Rajasthan Court May 1991 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.
Parasrampuria Synthetics Ltd. Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-29-1991
Reported in: 1991(2)WLN486
Inder Sen Israni, J.1. This writ petition has been filed with a prayer that it may be declared that the petitioner is entitled to the grant of eligibility certificate for exemption from sales tax-to a limit of Rs. 4 crores in respect of expansion in case of any expansion/diversification made by the petitioner.2. The petitioner, a public limited company, manufactures polyproplyene spinning filament yarn. It is stated in the petition that the Government of Rajasthan had promulgated Sales Tax Incentive Scheme for Industries, 1987 (for brevity, 'Scheme, 1987) vide notification dated May 23, 1987 (Anx. 1), under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act and the Central Sales Tax Act, with a view to promote industrial growth in the State of Rajasthan, particularly in the industrially backward areas. This was done with a view to attract entrepreneurs for setting up new industries and expanding the existing unit/diversification in the products. As per Clause (2) of the said Scheme, Units have been divided i...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. A.K. Mukherjee
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-28-1991
Reported in: [1991]192ITR680(Raj)
1. These eleven reference applications have been filed under Section27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'),as the petitioner's application under Section 27(1) of the Act was rejected.As these reference applications pertain to the same assessee But for differentassessment years, all are being disposed by this common order. 2. The point of law on which the petitioner wants a reference to be called for is as under- : 'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessment order made by the Wealth-tax Officer on March 17, 1980, was barred by time limit and, consequently, in quashing the assessment ?' 3. We have heard learned counsel for the Revenue and the assessee. The brief facts giving rise to these reference applications are that, until the year 1963-64, the assessee was being assessed in the status of a Hindu undivided family. The returns for the assessment years 1969-70 to 1974-75 wer...
Raju and ors. Etc. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-28-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ723; 1991(2)WLC421; 1991(2)WLN165
ORDERR.S. Verma, J.1. These two petitions Under Section 482, Cr.P.C. raise identical questions of law and facts. Hence, they have been heard together and are being finally disposed of at the admission stage itself by common consent.2. In S. B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 228 of 1991 petitioners Raju and others are the registered owners of tractor No. HMT 3511 and they also own the compressor attached with this tractor. In S. B Criminal Misc. Petition No. 232 of 1991 petitioner Bhanwar Singh is the registered owner of Tractor RNE 8914. He also owns the compressor attached to this tractor. On 24-4-1991 both these tractors were found carrying explosives without any licence and hence were seized by Shri Mahendra Singh, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Shahpura. At the time of seizures Tractor HMT 3511 was found in possession of Ramlal s/o Raju and Kalu s/ o Kana, while Tractor RNE 8914 was found in possession of one Mukut Singh, who is real brother of Bhanwar Singh. In connection with trac...
Rameshwar Dayal Vs. the State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-28-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)WLN369
N.L. Tibrewal, J.1. The petitioner is aggrieved against the order of the Additional Munisf and Judicial Magistrate, Laxmangarh, by which the applications of the petitioner and of other co-accused persons to drop Criminal proceedings against them for want of sanction Under Section 197 Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Code'), were rejected. After being unsuccessful in the revision in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Alwar, the present petition Under Section 482 of the Code has been filed. In the normal course, I would not have entertained this petitioner after the right of revision having been exercised by the petitioner, but the question involved in the matter goes to the root of the case and is jurisdictional one, I propose to decide the same.To appreciate the question of law which calls for consideration, it is necessary to narrate the facts in brief.2. Non-petitioner Tikka Kan Singh filed a complaint on 14.6.82 against the petitioner and three other police cons...
Rameshwar Dayal Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-28-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)WLN541
N.L. Tibrewal, J.1. The petitioner is aggrieved against the order of the Additional Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Laxmangarh, by which the applications of the petitioner and of other co-accused persons to drop criminal proceedings against them for want of sanction Under Section 197 Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Code'), were rejected. After being unsuccessful in the revision in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Alwar, the present petition Under Section 482 of the Code has been filed. In the normal course I would not have entertained this petition after the right of revision having been exercised by the petitioner, but the question involved in the matter goes to the root of the case and is a jurisdictional one, I propose to decide the same.To appreciate the question of law which calls for consideration, it is necessary to narrate the facts in brief.2. Non-petitioner Tikka Kan Singh filed a complaint on 14-6-82 against the petitioner and three other police const...
Manak Chand JaIn Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-28-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)WLN552
D.L. Mehta, J.1. Petitioner, Manak Chand, Public Prosecutor, filed this writ petition before this Court on 16th July 1990 and prayed therein that the respondents maybe restrained from terminating the services of the petitioner as Public Prosecutor, Ajmer District or, in the alternative not to terminate the services of the petitioner till 30th June, 1993. It was also prayed that a new appointment is made during the intervening period, then the Court should declare that the present Public Prosecutor that who has been appointed vide order dated, 9-2-90 (Annex. 9), shall continue to hold the office of Public Prosecutor till the expiry of his term of appointment. During the intervering period Shri Vasant Vijay Vargiya was appointed as Public Prosecutor as such, the writ petition was amended by the present petitioner and further prayer was made that appointment of Shri Vasant Vijay Vargiya may be declared illegal and the present petitioner should be allowed to hold the office of Public Prose...
Dharam Pal and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-28-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)WLN499
R.S. Verma, J.1. I have perused the judgment prepared by my learned brother Hon'ble Justice Jain. I am in entire agreement with him that this appeal must succeed. However, I would like to slate briefly the sailent features of the case, which persuade me to concur with my brother.2. There is absolutely no doubt that on 6.11.82, an incident did take place at about 2.5 p.m., at which deceased Hari Ram received a gunshot injury and in consequence thereof he breathed his last on 7.11.82 at about 7.15 a.m. in the Government Hospital at Sri Ganganagar. In this very incident, PW 1 Banwari Lal received two simple injuries by blunt object and two simple injuries by some sharp object (vide injury report Ex. P-20). Also injured in this incident was PW 2 Krishna, who received four simple injuries by blunt object, one grievous injury by sharp object and one simple injury by sharp object (vide injury report Ex. P-19).3. Four persons were put up for trial after due investigation and due commitment viz...
OmnaraIn Purohit Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-28-1991
Reported in: 1992(3)WLC641; 1991WLN(UC)292
G.S. Singhvi, J.1. In this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has prayed that the Rajasthan Public service Commission may be directed to call him for interview for the posts of Senior Teachers advertised by the Advertisement No. 6/89-90 and the communications dated 6.11.90 (Anx. 3) and dated 18.12.90 (Anx. 5) issued by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission be quashed.2. Petitioner was born on 15.6.1957. He passed M.A. in Hindi from the University of Rajasthan and thereafter did his Ph. D. from the University of Rajasthan and thereafter did his P.H.D. from the University of Rajasthan in the year 1984. He also passed B.Ed, examination in the year 1986.3. The petitioner was appointed as Teacher in Panchayat Samiti Bikaner with effect from 10.11.1986. He was appointed on Probation after selection by a Selection Committee.4. The petitioner has stated that after 1984 vacancies in the cadre of Senior Teacher (subsequently re-designated as Schoo...
Hanuman Singh. Vs. the State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-28-1991
Reported in: 1991(2)WLN188
G.S. Singhvi, J.1. The facts which are necessary for the disposal of this writ petition can briefly be stated here under:The petitioner was appointed as Constable in the service of the Police Department of the Government of Rajasthan in the year 1965. He continued to serve in that capacity till he was removed from service by order dated 12.5.76 of the Commandant, 4th Battalion, Rajasthan Armed Constabulary, Bikaner, under whom he was working at that time. The petitioner was involved in a criminal case of private nature. He was tried, along with six other persons, for offence Under Sections 148 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Sessions Judge, Bikaner, convicted the petitioner Under Sections 147 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code, in Sessions Case No. 35/76 State of Rajasthan v. Shiv Pratap Singh and Ors. The learned Sessions Judge sentenced the petitioner to imprisonment of one year and six months respectively on two counts and directed that both the sentences shall run concu...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Maharaja Shree Umed Mills Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-28-1991
Reported in: (1991)96CTR(Raj)72; [1991]192ITR565(Raj)
Mohini Kapur, J. 1. This is an application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), seekinga direction to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to state the case on the points of law raised by the Revenue. The assessee in this case is a textile mill at Pali. The dispute pertains to the assessment year 1976-77. A number of grounds were raised before the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner who disallowed a number of items, but on appeal the Commissioner of Income-tax reversed the decision. The decision of the Commissioner of Income-tax was maintained by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The application for making a reference was dismissed by the Tribunal and hence this application.2. The dispute relates to deduction of the amount of gratuity. According to the actuarial certificate, the liability of the assessee for gratuity for the year 1976-77 was Rs, 4,77,446. The assessee further claimed a sum of Rs. 3,06,175 on account of payment of gratuity...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »