Rajasthan Court February 2001 Judgments
Sudarshan Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-26-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)WLN5
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The petitioner is facing trial in a case registered under Section 8/21 of the N.D.P.S. Act. It has been canvassed on behalf of he petitioner that the search conducted by the Executive Magistrate was legally untenable in as much as the Executive Magistrate was part of the raid party as is apparent from the FIR. It was further contended that mandatory provisions of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act were flouted and the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail. Reliance was placed on Vishnu Prasad v. State 2000 (2) RCC 1288 Nadeem v. State 1998 (2) EFR 632 and Kishan Lal v. Central Bureau 1999 (1) RCC 674.2. I have heard learned Public Prosecutor under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.3. In none of the cases cited before me by Mr. Jagdeep Dhankar, learned Senior Advocate, the search was conducted by or in the presence of the Magistrate. The search in all these cases was made by the Gazetted Police Officers who were part of the raid party and under those circumstances t...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Laxmi Art Studio
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-26-2001
Reported in: (2001)168CTR(Raj)380; [2001]249ITR710(Raj)
R. Balia, J.Heard learned counsel for the Revenue. No one appeared for the respondent-assessee in spite of service.2. The facts giving rise to this reference are that the respondent-assessee is a registered firm. It had purchased and installed a new colour lab processing unit in December, 1984, at a cost of Rs. 7,37,088.24. The assessee created a reserve as required under section 32A and claimed investment allowance for the assessment year 1985-86 at Rs. 62,723.23 which claim was accepted by the assessing officer under section 143(1) and the same was reopened under section 143(2)(b). The Income Tax Officer withdrew the investment allowance earlier granted vide order dated 29-3-1988, and against which an appeal was taken before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals). During this period regular assessment for the assessment year 1986-87 was completed under section 143(3) by order dated 31-3-1987, in which the assessee's claim was accepted for the grant of investment allowance in respect of th...
Tag this Judgment!Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation and anr. Vs. Kanti Lal Vyas ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-24-2001
Reported in: RLW2009(3)Raj1998
H.R. Panwar, J.1. By the instant writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner-Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (for short 'the RSRTC' hereinafter) has challenged the award Annexure-6 dated 15th May, 2000 passed by the respondent No. 2, the Judge, Industrial Disputes Tribunal, Bikaner (for short 'the Tribunal' hereinafter).The facts and circumstances giving rise to the instant writ petition are that the respondent No. 1 raised an industrial dispute upon which the State Government of Rajasthan referred the dispute for adjudication to the Tribunal by notification dated 14th October, 1997. The issue referred by the State Government for adjudication to the Tribunal was as to whether non-grant of selection scale on completion of 9, 18 and 27 years of service to the respondent-Workman was valid or not? On receipt of the reference, the notices were served upon the parties and the respondent-Workman filed the statement of claim. A reply thereto was file...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Kumar Dhanuka Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-23-2001
Reported in: [2002]112CompCas637(Raj); 2001(2)WLC282; 2001(4)WLN85
Kokje, J. 1. This is an appeal Under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).2. The facis giving rise to this appeal briefly stated, are as under:On 16.1.97, search and seizure operations were carried out by the officers of the Income Tax Department at the business premises of M/s. H.P. Dhanuka Plastic Chem Private Limited, M.I. Road, Jaipur and the residential premises of Plot No. 361, Mahaveer Nagar, Tonk Road, Jaipur as also at the residential premises of Shri Prem Kumar Gupta, an Associate of the appellant. Various documents and valuables in the form of cash, foreign exchange, silver and gold jewellery were found and seized during the search operations. As a result of search and seizure, the tax liability of Rs. 3.42 Crores was raised vide assessment order dated 29.1.1999. This was an ex parte assessment Under Section 144 of the Act computing the total undisclosed income of Rs. 4,25,66,587/-. The appellant preferred an appeal before the Commis...
Tag this Judgment!Subhash Purohit Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-23-2001
Reported in: 2002(2)WLN390
Kokje, J.1. The petitioner was a Member of the Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jaipur (in short 'the Commission'). He was nominated by the State Government as a Member of the Commission by order dated 23.2.1996, in exercise of powers under Section 16(1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short 'the Act'). Separate appointment order of the same date was also issued by the State Government. In the notification, it was not specified as to whether he was being appointed on full time or part time basis but in the appointment order, his appointment was stated to be on part time basis. According to the terms and conditions of the appointment stated in the appointment letter, the appointment was for a period of five years or till completion of 67 years of age by the petitioner, whichever was earlier. It was specifically stated in the order that the petitioner could be removed from his post under the Consumer Protection (Rajasthan) Rules, 1987 (hereinafter referred...
Tag this Judgment!The Commissioner of Income Tax, Jodhpur Vs. Shri Eklingji Trust, Udaip ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-23-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)WLC261; 2001(2)WLN515
ORDERBalia, J. (1). Heard learned counsel for the parties.(2). This is a reference made at the instance of the revenue in connection with proceedings u/S. 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act of 1961') for rectifying assessment order for the assessment year 1974-75.(3). The respondent-assessee is a Public Religious and Charitable Trust and was claiming exemptions in respect of its income u/S. 11 and 12 of the Act of 1961. The original assessment order in respect of assessment year 1974-75 was completed on 27th September, 1976 by Income Tax Officer on a total income of Rs. 13,125/-.(4). It was found by the ITO that the part of income was not applied to the charitable purposes in view of the applicability of Section 13(3). The reasons for this rejeciion of claim to exemption and subjection of aforesaid sum to tax was that the assessee had carried forward a sum of Rs. 3.50 lacs advanced to M/s. Lake Palace Hotels and Motels (P) Ltd., Udaipur at an interest of 5% per annum a...
Tag this Judgment!Shankar Lal and ors. Vs. R.S.R.T.C. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-23-2001
Reported in: 2003ACJ1514; 2001(2)WLN416
ORDERPanwar, J. (1). This appeal is directed against the Judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 5th April, 1996 passed in S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 417/92 RSRTC vs. Shankar Lal & others, whereby the learned Single Judge reduced the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Balotra, (hereinafter referred to as 'The Tribunal') for enhancement.(2). The brief facts of the case which are necessary for the decision of this appeal are that Smt. Shanti Devi along with others were travelling in Jeep in order to visit Nakodaji Temple, at about 7.30 P.M. when the jeep reached near Siwana Ashotra crossing, the bus owned by respondent-Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (for short 'the Corporation') bearing No. RNG 806 came from opposite direction, which was driven rashly and negligently by its driver Respondent Jethu Dass, dashed against the jeep on the wrong side of the road due to which jeep over turned and Smt. Shanti Devi and many other occupants of the jeep sust...
Tag this Judgment!R.S.R.T.C., Jaipur Vs. Smt. Soni Devi and Others
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-23-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)WLC468; 2001(2)WLN406
ORDERPanwar, J.(1). This appeal is filed by Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, hereinafter (for short 'The Corporation') against the judgment and order dated 11th March passed by the learned Single Judge in S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 196/89, whereby the learned Single Judge has partly allowed the appeal filed by Ihe appellant claimants therein and enhanced the compensation from Rs. 50,000/- to Rs. 2,48,000/.(2). The claim petition was filed by Smt. Soni Devi widow of deceased Hasti Mal and her 3 daughters and 3 sons, who died at the age of 49 years on 10.1.83 while he was travelling in a bus No. RRM 870 owned by the Corporation, which collieded with a running rail/train due to rash and negligent driving by its Driver, Jaisingh. Due to thisaccident, occupant of the bus sustained severe injuries and as many as 9 persons succumbed to injuries inslataneously including Hastimal.(3). The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Balotra, (for short the Tribunal) after holding the trial held ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Eklingji Trust
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-23-2001
Reported in: (2001)167CTR(Raj)367; [2001]250ITR699(Raj)
Rajesh Balia, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This is a reference made at the instance of the Revenue in connection with the proceedings under Section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act of 1961'), for rectifying the assessment order for the assessment year 1974-75. 3. The respondent-assessee is a public religious and charitable trust and was claiming exemptions in respect of its income under Sections 11 and 12 of the Act of 1961. The original assessment order in respect of the assessment year 1974-75 was completed on September 27, 1976, by the Income-tax Officer on a total income of Rs. 13,125. 4. It was found by the Income-tax Officer that part of the income was not applied to the charitable purposes in view of the applicability of Section 15(3). The reasons for this rejection 6f claim to exemption and subjection of the aforesaid sum to tax was that the assessee had carried forward a sum of Rs. 3.50 lakhs advanced to Lake Palace Hotels and Motels (P.) ...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Kumar Dhanuka Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-23-2001
Reported in: [2001]252ITR205(Raj)
1. This is an appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. The facts giving rise to this appeal, briefly stated, are as under : On January 16, 1997, search and seizure operations were carried out by the officers of the Income-tax Department at the business premises of H. P. Dhanuka Plastic Chem Private Limited, M. I. Road, Jaipur, and the residential premises of Plot No. 361, Mahaveer Nagar, Tonk Road, Jaipur, as also at the residential premises of Shri Prem Kumar Gupta, an associate of the appellant. Various documents and valuables, in the form of cash, foreign exchange, silver and gold jewellery were found and seized during the search operations. As a result of search and seizure, the tax liability of Rs. 3.42 crores was raised vide assessment order dated January 29, 1999. This was an ex parte assessment under Section 144 of the Act computing the total undisclosed income of Rs. 4,25,66,587. The appellant preferred an appeal before t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »