Rajasthan Court November 1999 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hotel Joshi
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-05-1999
Reported in: (1999)157CTR(Raj)369; [2000]242ITR478(Raj); 2000(2)WLC376
N.N. Mathur, J. 1. This application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), has been filed at the instance of the Revenue seeking mandamus to the Tribunal for drawing up the statement of case and referring the following question of law : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is justified in not upholding the cost of construction as estimated by the District Valuation Officer at Rs. 19,89,000 which was based on the scientific CPWD rates as against the PWD rates of the State based on order X-3 which is meant for determining the rent of the building ?' 2. The respondent-assessee constructed a hotel building during the period between October 1, 1981, and October 15, 1984. As per his say, he maintained regular books of account for construction of the hotel building. The expenses of the construction were completely vouched except the expenses to the extent of Rs. 71,000. They were not su...
Laxman Singh Verma Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-05-1999
Reported in: (2000)IIILLJ685Raj; 2000(2)WLC11
N.N. Mathur, J. 1. Heard Mr. Mridul, learned counsel for the appellant. 2. This special appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned single Judge dated August 4, 1999 dismissing the writ petition on the ground of availability of alternate remedy by way of statutory appeal against impugned order dated February 3, 1990 passed by the Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies.3. Few necessary facts are that petitioner came to be appointed as Lower Division Clerk in the Minor Irrigation Project of the Govt. of Rajasthan, which was to be operative under the respondent Chittorgarh Prathmic SahakariBhoomi Vikas Bank Limited by order dated April 22, 1981. He was initially appointed for a period of sixty days, which was extended for further sixty days by order dated June 26, 1981. Before the expiry of sixty days by order dated August 24, 1981 (Annexure3), he was allowed to continue in service till the sitting of the selection committee or availability of surplus personnel or selected per...
Narayan Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-04-1999
Reported in: AIR2000Raj190; 2000(2)WLN160
ORDER1. The writ petition preferred by Narayan Lal petitioner was dismissed by the learned single Judge after hearing petitioner's counsel by a speaking judgment and order dated 7-9-1990.2. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied the petitioner preferred a D. B. Civil Special Appeal against the said judgment and order dated 7-9-1990. The Division Bench after hearing the counsel for the parties, came to the conclusion that the amendment to the provisions of the Rajasthan Municipalities (Disposal of Urban Land) Rules. 1974 had not been considered by the learned single Judge and the matter had been disposed of by merely considering the unamended rule though amendment to the said rule was having a bearing on the issue and, thus, the judgment of the learned single Judge deserves to be set aside. The Division Bench set aside the judgment and order dated 7-9-1990, admitted the writ petition and remanded the case to the learned single Judge for deciding it afresh.3. When the matter came up for consid...
Shiv Raj Bhatia Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-03-1999
Reported in: (2000)160CTR(Raj)330
ORDERB.J. Shethna, J.:Learned counsel Shri Bhandawat states that this petition is squarely covered by the judgment of this court delivered in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1355/97 ireported as General Insurance Employees Association v. Union of India & Ors. (2000) 160 CTR (Raj) 3271 and the judgments reported in Life Insurance Corpn. Class I Officers (Bombay) Association v. LIC of India & Ors. : [1998]229ITR510(Bom) and CIT v. E.A. Rajendran : [1999]235ITR514(Mad) .2. In terms of the aforesaid judgments this petition is dismissed and it is held that conveyance allowance and additional conveyance allowance are not exempted under section 10(14) of the Income Tax Act, section 10(14) of the Income Tax Act, 1961....
Hardev Singh and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-01-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ1900
ORDERS.C. Mital, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the judgment dated 1 -7-99 of learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 1, Sriganganagar whereby the appeal preferred by petitioners and co-accused Veeru alias Balveer Singh was partly accepted by setting aside the conviction of Veeru alias Balveer Singh under Section 452, 323 read with 34, 324 read with 34 and 326 read with 34, I.P.C. but the conviction and sentence of the petitioners for the said offences was confirmed on dismissal of their appeal. The petitioners and co-accused Veeru alias Balveer Singh had preferred the appeal against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Sadulshahar on 31-7-98.2. The brief facts of the case are that the complainant Mela Singh, his mother Pyaro, brother Sarwan and other inmates of the house were sitting inside at about 9.45 p.m. on 7-6-97. The petitioners Ashu Singh, Hardeo Singh and other co-accused Veeru alias Balveer Singh, Surjeet Singh, Mela Singh,...
Mohan Vs. Board of Revenue for Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-01-1999
Reported in: 2000(2)WLN46
J.C. Verma, J.1. The petitioner is aggrieved against the order passed by the Board of Revenue dated 15.12.1986 (Annexure-6) attached to the writ petition whereby the Board of Revenue had set aside the judgment and decree of the Revenue Appellate Authority dated 5.4.1980 (Annexure 5). The prayer is to restore the order Annexure 5.2. Jamnalal, the predecessor of the respondent Nos. 5 to 9 along with Rameshwar Lal (here-in-after called the respondent plaintiffs) had initially filed a suit against the present petitioners u/s 188 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act in the court of Assistant Collector, Sikar in respect of Khasra Nos. 679 and 674 measuring 6 Bigha 17 Biswa and 3 Bigha 18 Biswa situated at village Bai. They had prayed that they were the recorded tenants of the said Khasra numbers and the entries in their names were wrongly removed and were prepared in favour of Ghinsa, Kanha, Kalu and Bodu Jats who are said to have caused their interest on the present petitioners. The tenants in the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›