Rajasthan Court July 1987 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.
Hamendra Singh Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-31-1987
Reported in: (1988)69CTR(Raj)205; [1988]170ITR508(Raj)
Milap Chandra, J.1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter to be called as 'the Act'), made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur, on the request of the assessee to answer the following questions of law, namely :' 1. Whether the learned Appellate Tribunal is correct in not holding that the assessee's interest-earning capital of Rs. 2,71,000 represented by the fixed deposits stood reduced by the amount of loans of Rs. 1,51,818 taken by the assessee on the security of the said fixed deposits and in not holding that the interest paid on the reduced capital alone was taxable under Section 56 of the Act ? 2. Whether the learned Tribunal is correct in invoking the provisions of Section 57 of the Act when the assessee's interest-earning fixed deposits stood reduced by the amount of loans taken on the security thereof and the interest on reduced amount only is taxable under Section 56 of the Act?' 2. In the return relating to the assessment yea...
Shyam Sunder Agarwal Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-30-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Raj145; 1988(1)WLN131; 1(1988)WLN(Rev)24
1. This special appeal under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance 1949 is against dismissal of a writ petition by learned single Judge of this Court. By the writ petition challenge w as made to allotment of(sic)Bighas 1 Biswa of Khasra No. 410 out o 4 total area of 9 Bighas 8 Biswas in village Jakoda, Tehsil Bali, District Pali to respondent 4, Shree Sumerpur Cotton Ginning and Pressing Factory by the Collector, Pali at the behest of the State Government. The allotment of this land was made to the respondent No. 4 under the Rajasthan Land Revenue (Industrial Areas Allotment) Rule 1959 made in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 100 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 after the said Khasra No. 410 has been set apart for industrial purpose under Section 92 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act 1956. The appellant carried on business a Sumerpur in District Pali and also at Udaipur He too was a claimant for allotment of this land, but the same was denied to him. The wri...
S.K. Bohra Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-30-1987
Reported in: (1988)72CTR(Raj)209; [1988]173ITR400(Raj)
Milap Chandra, J.1. This reference has been made by the Appellate Tribunal (Wealth-tax), Jaipur, under Section 27 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter to be called as ' the Act '), on the request of the assessee in respect of the assessment years 1967-68 to 1971-72, The following question of law has been referred, namely :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the hon'ble Tribunal was right in placing reliance on the decision of the hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Surjit Lal Chhabda : [1975]101ITR776(SC) and in holding that a sum of Rs. 1,60,000 thrown by the assessee into the joint family hotchpot on March 31, 1976 (it should be March 30, 1967), was assessable in the hands of the assessee in the individual status and not in the status of a HUF '2. The facts of the case giving rise to this reference may be summarised thus.3. The assessee is an individual. On March 30, 1967, he made a declaration on stamp papers that he had thrown his self-acquired amount...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Guman Mal Shushi Chand
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-30-1987
Reported in: [1988]170ITR503(Raj)
1. This reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is at the instance of the Revenue for answering the following question of law, namely:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that as soon as Shri Indramal, partner, died on November 5, 1976, the assessee-firm was automatically dissolved meaning thereby that it was a case of succession and not a change in constitution and that Section 187 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, does not govern cases of this type ?'2. The assessee-firm consisted of three partners constituted by a deed of partnership dated May 14, 1965. One of the terms of the deed was that the partnership would not stand dissolved on the death of any of its partners. One of the partners, Indramal, died on November 5, 1976, during the accounting period of the relevant assessment year 1978-79. The remaining partners continued the business of the firm after admitting some more partners therein. The ass...
Smt. Kaushliya Devi and ors. Vs. Assistant Director, Urban Lands and B ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-30-1987
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)69
Milap Chandra, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order of the Director, Land and Building Tax, Rajasthan, Jaipur, dated October 9, 1985 (Anx. 6) whereby he directed the Assistant Director, Land and Building Tax, Jodhpur to reassess the petitioners under Section 15-B, Rajasthan Lands and Building Tax Act, 1964 (here in after to be called as 'the Act') and also for quashing the order of the Assistant Director, dated March 20, 1985 (Anx. 5) refusing to refund the amount of tax deposited sarlier and his notice (Anx. 7) issued under Section 15-B of the Act. The facts of the case giving rise to this petition may be summarised thus.: The petitioners own Suresh Bhawan, 803 Chopasani Road. Jodhpur. The Assistant Director assessed it as one unit, valued at Rs. 837000/- and levied tax of Rs. 6370/-w e.f. April 1, 1979 by his order dated July 21, 1981. On appeal, the Deputy Director Urban Land Buildings Tax, Jodhpur, set aside the order dated July 21, 1981 and remanded the ca...
Smt. Mohan Kanwar Ranawat and ors. Vs. Board of Revenue and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-30-1987
Reported in: 1(1988)WLN(Rev)104
Milap Chandra, J.1. This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the judgment of the respondents No. 1 to 3 dated 31-12-1971 (Annexure 3), 7-3-1975 (Annexure 4) and 6-10-1976 (Annexure 5) respectively by which the transfers of the agricultural land made by the petitioner No. 1 in favour of the petitioners No. 3, 4 and 5 were not recognised under Section 30DD, Rajasthan Tenancy Act (here in after to be called as 'the Act') and the separate share of late Mohan Kanwar Jagtawatji, mother of the petitioner No. 2, was also not recognised while calculating the extent of ceiling area under Section 30-C of the Act. The facts of the case giving rise to this writ petition may be summarised thus.2. Raisingh, husband of the petitioner No. 1, had khatedari land measuring 1347 Bighas 9 Biswas, more specifically described in Schedule 'A' of the writ petition. He died on 13-2-1958. In November 1971, proceedings under Section 30-C of the Act and Rules 9 and 10, Rajasthan Tenancy (Fixation of Ceiling on...
Smt. Mohan Kanwar Ranawat Vs. Board of Revenue
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-30-1987
Reported in: 2(1989)WLN(Rev)412
Milap Chandra, J.1. This writ petition has been filed challenging the judgment of the respondents Nos. 1 to 3 dated 31-12-1971, (Annexure-3), (Annexure 4) and 6-10-1976 (Annexure-5) respectively by which the transfers of the agricultural land made by the petitioner No. 1 in favour of the petitioner Nos. 2, 3, 4 & 5 were not recognised under Section 30-DD, Rajasthan Tenancy Act (here in after to be called as 'the Act') and the separate share of late Mohan Kanwar Jagtawatji, mother of the petitioner No. was also not recognised while calculating the extent of ceiling area under Section 30-C of the Act. The facts of the case giving rise to this writ petition may be summarised thus.2. Baisingh, husband of the petitioner No. 1, had Khatedari land measuring 1347 Bighas, 9 Biswas, more specifically described in Schedule 'A' of (be writ petition. He died on 13-2-1958. In November 1971, proceedings under Section 30-C of the Act and Rules 9 and 10, Rajasthan Tenancy (Fixation of Ceiling on Land) ...
Mst. Aziz Bano and ors. Vs. Mst. Malka Zamani Begum and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-30-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)627
Narendra Mohan Kasliwal, J.1. D.B. Civil First Appeal No. 47/80 was dismissed for want of prosecution by the following order dated July 28, 1982:28-7-1982Hon'ble G.M. Lodha, J.Hon'ble Kasliwal, J.No one appears for the appellant nor any application for substituted service has been filed.The appeal is, therefore, dismissed for want of prosecution.Sd/- N.M. Kasliwal, J.Sd/- G.M. Lodha, J.2. The appellants have filed the restoration application under Order 41, Rule 19 read with Section 151 CPC on August 21, 1982. It has thus been prayed that the exparte order dated July 28, 1982 about the dismissal of the appeal may be set aside and the appeal be restored to its original number. Shri V.V. Harit Advocate filed his own affidavit in support of the application.3. The respondents have opposed the application and both the parties have filed written arguments.4. Mr. Lodha appearing on behalf of the respondents has submitted that the Division Bench has no jurisdiction to hear the present restorat...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Dadu Wala and Co.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-29-1987
Reported in: [1988]170ITR491(Raj)
1. This is a consolidated reference made by the Tribunal in compliance with the direction of this court under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for answering certain questions of law said to arise out of the Tribunal's common order relating to the assessment years 1956-57, 1957-58 and 1958-59 in respect of the same assessee. These questions are as under : Regarding assessment year 1956-57 : '(1) Whether the Tribunal was competent to entertain the assessee's appeal particularly when no appeal could lie to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner against the Income-tax Officer's order under Section 46(1) due to non-payment of tax (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in cancelling the penalty levied upon the assessee by the Income-tax Officer under Section 46(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 ?' Regarding assessment year 1957-58 : '(1) Whether the Tribunal was competent to entertain the assessee's appeal particularly when no ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Gharsana Beriwal Road Works
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-29-1987
Reported in: (1987)65CTR(Raj)313; [1988]170ITR500(Raj)
1. This reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, isat the instance of the Revenue to decide the following question of law, namely:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally right in directing the Income-tax Officer to make two separate assessments, one for the period prior to the change and the other for the period after the change in the constitution of the firm, notwithstanding the fact that it was a change in the constitution of the firm as contemplated under Section 187(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The relevant assessment year is 1977-78. The assessee was a partnership firm constituted by a deed of partnership dated January 1, 1976. It consisted of five partners, of whom one died on March 20, 1976, during the accounting period of the relevant assessment year. Thereafter, the firm was reconstituted from the same date by executing another partnership, deed on April 14, 1976, The question for decision before the Inco...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »