Rajasthan Court January 1984 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.
Hukamchand Shankarlal Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-13-1984
Reported in: [1987]163ITR1(Raj)
P.K. Banerjee, C.J.1. This rule is directed against an order passed by the Commissioner, Wealth-tax, under Section 18(2A) before amendment of the Wealth-tax Act and after amendment, under Section 18B, whereby the petitioner was asked to pay penalty for failure, without reasonable cause, to furnish the return of net wealth under Section 14(1) of the Wealth -tax Act.2. The facts leading to the proceeding is that the petitioner filed a return under Section 14 for the period 1964-65 to 1967-68 on July 24, 1970, showing the estimated wealth at Rs. 1,80,250 for the assessment year 1964-65, Rs. 2,08,135 for the assessment year 1965-66, Rs. 2,15,197 for the assessment year 1966-67 and Rs. 2,40,560 for the assessment year 1967-68. The Wealth-tax Officer assessed the tax for the assessment year 1964-65 at Rs. nil, Rs. 84 for the assessment year 1965-66, Rs. 168 for the assessment year 1966-67 and Rs. 268 for the assessment year 1987-68, totalling for all the three years at Rs. 520. Thereafter, a...
Hukamchand Shankarlal Vs. Commissioner of Wealth Tax and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-13-1984
Reported in: (1984)43CTR(Raj)240
ORDERP. K. Banerjee, C.J. - This rule is directed against an order passed by the CWT u/s. 18(2A) before amendment of the WT Act and after amendment of s. 18B, whereby the petitioner was asked to pay penalty for failure, without reasonable cause, to furnish the return of net wealth u/s. 14(1) of the WT Act.2. The facts leading to the proceedings is that the petitioner filed a return u/s. 14 for the period 1964-65 to 1967-68 on 24-7-1970 showing the estimated wealth at Rs. 1,80,250 for the asst. yr. 1964-65, Rs. 2,06,135 for the asst. yr. 1965-66, Rs. 2,15,197 for the asst. yr. 1966-67 and Rs. 2,40,560 for the asst. yr. 1967-68. The WTO assessed the taxable quantum for the asst. yr. 1964-65 at Rs. Nil, Rs. 84 for the asst. yr. 1965-66, Rs. 168 for asst. yr. 1966-67 and Rs. 268 for the asst. yr. 1967-68, totaling for all the three years at. Rs. 518. Thereafter, a proceeding was drawn up against the petitioner and notice was issued for penalty on account of late filing of the return. The p...
Bansh Pradeep Singh S/O Raghuveer Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-13-1984
Reported in: 1984WLN370
N.M. Kasliwal, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor.2. This petitioner under Section 482 Cr. PC is directed against an order dated 2(sic)rd Dec. 1983, passed by learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Malpura. The accused petitioner wanted to take specimen signatures of PW 15 Bhoor Singh and to get the same compared by a hand writing expert at his own expenses. The said application was dismissed by the impugned order.3. In my view full oportunity must be give to the accused for defending his case. There is no allegation against the accused that he wanted to prolong the trial without any just chase. In Ronald Wood Mathams and Ors. v. State of West Bengal AIR 1954 SC 455 it was observed as under:Although the evidence on record may tend to establish a strong case against the accused, he entitled to rebut and if certain documents would furnish good material for rebutting that case the Court, by declining to issue process for the examination of the...
Desh Raj and 27 ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-13-1984
Reported in: 1984WLN14
S.K. Mal Lodha, J.1. This is a bunch of twenty eight writ petitions before me which involve identical questions. They were heard together and I consider it convenient to dispose them of by a common order.2. I will facts of S.B. civil Writ Petition No. 2361 of 1983 (Deshraj v. Union of India.)3. The petitioner was given compulsory retirement. A review petitioner was filed. The review petition was accepted. The petitioner was ordered to be reinstated by order Anx. 1 dates March 22, 1983. Anx. 1 inter alia contains the following order:On review he is reinstated in service. The intervening period is to be treated as leave due.The petitioner is aggrieved of that part of the order by which the intervening period was ordered to be treated as leave due. He has filed the writ petition that the aforesaid part of the order may be quashed, and the non-petitioners (1) Union of India, (2) General Manager Northern Railway, Bikaner House, New Delhi (3) Divisional Railway Manager, Northern Railway, Bik...
Shiv Shanker Rice and General Mills Vs. Mangilal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-11-1984
Reported in: 1984WLN12
S.K. Mal Lodha, J.1. This is defendant's revision against the order of the learned District Judge, Jalore dated 21-10-19(sic)83 granting exemption to the plaintiff from bringing the legal representatives of the deceased defendant No. 7 Nand Kishore on record.2. Nand Kishore defendant No. 7 had died on 16-8-1982 and an application for bringing his legal representatives on record had not been made within 90 days. Thereafter an application was made for that purpose 25-2-1983. Later the plaintiff also moved an application under Order 22, Rule 4(4) CPC on 22-4-1983 praying for exemption from bringing the legal representatives of the deceased Nand Kishore on record. It is an admitted fact that Nand Kishore has not filed any written statement nor had appeared before the court to contest the suit. The Court granted the exemption as prayed.3. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties.4. The question before me is whether exemption under Order, 22 Rule 4(4) C.P.C. could not be granted by the c...
Prithvi Singh Vs. Additional Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-10-1984
Reported in: (1985)44CTR(Raj)168; [1986]157ITR193(Raj)
Dwarka Prasad, J. 1. This is a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, by which the following question of law arising out of the order of the aforesaid Tribunal dated February 22, 1974, has been referred to this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in holding that the assets transferred by him to his wife and minor sons on November 4, 1964, are includible in his wealth in accordance with Section 4(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act in the wealth of the assessee who is an individual ?'2. The facts and circumstances in which this reference arises may be briefly stated. The respondent, Prithvi Singh, who will hereinafter be referred to as 'the assessee', was the holder of an impartible estate known as the jagir of Bisalpur, situated in district Pali in the State of Rajasthan, The jagir was said to have been granted to the forefathers of the assessee more than 300 years ago and succession to the jagir was gove...
J.P. Sharma and Sons Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-09-1984
Reported in: [1985]151ITR333(Raj); 1984()WLN47
Dwarka Prasad, J. 1. This reference has been made to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, whereby the following questions of law arising out of the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'C', dated September 30, 1970, have been referred to this court for its opinion :'1. Whether, having regard to the fact that there were disputes and litigation pending between the assessee and the Railway authorities regarding the amounts payable to him and having regard to the fact that these disputes were settled by arbitration and the amount payable determined in 1963, long after the close of the accounting year, the assessee could be held to be guilty of concealment of income in respect of such amounts when he filed his original return in December, 1961 ?2. Whether the levy of the impugned penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was justified ?'2. The assessee-firm was a railway contractor providing labour to the Northern Railway for performing the work of loading...
Bar Council of Rajasthan Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-09-1984
Reported in: (1984)39CTR(Raj)334; [1984]147ITR720(Raj)
Dwarka Prasad, J.1. This reference has been made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur (hereinafter called 'the Tribunal'), at the instance of the assessee, the Bar Council of Rajasthan, and the following two questions of law arising out of the order of the Tribunal dated May 25, 1973, have been referred to this court for its opinion : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee-council could be taken to be a body intended to advance any object of general public utility ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that income from interest was not exempted under Section 11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961?' 2. The assessee, the Bar Council of Rajasthan, is a body corporate constituted under the Advocates Act, 1961, and it came into existence on November 7, 1962. In respect of the assessment year 1970-71, corresponding to the accounting year ended on March 31, 1970, the assessee de...
Pratap Singh Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-09-1984
Reported in: 1984WLN133
S.S. Byas, J.1. This is a jail appeal by accused Pratap alias Pratap Singh against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Udaipur dated August 2, 1977 convicting the appellant under Sections 302 and 380, IPC and sentencing him to imprisonment for life under the first count and rigorous imprisonment for seven years with a fine of Rs. 300/-, in default of the payment of fine to further undergo three months' like imprisonment under the second count.2. Put briefly, the prosecution case is that the deceased victim Smt Ghisi Bai aged about 35 years was living alone in her farm-house situate in her field known as Som Taloa in Mauja Chhotisar district Udaipur. The field was cultivated by PW 1 Limba. In the noon of 6-12-76 when Limba was ploughing the field, he saw Some cattle damaging the standing crop. He cried aloud to ask Mst. Ghisi Bai to come out but found no response. He went to her house and found the door open. He saw Ghisi Bai lying dead in the house with a pool of blood around h...
State of Rajasthan and anr. Vs. Gulam Abbas KamruddIn and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-06-1984
Reported in: 1984WLN64
G.M. Lodha, J.1. These two contempt petitions have been filed in respect of the wilful disobedience' of the orders passed by this court on 29-4-81 and 14-5-81 in respect of the stay applications moved by the petitioners M/s Gulam Abbas Kamruddin in writ petition No. 528/81.2. In both the orders the substance and operative part of the order which is relevant for the purposes of contempt relates to the permission to remove the woond and charcoal by M/s Gulam Abbas Kamruddin on furnishing an undertaking to the respondents that in case the writ petition is dismissed, the amount so valued would be paid by him. For the valuation of the amount, it was directed that a representative of the respondents would be allowed to prepare an inventory mentioning the weight, quality, quantity and cost of them.3. Whereas in the contempt petition filed by M/s Gulam Abbas Kamruddin it is alleged that the respondents-non-petitioners did not permit the renewal of the charcoal etc. even though an undertaking w...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »