Rajasthan Court January 1984 Judgments
Sohan Singh and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-31-1984
Reported in: 1984WLN6
N.M. Kasliwal J.1. This revision is directed against an order of the learned Sessions Judge, Bundi, dated 29th September, 1983, framing charge against the accused persons under Sections 302, 302/149, 120B, 147 148 and 201 IPC.2. One Mohan Singh father of deceased Prasan Kaur inst(sic)tated a private complaint in the court of Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Bundi on 19th June, 1980, who forwarded the same under Section 256(3) Cr. P.C. to Station House Officer. Talera for investigation and report. The Station House Officer made a report to Superintendent of Police, Bundi, who sent a detailed report on 2nd July, 1980 to the concerned Magistrate that this case had already been investigated and no case of murder had been proved in police investigation. Thereafter on 11th July, 1980, the learned Magistrate passed an order for registering the FIR and to make further investigation and send the report under Section 173 Cr. P.C. to the court and also issued a notice to the Station House Officer ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hind Agencies
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-30-1984
Reported in: (1984)40CTR(Raj)350; [1984]148ITR94(Raj)
Bhargava, J. 1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act'), and the following question of law has been referred to the High Court for its decision :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that Section 187(1) of the Income-tax Act.1961, was not applicable in this case, and further that separate assessments be made against the two firms for the assessment year 1967-68 ' 2. The brief facts giving rise to this reference are as follows:Firm M/s. Hind Agencies, Khanda Manak Chowk, Jaipur, was a partnership firm having the following members : 1. Shri Girdhari Lal s/o. Shri Tulsi Das 2. Shri Shyam Sunder s/o. Shri Chand Narang 3. Shri Raj Kumar s/o. Shri Girdharilal 4. Shri Suresh s/o. Shri Girdhari Lal 5. Shri Ramesh Kumar s/o. Shri Girdharilal. 3. A partnership deed was executed among the parties on June 17, 1964. The shares of the partners were equal. This partnership...
Tag this Judgment!Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. M.K.M. Moosa Bhoy Amin
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-30-1984
Reported in: (1984)40CTR(Raj)343; [1984]148ITR89(Raj); 1985(1)WLN403
Bhargava, J.1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act'), wherein the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, has referred the following question of law for the opinion of this court:' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that Section 187(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was not applicable in this case, and further that separate assessments be made on the two firms for the assessment year 1969-70 '2. The facts giving rise to this reference, briefly stated, are as follows: 3. The assessee, M/s. M. K. M. Moosa Bhoy Amin, is a registered firm constituted under a deed of partnership dated December 7, 1956, with the following five partners :1. Shri Shamsuddin 2. Shri Saifuddin 3. Shri Saifuddin (Sunelwala) 4. Shri Hakimuddin 5. Shri Fatima Bai 4. One of the partners, namely, Shamsuddin, died on June M, 1968, and, thereafter another partnership deed was executed on...
Tag this Judgment!Lal Singh and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-30-1984
Reported in: 1984WLN(UC)90
K.S. Lodha, J.1. This writ application has been filed by the petitioners challenging the order of the learned Collector, Ganganagar, dated 15-3-76 directing acquisition of their lands Kilas No. 5, 6, 15, 16 and 25 in Khasra No. 186/281 of village Misana Tehsil Tibi district Ganganagar.2. As the writ application is liable to succeed on a short point, namely, the jurisdiction of the Addl. District Development Officer, the facts of the case need not be stated at any length. Suffice it to say that the petitioners who are the khatedars of the aforesaid land received notice dated 27-13-75 from the Collector, Ganganagar, under Section 88A(2) of the Rajasthan Panchayat Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act.') stating that the land of the petitioners was required for the proposes of allotment free of charge and asking them to show cause why it should not be so acquired, The petitioners filed their replies to this notice. Thereafter the petitioners again received a notice from the Addl. Distr...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Mohan Kanwar Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-30-1984
Reported in: 1984WLN254
N.M. Kasliwal, J.1. This revision by Smt. Mohan Kanwar w/o Gordhan Singh is directed against the order of learned Sessions Judge, Jaipur District Jaipur, dated 16th September 1982, setting aside the order of learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Amer, dated 3rd August, 1982, passed under Section 146(1) Cr. PC.2. Smt. Mohan Kanwar submitted a complaint on 13th March, 1982 in Police Station, Chandwaji to the effect that her husband Gordhan Singh had died long back and Khatedari of Khasra Nos. 646 and 650 measuring 27 Bighas 19 Biswas had been recorded in her favour. She was getting the land cultivated through her brother-in-law Bhagirath Singh. It was further mentioned that her another brother-in-law Hanuman Singh and his sons Prabhu Singh, Bhawani Singh Mahaveer Singh and their Hali Gheesa were interfering in her possession and used to take away the crop by force. The Station House Officer recorded the statement of Smt. Mohan Kanwar and Bhagirath Singh and submitted a complaint in the cour...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Prakash Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-27-1984
Reported in: 1984WLN(UC)158
K.S. Lodha, J.1. The Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Ganga Nagar issued a notice dated 31-9-70 to the petitioner Ram Prakash saying that a sum of Rs. 12,441.20 prineipal+5,514.70 interest total 17,955.90 was out-standing against the petitioner to the Ganganagar Kisan Co-operative Marketing Society Ltd., Sri Ganganagar on account of loan till 12th December, 1970 which had not been paid by the petitioner and, therefore, he should either deposit the above amount with the said society by 15-1-71 under intimation to the Assistant Registrar or if he had any objection to this demand, he may submit the same to him by 15-8-71.On 16-8-71 the petitioner appeared before the Assistant Registrar & asked for a copy of the 'Khata' & also requested that the account may be explaind to him. He filed an application (Ex 8) in this respect. Thereafter on 5-,0-71 the petitioner filed a reply (Ex. 3) to the notice stating that the rate of interest had not been settled between him and the society ...
Tag this Judgment!Narpat Karan Vs. the District Judge and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-27-1984
Reported in: 1984WLN514
M.C. Jain, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the findings recorded by the Distract Judge, Balotra, on issues No. 10 and 11 framed in election petition submitted by the non-petitioner No. 2 Tej Singh.2. The writ-petition Narpat Karan and the non-petitioner Tej Singh had contested the election of Pradhan of the Panchayat Samiti, Balotra and its result was declared on 30-12-1981, in which the writ-petitioner was declared elected. He secured 205 votes, whereas the non-petitioner No. 2 Tej Singh secured 203 votes. An election petition was filed by the non-petitioner No. 2 Tej Singh on 19-1-1982, in which he prayed that he be declared elected as Pradhan of the Panchayat Samiti, Balotra. The writ-petitioner submitted reply to the election petition, in which he also pleaded recrimination alleging corrupt practices against the election-petitioner. Issues No. 10 and 11 were framed by the learned District Judge, which on translation in English, read under:Issues No. 10: Whether the plea...
Tag this Judgment!Ratan Lal Vs. the State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-25-1984
Reported in: 1984WLN(UC)41
K.S. Lodha, J.It appears that some proceddings for recovery under the Land Revenue Act in relation to some dues of the forest department were pending before the Tehsilder, Bhinmal againest one Malook Chand s/o Nathu Lal Modi of village Pavti. On 28.3.76, the said Malook Chand had gone to Bhinmal in Jee No. RJL, 8474 and the Tehsilder attached this jeep in those recovery proceedings and took possession of the same. The present. petitioner Ratan lal who is brother of the said Malook Chand claims to be the owner of this jeep. He has filed a true copy of the registation certificate which is Ex.2 on the record which shows that this jeep originally stood in the name of M/s Metal Corporation of India Limited, Udaipur but had been changing hands and the last endorsement of transfer stands in the name of the present petitioner Ratan lal s/o Nathu lal Agarwal. he filed an objection to this attachment on 31.3.76 and also sent a telegram to the Tehsildar Bhinmal through Collector, jalore on 20.4.7...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ram Dayal Modi and Sons
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-24-1984
Reported in: [1985]151ITR481(Raj)
Agrawal, J.1. In this reference made under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), has referred the following question to this court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the cost of material supplied by the Government is not includible in the gross receipts for the purpose of estimating the net income of the assessee ?'2. The facts, briefly stated, are as under:M/s. Ram Dayal Modi & Sons, Dholpur (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee-firm '), was carrying on business as contractor during the assessment year 1969-70. It had executed certain contracts for the construction of buildings for certain Government Departments. The gross amount of the bills receivable by the assessee was Rs. 2,25,323 for the aforesaid works executed by the assessee-firm. The aforesaid bills included a sum of Rs. 36,825 towards the value of the material supp...
Tag this Judgment!Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Bhatia Mahajan Construction
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-24-1984
Reported in: (1984)41CTR(Raj)273; [1984]149ITR148(Raj)
Agrawal, J. 1. In this reference made under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as ' the Tribunal'), has referred the following question to this court: ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in condoning the delay in filing a declaration under Section 184(7) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ' 2. M/s, Bhatia Mahajan Construction Co., Bundi (hereinafter referred to as ' the assessee '), was a registered firm for the assessment year 1965-66. The return for the assessment year 1966-67 was filed by the assessee on September 29, 1966. Revised returns were filed by the assessee on August 25, 1967, and September 21, 1967. The application for continuation of registration in Form No. 12 was filed on June 28, 1968. The ITO did not continue the registration of the assessee for the reason that the assessee had failed to claim continuation of registration by filing an application under Section...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »