Rajasthan Court February 2001 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. D.K. Trivedi and Sons
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-07-2001
Reported in: [2001]250ITR561(Raj); 2002(1)WLN230
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur, has referred the following question of law for the opinion of this court which arises out of the order of the Tribunal in ITA No. 860/JP of 1986, dated November 17, 1998.'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally justified in setting aside the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and in holding that investment allowance granted to the assessee cannot be withdrawn ?'2. The facts of the case are that the respondent-assessee which is a registered firm had installed new machinery during the relevant previous year of the value of Rs. 2,07,017 on which investment allowance under Section 32A was claimed which came to Rs. 51,754. As required under law, the assessee had created reserve for Rs. 39,000 for the purpose of making the above claim for investment allowance. This allowance was allowed, while computing the assessment originally made under Section 143(3) on March 31, 1980. After t...
Wazir Ahmed Khan and ors. Vs. Mohd. Anwar Ali and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-07-2001
Reported in: 2001CriLJ1607; 2001(4)WLN64
Kokje, J. 1. This is an application filed on behalf of eleven petitioners, who were plaintiffs in two civil suits filed in the court of learned Munsif, First Class,Chhabra for a declaration that they were Indian citizens and therefore, can not be deported to Pakistan branding them as Pakistani citizens. The learned Munsif, First Class, Chhabra dismissed both the suits in- toto. The Additional Distt. Judge, Baran dismissed the appeal arising out of the suits. The matter was brought to this Court in second appeal by the applicants. This second appeal registered as S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 33/86 was decided on 11.3.97 and this contempt petition arises out of the alleged dis-obedience of the order passed in that second appeal. 2. The applicants have alleged that on 19.7.2000, the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Chhabra passed an order that as the second appeal has been dismissed, a communication be sent to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Government of India to arrest the plaintiff-appl...
Bharatpur Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Judge, Labour Court and a ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-07-2001
Reported in: (2001)IILLJ1035Raj; 2001(2)WLC712
Gyan Sudha Misra, J.1. The petitioner-Bharatpur Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. through its Administrator and Managing Director has filed this writ petition assailing the award passed by the Labour Court, Bharatpur dated June 5, 1995 by which the Labour Court has been pleased to pass an order of reinstatement of respondent No. 2 Shri Tara Singh alongwith the backwages and also to maintain his continuity in service. Unfortunately, the workman-respondent No, 2 Tara Singh died on January 3, 1998 during pendency of this writ petition and in his place legal representatives including his wife were substituted. 2. The whole matter appears to have cropped up as a reference was initiated framing an issue as to whether the Bharatpur Central Co-operative Bank could dismiss the workman Shri Tara Singh by order dated February 24, 1982 and whether the same was legal and valid and in case it was illegal, what relief or reliefs could be granted to him while dealing with this reference, the facts of the...
Ram Pratap Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-07-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ1430; 2000(4)WLC384
N.P. Gupta, J.1. The matter comes up for consideration of application for suspension of sentence. However, since the record has been received,jwith consent of learned counsel appearing I have heard the appeal finally on merit itself.2. The learned trial Court by the impugned judgment has convicted the appellant for the offence under Section 376/511 and Section 452, IPO and has sentenced to an imprisonment of three years and six months on the first count along with a fine of Rs. 500/- and to an imprisonment of two years with fine of Rs. 200/- on the second count.3. The prosecution story briefly put is that on 15-9-96, a first report was lodged at Police Station Tibbi to the effect, that on 13-9-96, the informant had gone out to another village and his wife had gone to the field for picking Cotton, at which time his daughter Gora was all alone in the house. At that time about 12-00 Noon, the appellant tress passed into the house and caught hold of the victim Gora, attempted to commit rap...
Harpat Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-07-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)WLC456; 2007(2)WLN19
B.J. Shethna, J.1. Suspension should not ordinarily be interfered by this Court in its extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, particularly when a person is placed under suspension for a serious charge of corruption, unless and until a strong case of malafide is made out.2. On a complaint lodged by one Naib Singh, the petitiner, who was working as Patwari, was caught red handed for accepting bribe of Rs. 500/-, therefore, by an order dated 14.9.1998 (Annex. 1) he was immediately transferred as a Leave Reserve Patwari of Tehsil Karanpur.3. Recently, the Hon'ble Chief Minister of the State has made public announcement that State Govt. will come down very heavily upon the dishonest, corrupt officers and they will not be spared, whosoever may be and. howsoever he may be high. Necesary instructions have been issued as per the circular dated 14.9.2000 (Annex. 3) by the State Govt. to the effect that any Govt. Officer or Public Servant caught in corruption ...
Cit Vs. D.K. Trivedi and Sons
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-07-2001
Reported in: (2001)168CTR(Raj)361; 2001(3)WLC393
By the court :The Tribunal, Jaipur, has referred the following question of law for opinion of this court which arises out of order of the Tribunal in ITA No. 860/Jp/1986 dated 17-11-1998.'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally justified in setting aside the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and in holding that investment allowance granted to the assessee cannot be withdrawn.'2. The facts of the case are that the respondent-assessee which is a registered firm had installed new machinery during the relevant previous year of the value of Rs. 2,07,017 on which investment allowance under section 32A was claimed which came to Rs. 51,754. As required under law the assessee had created reserve for Rs. 39,000 for the purpose of making the above claim for investment allowance. This allowance was allowed while computing assessment originally made under section 143(3) on 31-3-1980. After close of the previous year relating to the assessment ye...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Tara and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-07-2001
Reported in: 2007(3)WLN491
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. The instant writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned judgment and orders of the learned Board of Revenue dated 27.12.1997 (Annx. 4) and 2.7.1998 (Annx. 6) by which the reference made by the Authority Under Section 82 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act has been rejected and its review application has also been dismissed.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the land encompass in Khasra No. 702 measuring 56.9 Bighas, Khasra No. 708 measuring 83 Bighas and Khasra No. 705 measuring 40.14 Bighas situate in revenue estate Shiy Distt. Banner was in the name of Doli (Math Shri Garibnath Ji Maharaj), Respondent No. 1 was recorded as a cultivator of the said and his name also had been mentioned in the earlier revenue record. The land in Khasra Nos. 702 and 705 came to be recorded in the name of respondent No. 1 antl the land in Khasra No. 708 in the name of respondent Nq.2. Respondents No. 2 and 3 are the transferees of the land from resp...
Ramesh Chandra Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-06-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)WLC408; 2001(2)WLN620
ORDERPalshikar, J.1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks an order from this Court, directing his release from detention, under the provisions of Sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, as he is in custody for being suspected of having committed an offence under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').(2). The facts giving rise to the application for ball stated briefly, are that on 29.4.2000, the Superintendent of Police, Bhilwara, on suspicion that some intoxicating substance is likely to pass through the Stale, ordered sealing of the roads (Nakabandi) and checking of all the trucks passing on these roads. One Truck bearing No. GJ.7X-2648, coming from Chittorgarh, was stopped, the cabin was occupied by the driver, cleaner and one more person. The name of the driver was Onkar, the name of the Cleaner was Gheesa Lal and the third person Ramesh Chandra was the owner of the truck. Enquiries further revealed that the truc...
E.i.H. Limited Vs. State of Rajasthan and Others
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-06-2001
Reported in: AIR2001Raj236; 2001(4)WLN99
ORDERMathur, J.1. This wril petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by E.I.H. Limited is offshoot of the two pending writ petitions known as 'Udaipur Lakes System', challenging the order dated 8/9.12.2000 (Annex. 12) passed by the Collector, Udaipur, directing the peiitioner Company to stop construction work with immediate effect of Phase Second of 'Hotel Trident.'(2). The City of Udaipur is known for its lakes system and for ils scenic beauty. However, a concern was expressed by the citizens about increasing .number of hotels around the Pichhola Lake polluting Ihe water. The lakes which are lifeline of all the inhabitants of Udaipur have rapidly turned into a death trap on account of pollution in water, heavy siltalion and encroachments. The writ petition in Ihe public interest was filed before this courl as back as in the year 1982. The State Government realising that Udaipur lakes are facing environmental problems, siltation and also shrinkage in its area, with a vie...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Aggarwal Gum Industries
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-06-2001
Reported in: (2001)166CTR(Raj)380; [2001]250ITR843(Raj); 2001(3)WLN371
1. Heard learned counsel for the Revenue.2. No one has appeared for the respondents in spite of service.3. At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, the following question of law arising out of I. T. A. No. 52/JP of 1988, for the assessment year 1983-84 has been referred to this court for its opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the deduction under Section 80HH of the Act should be allowed to the assessee on commercial profits before allowing deduction of unabsorbed investment allowance of preceding year in view of the provisions of Section 80AB of the Act ?'4. The facts necessary for the present purpose are that the assessee is a partnership firm. For the assessment year 1983-84, the assessee-firm claimed deduction under Section 80HH in respect of profits and gains from newly established undertaking in backward area. The Income-tax Officer accepted its claim, but while working out the quantum of de...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »