Rajasthan Court August 1985 Judgments
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Akshay Kumar Sanghi
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-20-1985
Reported in: [1987]163ITR43(Raj)
M.C. Jain, J.1. These are 4 applications under Section 27 of the Wealth-tax Act directing the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, to state the case and refer the questions of law arising out of the Tribunal's order dated April 13, 1977, passed in wealth-tax appeals in respect of the assessment years 1968-69, 1969-70, 1970-71 and 1971-72.2. We may state here the brief facts giving rise to the present applications.3. The respondent, Akshay Kurnar Sanghi, was an assessee under the Wealth-tax Act. He submitted the returns for the assessment years 1968-69, 1969-70, 1970-71 and 1971-72. The valuation dates in respect of the above assessment years were 31st March, 1968, 31st March, 1969, 31st March, 1970, and 31st March, 1971, respectively. The assessee had shown value of his immovable property at Rs. 36,000 in his returns in respect of these assessment years. The Wealth-tax Officer after considering the evidence on record valued the property in question at Rs. 75,000, Rs. 80...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Smt. Kamla Devi Bangur
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-20-1985
Reported in: [1987]163ITR385(Raj)
M.C. Jain, J. 1. These are two applications under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (No. 27 of 1957), for directing the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, to state a case and refer the question of law arising out of the Tribunal's order dated June 24, 1977, passed in Wealth-tax Appeals Nos. 137 and 138/JP/1966-67 for the assessment years 1968-69 and 1969-70.2. The reference applications have arisen out of the following facts :The assessee-respondent was assessed for the aforesaid two assessment years under the Wealth-tax Act by the Wealth-tax Officer, Jodhpur, on February 6, 1971. The Wealth-tax Officer did not include the whole of the jewellery and ornaments in the total wealth of the assessee in view of the decision of their Lordships of the Supreme Court in CWT v. Arundhati Balkrishna : [1970]77ITR505(SC) . Subsequently, Section 5 of the Wealth-tax Act was amended by the Finance (No. 2) Act of 1971, with retrospective effect from April 1, 1963. The effect o...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Smt. Rajkumari Bangur
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-20-1985
Reported in: [1986]158ITR47(Raj)
M.C. Jain, J.1. These are three applications under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, for directing the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, to state a case and refer the question of law arising out of the Tribunal's order dated June 24, 1977, passed in Wealth-tax Appeals Nos. 139, 140 and 141 JP 1976-77 for the assessment years 1967-68, 1968-69 and 1969-70.2. The reference applications have arisen out of the following facts :3. The assessee-respondent was assessed for the aforesaid three assessment years under the Wealth-tax Act by the Wealth-tax Officer, Jodhpur, on February 6, 1971, The Wealth-tax Officer did not include the whole of jewellery and ornaments in the total wealth of the assessee in view of the decision of their Lordships of the Supreme Court in C.W.T. v. Arundhati Balkrishna : [1970]77ITR505(SC) . Subsequently, Section 5(1)(viii) of the Wealth-tax Act was amended by the Finance (No. 2) Act of 1971 with retrospective effect from April 1, 1963. Th...
Tag this Judgment!Laxman Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-20-1985
Reported in: 1986(1)WLN685
Milap Chand Jain, J.1. The appellant Laxman Singh, his brother Ram Singh and his mother Mst. Rampyari were tried for the offence under Sections 447, 307, 380/451 read with Sections 34 and 109, IPC by the learned Sessions Judge, Merta, who by judgment dated September 3, 1974 convicted the appellant Laxman Singh of the offence under Section 302, IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months rigorous imprisonment. He was also convicted of the offence under Section 307, IPC and was sentenced to undergo five years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/. in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one month. He was also convicted of the offence under Section 447, IPC and was sentenced to undergo one month's simple imprisonment. All the sub-stantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. He was acquitted of the offences under Sections 451 ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Assam Roller Flour Mills
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-20-1985
Reported in: (1986)51CTR(Raj)244; [1987]163ITR186(Raj)
Dwarka Prasad Gupta, J. 1. These two reference applications arise in similar circumstances and raise similar questions between the same parties and as such they are being disposed of by a common order.2. These are two applications under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), filed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Rajasthan, Jaipur, praying that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, be directed to refer the following question of law arising out of its order dated August 31, 1978, to this court for its opinion :'Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that double relief in respect of the amount collected by way of sales tax was not granted to the assessee and the Revenue has not been able to satisfy that any direction has been given involving excessive relief to the assessee ?'3. The facts which have given rise to these applications may be briefly stated. M/s. Assam Roller Flou...
Tag this Judgment!Jamna Lal Mohan Lal Vs. Barkat Ali
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-19-1985
Reported in: 1986(1)WLN350
Milap Chand Jain, J.1. By order dated July, 8, 1980, the learned Single Judge has referred this revision petition to the larger Bench as the revision petition involves an important question of law as to the interpretation of Section 15 of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 (for short 'the Act') as amended by the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) (Amendment) Ordinance, 1975 (Ordinance No. 26 of 1975) promulgated on September 29, 1975, which was subsequently replaced by the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) (Amendment) Act, 1976 (Act No. 14 of 1976).2. The facts leading to the present revision petition are, briefly stated as under:The non-petitioner No. 1 Barkat Ali instituted a civil suit No. 344 of 1967 against the petitioners for eviction on the ground that he needs the suit shop for carrying on business of stationery by his son Abbas Ali and the suit was decreed on August 19, 1968. The decree-holder obtained possession of t...
Tag this Judgment!Shanker Lal and 7 ors. Vs. Authorised Officer and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-19-1985
Reported in: 1986WLN(UC)288
Milap Chand Jain, J.1. These writ petitions are directed against the order of the Government dated October 13, 1978 passed by the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Rajasthan (Revenue Department), Jaipur under Section 15(1) of the Rajasthan Imposition of Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1973 (for short 'the Act'), where by, the petitioners' ceiling cases were reopened on the ground that the orders of the Authorised Officer, Hanumangarh dated April 15, 1976, the Additional Collector, Sri Ganganagar dated June 26,1976 and of the Board of Revenue dated September 18, 1976 are not according to the provisions of the Act and are against the interest of the Government and there are mistakes apparent on the face of the record in the order of the Board of Revenue.2. These writ petitions have come up on a reference made by the learned Single Judge as the question involved, are questions of great importance.3. We may advert to some relevant facts. The agricultural land was original held by...
Tag this Judgment!Shiv Lal Solanki and 6 ors. Vs. the Jalore Central Co-operative Bank L ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-19-1985
Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)246
Ashok Kumar Mathor, J.1. In all these writ petitions identical question arises for consideration, therefore they are being disposed of by one single Judgment. For the convenience sake facts of one case are given. The petitioner Shiv Lal Solanki, applied for the post of Clerk/Cashier in pursuance of advertisement issued by the Jalore Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Jalore, (here in after referred as the respondent Bank). It is alleged that the petitioner was interviewed and he was selected for the post of Clerk/Cashier. Thereafter Executive Committee of the respondent Bank approved appointment of the petitioner and issued order Exbt. 1 dated 28th December, 1981. Thereafter a seniority List was also assigned vide order dated 13th October, 1983 (Annexure-A). It is alleged that on 14th August, 1982 petitioner's services were also terminated vide Annexure-2, but on very day the Chairman of the Bank cancelled the termination order and restored the petitioner back to his post. Since then he co...
Tag this Judgment!Asian Paints (India) Limited Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-19-1985
Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)228
Vinod Shanker Dave, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order, dated July 5, 1985 passed by Judicial Magistrate No. 6, Jaipur City Jaipur.2. An Ambassador car bearing registration No. MRC 9833 belonging to the Company was, it is alleged, driven by W.J. Samual on June 14, 1980 met an accident resulting in a fracture of the leg of one Shri Shyam Chaturvedi. A report was lodged and case was registered under Section 279 & 338 IPC which is pending trial before Judicial Magistrate No. 6, Jaipur City, Jaipur.3. Mr. Samul left the service of the petitioner company and is facing trial as an accused. The vehicle MRC 9833 was handed over to the petitioner company on supardginama. As mentioned above the accident took place in June, 1980 and the application on which impugned order was passed is dated July 3,1985, i.e., after 5 year of the occurrence. The permission was sought on behalf of the company that company be permitted to sell the vehicle. Attention of the trial court was dra...
Tag this Judgment!Sita Ram Dangayach Vs. Suraj NaraIn and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-16-1985
Reported in: 1985(2)WLN315
Panna Chand Jain, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order dated 6th August, 1985, passed by the learned Addl. District Judge No. 1 Jaipur City, Jaipur, by which an application filed by Sita Ram alleged to be under Order 21 Rule 36 read with Section 151, CPC, has been dismissed in the course of deciding the execution application filed by one Suraj Narain, decree-holder, against Gordhan, judgment-debtor, arising out of the decree dated 12th March 1973, passed in Civil Suit No. 54/1961.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that plaintiff Suraj Narain instituted a suit for possession against Udai Narain and others. The property with respect to which the possession was claimed is a temple known as temple of Thakurji Harsh Bihariji and is a situated in Kishanopol Bazar, Jaipur. It was alleged in the suit that one Shri Ganga Chand was a trustee of the temple who died in the year 1916, leaving behind Gopi Devi, his widow and two sons Gopal and Lal Chand. Gopal and Lal C...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »