emperor. In 1947, upon independence, the Central Government, therefore, in terms of the findings of the said survey became the owner of the said property. Until date no one has taken any step to alter the said declaration made in the said survey. It appears that on 4th December, 1972 the Circle Officer of Gopalganj submitted a report that certain persons have unauthorisedly encroached upon the land situated in the said plot. The said report resulted in an encroachment case being initiated against the appellant. The case was decided against the appellant. Appeal preferred by the appellant against the said decision was dismissed, whereupon appellant filed a writ petition registered as C.W.J.C. No. 640 of 1976. The said writ petition was allowed by a Division Bench of this Court, where while both the orders passed in the ...
Tag this Judgment!State of Bihar and ors. Vs. Shiv Shankar Construction Co. (P) Ltd.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-24-2008
1. That the relevant clause of contract, which according to the appellants is an arbitration agreement, is Clause 23 of General Rule and Directions for the guidance of the contract is not in dispute.2. Clause 23 reads thus:In case any dispute or difference shall arise between the parties or either of thereupon any question relating to the meaning of the specifications, designs, drawings and instructions hereinbefore mentioned or as to the quality of workmanship or materials used on the work, or as the.construction of any of the conditions or any clause or thing therein contained, or as to any question, claim, rights or liabilities of the parties, or any clause or thing whatsoever, in any way arising out of, or relating to the contract, designs, drawing, specifications, estimates, instructions, order, or these conditions, or otherwise concerning the work, or the execution, or failure to execute the same whether arising during the progress of the work, or alter the completion or abandon...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »