Rajasthan Court December 1993 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.
Rajendra Bahadur Bhandari Vs. Rajasthan State Agriculture Marketing Bo ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-16-1993
Reported in: 1993(3)WLC125; 1993WLN(UC)481
K.C. Agrawal, J.1. The only point in the present appeal is in respect of interpretation of entry of Schedule VI 'Ministerial' in the Rajasthan State Agriculture Marketing Board (Service) Bye-Laws, 1977. The entry No. 8 of the aforesaid schedule VI provides that the post of UDC is to be filled in 100% by promotion, and the minimum qualification and experience required for promotion to the post of UDC is that the person must have five years experience as LDC except graduate with three years service as LDC, The dispute is with regard to the words 'except graduate with 3 years service as LDC. According to the appellant if a person has served as LDC before graduation that period is also required to be taken into consideration while according to the respondents the person should serve for three years as graduate only then he can take the benefit of the latter part of the minimum qualifications and experience required for promotion. The post of UDC is to be filled in 100% by promotion from am...
Controller of Estate Duty Vs. Smt. Dropadi J. Nagpal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-16-1993
Reported in: [1995]211ITR240(Raj)
V.K. Singhal, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law arising out of its order dated May 29, 1981, under Section 64(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 (hereinafter called as 'the Act') :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in confirming the Appellate Controller of Estate Duty's order, reducing the value of immovable property known as Nagpal Hotel from Rs. 5,61,000 to Rs. 3,28,380 in which the deceased had one-third share ?'2. The brief facts of the case are that the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty, Jaipur, adopted the value of immovable property known as 'Nagpal Hotel' at Rs. 5,61,000 on the basis of the report of the Departmental Valuation Officer and the deceased's (Lal). Nagpal's) one-third share was worked out at Rs. 1,52,490. The said property was valued by the Wealth-tax Officerat a figure of Rs. 3,73,169. The Assistant Controller of Estate Duty found that the immovable property under c...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ramchandra Udhavdass
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-10-1993
Reported in: [1995]211ITR136(Raj)
V.K. Singhal, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law arising out of its order dated October 30,1981, under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of the assessment year 1974-75 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee-firm is entitled to registration ?'2. The brief facts of the case are that the firm, Messrs. Ramchandra Udhavdass, was constituted by a deed dated February 5, 1972, consisting of Ramchandra, Udhavdass and Gurnamal sharing the profits and losses at 40 per cent., 35 per cent. and 25 per cent., respectively. The registration for the assessment year 1973-74 was granted by the Income-tax Officer. The firm follows the calendar year as its previous year. Ramchandra expired on July 24, 1973, and, therefore, in accordance with the provisions of Clause 7 of the partnership deed dated February 5, 1972, Smt. Sakhi Bai was admitted as a partner with e...
Durga Cotton Industries Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-10-1993
Reported in: 1994(1)WLC696; 1993WLN(UC)599
A.K. Mathur, J.1. The petitioner by this writ petition has prayed that the notices Annexures 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 and 10 may be quashed and the respondents No. 2 and 3 may be directed to consider the rate of tax payable by the petitioner on absorbent cotton wool I.P. as 4% under item-No. 16 of the notification dated 27.6.1990. It is also prayed that the judgment given in the case of Vishwas Surgical Industries, Sri Ganganagar Asstt. Commercial Taxes Officer (1992) 10 STA 40 may be quashed.2. The petitioner is a partnership firm registered under the provisions of the Indian Partnership Act. The petitioner is carrying on the business of purchase and sale of cotton at Nokha in District Bikaner. The petitioner is a registered dealer under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act and the petitioner's sales tax number is 1812/29. One of the commodities which the petitioner sells is absorbent cotton wool I.P. Initially this item was governed by Item No. 11 of the notification dated 8.3.1988, which reads as...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. R.G. Ispat Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-09-1993
Reported in: [1994]210ITR1018(Raj)
V.K. Singhal, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law arising out of its order dated August 24, 1983, under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act in respect of the assessment years 1976-77 and 1977-78 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in holding that the massive reinforced concrete structure, especially designed to take up loads, constituted 'plant' within the meaning of Section 43(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.' ?2. The assessee is a limited company and is a manufacturer of grinding media balls and ingots. A claim for depreciation initially was made onthe plant and machinery installed. The Income-tax Officer held that the building for the plant and machinery is not plant and, therefore, the depreciation and investment allowance was disallowed. In appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), it was observed that the building in the present case could be covered within th...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. R.L. Kasliwal and L.K. Kasliwal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-09-1993
Reported in: [1995]211ITR153(Raj)
V.K. Singhal, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the above two cases under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, in respect of the assessment years 1972-73 and 1973-74, which arise from its order dated August 27, 1981.2. The jurisdiction of the Wealth-tax Officer to initiate reassessment proceedings is in dispute.3. The Wealth-tax Officer made a reference under Section 16A of the Wealth-tax Act to the Departmental Valuation Officer on May 20, 1975, for valuation of immovable property (Gems Cinema) owned by the firm, Messrs. Maniram and Sons, for the relevant assessment years 1971-72 and 1974-75. The valuer submitted his report on April 30, 1976, determining the value at Rs. 15,45,000 and Rs. 20,20,000 as on Diwali, 1970, and Diwali, 1973, respectively. The Wealth-tax Officer issued notice for the assessment years 1972-73 and 1973-74 for escaped assessment under Section 17(1)(b). The reassessment order was accordingly framed. In appeal, the Appellate Assistant Com...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Yematake Honeywell Co. Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-09-1993
Reported in: [1994]210ITR1051(Raj)
V.K. Singhal, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following two questions of law arising out of its order dated July 21, 1982, in respect of the assessment year 1976-77 under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in deleting the penalty of Rs. 7,339 levied under Section 271(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?(2) Whether the decision of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is perverse in deleting the penalty of Rs. 7,339 levied under Section 271(1)(a) inasmuch as they have relied on their decision in quantum appeal not served so far ?'2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee was required to file a return of its income under Section 139(1) of the Income-tax Act on or before June 30, 1976. The said return was filed on February 18, 1977, which was late by seven months. The assessment of the assessee was completed on February 27, 1979, on a tota...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Smt. Kalyani Sharma
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-07-1993
Reported in: [1994]210ITR947(Raj)
V.K. Singhal, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law arising out of its order dated March 25, 1980, under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, in respect of the assessment years 1976-77 and 1977-78 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee was not the owner of the ornaments weighing 80 tolas of gold and that she was holding the same for the benefit of her sons and the same were to be given to their wives on the occasion of their marriage ?'2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed a return of wealth in respect of jewellery acquired at the time of her marriage from her parents and in-laws. Jewellery weighing 80 tolas of gold ornaments received from her mother, Smt. Man Devi, was not declared in the return on the ground that the said ornaments belonged to the wives of the two sons of her son, Dr. S. K. Sharma. An affidavit of the elder sister, Smt....
Mangudass Vs. State of Raj.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-07-1993
Reported in: 1994(1)WLC617; 1993WLN(UC)255
M.R. Calla, J.1. This jail appeal has been directed against the judgment dated 13.12.85 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chittorgarh, whereby he found the accused appellant guilty for the offences under Section 302 & 397 I.P.C. and sentenced him to life imprisonment and to ten years rigorous imprisonment respectively and further directed that both substantive sentences shall run concurrently.2. Briefly stated the prosecution case as unfolded by the evidence is that in the night intervening 17th & 18th Feb. 1992 some unknown persons omitted the murder of Lalu son of Devkishan Jat resident of Village Casma, who was sleeping in his Nohra. Next morning Godulal came to know about the murder of Lalu Ram. He went to Shri Godulal 'Ward Panch', and informed him about the incident, who lodged an oral report ot the SHO Police Station, Akola, which was reduced into writing as Ex. P/6 and the formal FIR Ex. P/7 was drawn. The Investigation Officer rushed to the spot, inspected the s...
Smt. Kanwar Devi Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-06-1993
Reported in: (1995)ILLJ401Raj; 1994(1)WLC381
B.R. Arora, J.1. Petitioner's husband Prabhu Ram was working as Assistant Commandant in 19th Battalion, Border Security Force, Jodhpur. He was a member of General Provident Fund Account. He retired from the Government service on March 20, 1978, after attaining the age of superannuation. After his retirement, Prabhu Ram moved an application on April 4, 1985 for the payment of G.P.F. amount. This application remained unattended and he again moved an application on May 5, 1985 reminding the respondents to make payment of G.P.F. amount to him. This application/reminder also was not processed and considered by the respondent and, therefore, he again reminded the authorities on March 4, 1986for making him the payment of G.P.F. amount. All these applications/reminders remained unattended by the respondents and the payment of G.P.F. amount was not made to the petitioner's husband Prabhu Ram. In the meanwhile, petitioner's husband died on September 3, 1989. After the death of her husband, the p...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »