Rajasthan Court July 1979 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. A.K. Sharma
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-31-1979
Reported in: (1979)12CTR(Raj)84; [1983]141ITR23(Raj)
1. This is a reference application under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for giving a direction to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal for stating the case and to refer the question of law arising out of its order dated April 14, 1976.2. The non-petitioner, Dr. A.K. Sharma (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee') is a medical practitioner in the employment of the Rajasthan Govt. The assessee filed a return for the assessment year 1966-67 on May 21, 1967, showing his total income of Rs. 21,745 which included rupees 18,000 as income from private practice. The assessing authority determined the income of the assessee from private practice at Rs. 25,000 on estimate basis. Subsequently the ITO came to know that the assessee had not disclosed his true income from private practice and as such the assessing authority initiated proceedings for the reassessment under Section 147(a) of the Act. In the course of the reassessment proceedings it was brou...
Tag this Judgment!Durga Shanker Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-31-1979
Reported in: 1979WLN(UC)230
K.D. Sharma, J.1. D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 560/74 and D.B. Criminal Jail Appeal No. 689/74 filed by Durga Shanker arisa out of one and the same judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Udaipur, dated 27-8-1974 by which the appellant was convicted under Sections 302 and 324 IPC and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- and in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months on the first count and on the second to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months for causing simple injuries to Smt. Noji with a sharp edged knife. The sentences on both the counts were, however, ordered to run concurrently.2. The prosecution case against the appellant was as follows : The appellant wanted to run a shop situated near the temple of Radheshyam deity in front of the Court premises at Udaipur. Shri Narainlal PW 9 was running a tea stall in that shop after taking it on lease from its owner. As the appellant was desirous of running that shop, he app...
Tag this Judgment!Damodar Vs. Urmila
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-30-1979
Reported in: AIR1980Raj57
K.S. Sidhu, J.1. This appeal in a matrimonial matter has been preferred by the husband from the judgment dated Nov. 20, 1977, made by the District Judge, Jhunjhunu, granting the wife a decree for restitution of conjugal rights against the husband.2. The facts leading to the filing of this appeal may be shortly stated here. The parties were married according to Hindu rites at Pilani, Tehsil Chirawa, Dist. Jhunjhunu, on March 9, 1970. The wife brought a petition against the husband under Section 9 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter called the 'Act') for restitution of conjugal rights on September 18, 1973. She made the allegations that the parties resided together at Sonthali for nearly 3 1/2 years after the marriage. and that the husband and his parents had been ill-treating her throughout that period. On Aug. 17, 1973, the husband forcibly took her to Pilani and left her there at her parents' house. He bluntly told her that he would not reinstate her in the matrimonial home until sh...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Associated Stone Industries (Kotah) Ltd ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-30-1979
Reported in: (1979)12CTR(Raj)67; [1981]130ITR868(Raj)
Dwarka Prasad, J.1. This is a consolidated reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay Bench ' C ', Bombay (hereinafter referred to as ' the Tribunal '), under Section 66(1) of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922, by which seven questions have been referred to this court.2. We may briefly state the facts, which have given rise to this reference application.3. The Associated Stone Industries (Kotah) Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ' the assessee-company ') was incorporated in the then Indian State ofKotah on January 17, 1945, as a public limited company for carrying on the business of quarrying stones. The then Maharao of Kotah State granted a lease to the assessee-company on May 2, 1945, for a period of 15 years beginning from October, 1944. Clause 18 of the lease agreement entered into by the assessee-company with the then Maharao of Kotah for quarrying flooring stones was as under :' 18. (i) In consideration of the concessions and privileges granted by the GRANTOR and in lieu ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Amar Kumari Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-30-1979
Reported in: [1979]120ITR747(Raj)
Dwarka Prasad, J. 1. This application under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ' the Act'), has been filed in this court by the assessee seeking a direction to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, to state the case and refer the questions arising out of the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated November 30, 1976, to this court for its opinion.2. The case of the petitioner is that she is assessed to income-tax under the provisions of the Act as an individual. During the assessment year 1972-73, relating to the accounting year ending on October 19, 1971, the assessee purchased a plot of land, marked B-7A, having an area of 1,799.9 sq. yards in the city of Jaipur from M/s. Vinay Chand Pravin Chand for a sum of Rs. 45,000 by means of a sale deed dated June 5, 1971, which was duly registered on July 17, 1971. In the course of the assessment proceedings for the aforesaid assessment year 1972-73, the ITO, Central Circle-2, Jaipur (h...
Tag this Judgment!Javrilal Vs. Hajarisingh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-27-1979
Reported in: AIR1980Raj189
ORDERS.K. Mal Lodha, J. This revision application by the decree-holder is directed against the order of the learned District Judge, Pali, dated August 24, 1978, by which, he dismissed decree-holder's appeal on the ground that it was lodged beyond the prescribed period of limitation.2. The relevant facts necessary for the disposal of this revision are these. The petitioner, vide Suit No. 19 of1979, obtained a decree on Sept. 18,1974, Execution was levied. The judgment-debtor-non-petitioner preferredobjection under Section 47, C. P. C. Theobjection of the judgment-debtor wasaccepted by the learned Civil Judgeon April 7, 1976 and the decree-holderwas directed to take possession of theshop marked as OPQR and not EFGHin the plan, which was submitted bythe judgment-debtor. Being aggrievedby the aforementioned order, datedApril 7, 1976, the decree-holder preferred appeal before the District Judge,Pali on May 18, 1976. On Sept. 8, 1976,an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act (for ...
Tag this Judgment!inder Singh Vs. S.T.A.T. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-27-1979
Reported in: AIR1980Raj131
ORDER1. This is a writ petition by one Indersingh, who carries on a transport business in Rajasthan. He has challenged the order of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal (for short 'S.T.A.T.' hereafter), dated June 5, 1979, cancelling the temporary permit on Bhadra-Rejri route granted to him by Regional Transport Authority (which will hereinafter, for the sake of brevity, be referred to as 'R.T.A.'), Bikaner in pursuance of the resolution dated May 2, 1979,2. In order to appreciate the contentions raised, I may briefly refer to the facts giving rise to this petition,3. Bhadra-Siwani is an inter-Statal route 35 miles in length and out of which 28 miles is in the State of Rajasthan and 7 miles of this route fall in the State of Haryana. The State of Rajasthan as well as the State of Haryana entered into an agreement to open the route Bhadra-Siwani. This route has been mentioned at item No. 29 in the agreement (Ann, P-6). The State of Rajasthan was allotted the share of two buses and one...
Tag this Judgment!Gidumal Vs. Ramlal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-27-1979
Reported in: 1979WLN(UC)418
S.K. Mal Lodha, J.1. This is a revision application by the landlord-defendant against the judgment and decree dated August 26, 1976 of the learned Additional District Judge No. 1, Jodhpur by which he reversed the judgment and decree passed by the Munsif City, Jodhpur on December 19, 1973 in a suit for fixation of standard rent.2. The plaintiff is the tenant and the defendant is the landlord. The case of the plaintiff was that he is tenant of a shop situate in the main market Sardarpura Road No. 1st B, Jodhpur which was constructed by Bhikamchand Khatri in 1943 & was let by him to one Sindhi Vaidraj (Vishanddas Sindhi). Bhikamchand Khatri sold his house, including the shop, to one Sukhlal and his sons and who let it out to the plaintiff on March 1, 1954 on monthly rent of Rs. 10/- Rs. 2.00 p m as electric charges. Sukhlal and his sons sold the house including the shop in suit to the petitioner in June 1960 and thus, the plaintiff became his tenant. It is said by the plaintiff that after...
Tag this Judgment!Roop NaraIn Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-24-1979
Reported in: [1980]123ITR315(Raj)
Dwarka Prasad, J. 1. These two reference applications have been filed under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for directing the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, to state the case and refer certain questions, said to be arising out of the orders of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur (hereinafter called ' the Tribunal '), to this court. The reference case No. 91 of 1974, arises out of the assessment proceedings, while the other reference case No. 92 of 1974, arises out of the penalty proceedings relating to the same assessee and the same assessment year 1966-67. As the assessee and the assessment year are the same, it would be proper to dispose of these two reference applications by a common order.2. The circumstances, which have given rise to these two reference cases, may be briefly stated :The petitioner, Roop Narain, is the ex karta of a HUF. The relevant accounting year is that which ended on Di...
Tag this Judgment!Arjun Singh Vs. Puran Mal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-23-1979
Reported in: AIR1980Raj70; 1979()WLN390
C.M. Lodha, C.J. 1. This second appeal has been laid before us in pursuance of an order made by S.N. Modi, J. whereby the learned Judge felt some doubt about the correctness of the view taken by D.P. Gupta J. in S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 216 of 1976, Mangi Bai v. Jeeva, decided on 4-10-1976 and, therefore referred this case to a larger Bench.2. The point arising for decision is short and simple. Plaintiffs Puran Mal and others filed a suit against the defendant appellant for his eviction from a room situated in Nohra No. 2. Lakar Mandi, Sri Ganganagar, alleging that the room in question had been let out at a monthly rent of Rs. 12/- but the defendant had not paid rent for 17 months and, consequently, he had become a defaulter. It was also pleaded that the suit premises are required by the plaintiffs reasonably and bona fide for their residence. The defendant con-tested the suit and pleaded that although the amount of rent for 17 months was due from him, but it was the plaintiff who ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »