Rajasthan Court July 1985 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Gyan Prakash Gupta
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-26-1985
Reported in: 1985(2)WLN389; 1985(2)WLN389
S.K. Mal Lodha, J.1. At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Jodhpur, the following question has been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur ('the Tribunal' herein), for the opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was in law justified in holding that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax was right in annulling the assessment for the assessment year 1965-66 made by the Income-tax Officer ?'2. This question is said to arise out of the order of the Tribunal dated May 31, 1978, passed in I.T.A. No. 1277(JP)/1977-78, in respect of the assessment years 1965-66 and 1967-68.3. The assessments for the assessment years 1965-66 and 1967-68 were completed under Section 143(3} of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (No. XLIII of 1961) for short ('the Act'). It was discovered by the Income-tax Officer ('the ITO') that the assessee, Mohanlal (deceased), failed to disclose the materi...
Tag this Judgment!Commercial Taxes Officer Vs. Western Indian States Motors
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-26-1985
Reported in: [1987]67STC257(Raj)
Dwarka Prasad, J.1. The question which was raised before the learned Single Member of the Board of Revenue in the revision petition, was as to whether interest under Section 11-B of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 (for short, 'the Act' hereinafter) could be levied only in respect of the completed months or also in respect of part of a month in relation to the period for which the assessee was in default in payment of tax under the Act. The learned Single Member of the Board of Revenue held that while calculating the amount of interest payable by the assessee under Section 11-B of the Act only completed months have to be taken into account while portions of the month should be excluded. However, after arriving at the aforesaid finding, the learned Single Member of the Board of Revenue dismissed the revision petition filed by the assessee. The assessee then filed a special appeal before a Division Bench of the Board of Revenue, and the only question before the Division Bench was, as to...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Devichand Pan Mal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-25-1985
Reported in: (1986)52CTR(Raj)31; [1986]160ITR545(Raj)
S.K. Mal lodha, J. 1. At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Jodhpur, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur ('the Tribunal' herein), has referred the following questions for our opinion, which arise out of its order dated June 30, 1978, passed in Income-tax Application No. 375/JP/76-77 :' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax has rightly entertained the appeal on the point of levy of penal interest under Section 215 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the learned Appellate Assistant Commissioner had not travelled outside his jurisdiction in this case ?3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in sustaining the order passed by the learned Appellate Assistant Commissioner waiv...
Tag this Judgment!State of Rajasthan Vs. Dayal Saran Saxena
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-25-1985
Reported in: 1986(2)WLN309
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. This Civil Second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the learned District Judge, Ajmer, confirming the judgment and decree pissed by the learned Munsif Magistrate, Ajmer.2. The plaintiff respondent instituted a suit for declaration that he is entitled to be promoted and confirmed as U.D.C., w.e.f. 27-7-1956 and arrears of pay on that basis upto date, on the allegation that he was appointed as 'Taqabi' clerk in the then Dholpur State from 27-7-1949, and on integration he came to be absorbed as L.D.C., in Ayurvedic Department from 2-5-1952. His further case, is that although there were no adverse entire communicated to him in his confidential Report and although he is senior to the various persons detailed in the plaint who have been promoted as UDC still he has not been promoted and confirmed before 26-12-1961. He claimed that he is entitled to be promoted from 1-11-1956 and confirmed on the said post. The defendant State Government submit...
Tag this Judgment!Baga Ram S/O Manaji Vs. Jalore Co-operative Marketing Society Ltd. and ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-25-1985
Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)176
A.K. Mathur, J.1. Petitioner has filed the present writ petition aggrieved against the order Annx. 1. whereby he was served with one month's notice terminating his services. The writ petition was admitted and a stay order was granted.2. A preliminary objection has been raised by Mr. Dave appearing on behalf of respondent that the present petition is not maintainable because it is a writ petition directed against a Society but this object is not sustainable because the perusal of Annx.1 would show that respondent No. 2 who is working in the Society as Administrator has passed the order in pursuance of the order issued by the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, therefore, this order is in substance order of the Assistant Registrar.3. In Nagaur Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Kesaram 1979 RLW 480, Division Bench of this Court has held that if the order has been passed by Administrator on the basis of the order of Registrar, then that order would amount to be order of Registrar, ...
Tag this Judgment!Dama Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-25-1985
Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)314
Kanta Bhatnagar, J.1. Appellant Dama was tried by the learned Sessions Judge, Udaipur Under Section 302 IPC. By the judgment dated April 10,1980 the learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellant Dama for the offence Under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo one year's R.I.2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are as under : On October 21, 1979, the day next to Deewali deceased Bhera son of Kanha Mina, appellant Dama and seven or eight other persons assembled beneath a mango tree and after singing the songs known as 'hidke geet'. Daula put off the 'dhoti' of Dalla (PW 2) which annoyed and he reprimanded him for being so. Bhera son of Kana gave two or three kicks to Dalla. At this appellant Dama rushed near them and contorted the neck of deceased Bhera son of Kanha and threw him aside. Bhera son of Kanha died instantaneously. Bhera son of Poonja, also present there, went to the Sarpanch who scrib...
Tag this Judgment!G.S. Satsangi Vs. the Life Insurance Corporation of India and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-25-1985
Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)525
P.K. Baneerjee, C.J.1. In this rule the petitioner challenges the order of dismissal passed by the Divisional Manager of the Life Insurance Corporation Jaipur and affirmed by the Appellate Authority i.e. the Zonal Manager. On August 13, 1975, a charge-sheet was given to the petitioner which is in the following terms:Charge SheetYou, Shri G.S. Satsangi, Development Officer (under suspension), Branch Office, Bikaner, are hereby charged for the following:1(a) That you introduced one Shri Ram Chander on 29-5-73 for opening the saving Bank Account No. 1193 in his name in the Union Bank of India, Bikaner without knowing him as per your written statement dated 25-4-75;(b) That inspite of your not knowing the said Ram Chander you had again attested on 29-12-73 his signature on his refund application for Rs. 348.80 though he was not physically present at the time of attestation, as per your written statement dated 25-4-75;You have thus caused the opening of the said Saving Bank Account in the n...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ayurvedic Sevashram (P.) Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-24-1985
Reported in: (1986)54CTR(Raj)119; [1986]159ITR112(Raj); 1985(2)WLN406
S.K. Mal Lodha, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay Bench 'E' (for short 'the Tribunal'), has referred the following two questions for the opinion of this court, which are said to arise out of its order dated April 28, 1977, passed in Income-tax Appeals Nos. 256 and 257/JP) 74-75 relating to the assessment years, 1969-70 and 1970-71 :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the reassessment and the disallowance made following the application of Section 40A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, are not justified ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that even if the provisions of Section 40A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, are applied, the payments to non-relatives of the directors should not be subjected to the test laid down in Section 40A(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. The assessee is M/s. Ayurvedic Sevashram (P) Ltd., Udaipur. It previously had as mana...
Tag this Judgment!Fakri Automobiles Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-23-1985
Reported in: [1986]160ITR504(Raj); 1985(2)WLN758
S.K. Mal Lodha, J.1. In compliance with the order dated September 12, 1978, of this court passed in D.B. Income-tax Case No. 2 of 1976, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur (' the Tribunal ' herein), has referred the following three questions for our opinion :' 1. Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal had any material to arrive at its conclusion that diesel of Rs. 14,026 (18,000 litres) recorded on July 4, 1970, in the cash book and the stock register of the applicant-firm represented the suppressed stock ?2. Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was, at any rate, justified in holding that the aforesaid sum of Rs. 14,026 was liable to be included in the total income of the applicant-firm as ' income from undisclosed sources ' ?3. Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in holding that the purchases of diesel worth Rs. 14,026 recorded on July 4, 1970, was ' an expenditure ' within the meaning of Section 40A(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 '2. The ...
Tag this Judgment!Bakshu Khan and 16 ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-23-1985
Reported in: 1985(2)WLN156
Milap Chand, J.1. These appeals are directed against the orders of the learned Single Judge, dated November 2, 1983, whereby the appellants writ petitions were dismissed. Brief facts leading to the present appeals are that the appellants were serving as Constables. On 24th January, 1976 under Sub-rule (3) of Rule 24 of the Rajasthan Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1974 (here in after referred to as 'the Rules'), a Board was constituted for holding the examination and selection for promotion to the posts of Head Constables. According to the appellants, they undertook the qualifying examination and their names were included in the list of selected and suitable candidates. Under Sub-rule (2) of Rule 24 of the Rules they were given promotion on the posts of Head Constables on a temporary basis. The posts were also temporary. It was stated in their promotion order dated 6-7-1976 (Exbt. R-4) that they will be required to undergo qualifying examination again for inclusion of their names in ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »