Rajasthan Court April 2002 Judgments
Dr. M.K. Gaur and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-26-2002
Reported in: RLW2003(2)Raj870; 2002(3)WLC367; 2002(5)WLN82
Naolekar, J.1. The Director Education Government of Rajasthan sent a requisition vide communication dated 8.8.1995 to the Rajasthan Public Service Commission (for short, 'the Commission') for selection of suitable candidates to fill twenty-five vacancies of College Lecturers in Geography. The break-up of these vacancies was - twelve of the year 1994-95 and thirteen of the year 1995-96. Out of these vacancies four were reserved for Scheduled Castes, three for Scheduled Tribes and five for Other Backward Classes. In pursuance of the requisition, the Commission invited applications from eligible candidates vide advertisement dated 8.11.1995. Last date fixed for receipt of the applications was 30.12.1995. 118 candidates applied for the post. On scrutiny, 115 candidates were found eligible to appear in the interview. Before commencement of the interviews, demand for additional thirteen vacancies was further sent to the Commission vide communication dated 12.2.1996 by the Director Education ...
Tag this Judgment!Asstt. Cit Vs. Ashok Kumar Garg
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-26-2002
Reported in: (2002)75TTJ(NULL)885
ORDERS.R. Chauhan, J.M.As both these appeals and their related cross-objections are inter-related and involve common points, so we are disposing them of by this common order for the sake of convenience.2. ITA No. 1411/Jp/1994 and 1412/Jp/1994 are two appeals by revenue for assessment year 1991-92 and are directed against two separate orders of Commissioner (Appeals), Jodhpur, each dated 21-2-1994.3. The assessee has preferred cross-objection No. 1/Ju/2002 and 2/Ju/2002 in respect of ITA No. 1411/Jp/1994 and 1412/Jp/1994 being the revenue's appeals.4. I have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the records.5. First I take up revenue's appeal in ITA No. 1412/Jp/1994 in the case of Shri Ashok Kumar Garg. The revenue has raised the sole ground disputing the reduction of N.P. rate from 30 per cent as applied by assessing officer to the gross receipts from plying of tanker to 17 per cent. The learned Departmental Representative of revenue has contended that the assessing of...
Tag this Judgment!Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes Department Vs. Teletube Elect ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-26-2002
Reported in: [2004]134STC56(Raj)
Rajesh Balia, J. 1. This case relates to levy of tax on the packing material contained in which principal goods 'the glass' were sold as one single sale transaction. The tax has been imposed separately on the principal commodity and the packing material by assuming an implied sale of packing material independent of principal commodity by invoking Sub-section (1) of last proviso to Section 5 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954.2. The assessee raised an objection about levying of tax on such deemed sale by invoking the said proviso which is only a part of the rate structure and not a part of charging tax for levying tax by assuming the sales of packing material to exist which in fact have not taken place independent of the principal commodity.3. Ultimately, the Tax Board has found in favour of the assessee that tax cannot be levied separately on packing material solely by invoking the last proviso to Section 5(1) by treating it to be a deemed separate sale of the commodity independent o...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner, Commercial Taxes Department Vs. R.B. Garg and Brothers a ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-26-2002
Reported in: [2002]128STC508(Raj)
Rajesh Balia, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. These two revisions arise out of the common order passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board in the case of same assessee-dealer, R.B. Garg & Brothers in Appeals Nos. 689 of 1997 and 690 of 1997 on August 29, 1998.3. The only issue raised in these revisions is whether moulds testing equipments used by the assessee in the manufacture can be included in the eligible fixed capital investment for the purpose of computing extent of benefit that can be availed of under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Incentive Scheme, 1987. In the scheme, the maximum amount of incentive by way of tax exemption, which can be availed of by the unit which has been granted eligibility certificate under it, is directly relatable to the eligible fixed capital investment, while the District Level Screening Committee has excluded the cost of mould testing equipments on the ground of a circular issued by the Director (Industries) on October 12, 1995 in which for the purposes...
Tag this Judgment!Suman Steels Vs. Union of India
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-26-2002
Reported in: [2003]127TAXMAN353(Raj)
ORDERThe petitioner is a proprietorship concern and is engaged in the business of manufacturing tubular trusses for auction platform on contract basis. The petitioner filed a return of income for the assessment year 1995-96. The return of the petitioner was processed under section 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and refund was granted to the petitioner. The petitioner has been served with a notice under section 148 of the Act for the assessment year 1995-96. In the present writ petition, the petitioner is impugning the notice issued under section 148 of the Act.The petitioner states that respondent No. 4 while issuing notice has claimed to have reason to believe that income of the petitioner for the assessment year 1995-96 has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Act. In the notice, it is stated that respondent proposes to reassess the petitioner. The petitioner was required to file return within 31 days from the date of servi...
Tag this Judgment!Suman Steels Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-26-2002
Reported in: [2004]269ITR412(Raj)
B. Prasad J.1. The petitioner is a proprietorship concern and is engaged in the business of manufacturing tubular trusses for auction platform on contract basis. The petitioner filed a return of income for the assessment year 1995-96. The return of the petitioner was processed under Section 143(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and refund was granted to the petitioner. The petitioner has been served with a notice under Section 148 of the Act for the assessment year 1995-96. In the present writ petition, the petitioner is impugning the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act.2. The petitioner states that respondent No. 4 while issuing notice has claimed to have reason to believe that income of the petitioner for the assessment year 1995-96 has escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147 of the Act. In the notice, it is stated that the respondent proposes to reassess the petitioner. The petitioner was required to file a return within 31 days f...
Tag this Judgment!Dy. Cit Vs. Hindustan Zinc Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-26-2002
Reported in: (2004)86TTJ(NULL)389
ORDERB.L. Khatri, A.M.This is an appeal by the revenue against the order of Commissioner (Appeals), Udaipur, for assessment year 1990-91. The appellant agitated on various grounds which are being discussed and decided in this order.2. Ground No. 1-deletion of addition of Rs. 4,76,84,000 made on account of provision for losses in stores, stock, raw material and finished goods. We find that this ground of appeal is covered by ground No. 3 of appeal in ITA No. 321/Jp/1996 for assessment year 1992-93 through order of this Bench, dated 17-10-1991. For the reasons given therein, we decline to interfere with the order of the Commissioner (Appeals).3. Ground No. 2-deletion of addition of Rs. 4,58,000 being excess amortization of expenses. This has reference to the comments of the C & AG under section 619(4) of the Companies Act, 1956 wherein it has been stated that the expenditure on mine exploration and development expenditure in respect of Rajpura-Dariba Mines was not done in accordance with...
Tag this Judgment!Swagat Synthetics (P) Ltd. Vs. Ito
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-26-2002
Reported in: (2002)77TTJ(NULL)987
ORDERB.L. Khatri, A.M.This is an appeal by the assessee against the order of Commissioner (Appeals), Ajmer, for assessment year 1997-98. The appellant agitated on various grounds which are being discussed and decided in this order.2. Ground No. 1 is general and the ground regarding quashing of the order is not being pressed by the learned counsel.3. Ground No. 2Share application money added under section 68.During the year under appeal the assessee-company increased the subscribed share capital and received share application money from 8 shareholders. The assessing officer had made an addition of Rs. 1,30,000 for unexplained share application money in the names of 8 persons under section 68 of the Income Tax Act. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) had confirmed the same. The Commissioner (Appeals) observed that the case of CIT v. Stellar Investment Ltd. : [1991]192ITR287(Delhi) had already been considered by the Full Bench of the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Sophia Finance Lt...
Tag this Judgment!Om Prakash Vs. Manoharlal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-24-2002
Reported in: RLW2003(2)Raj1134; 2002(4)WLC530; 2002(5)WLN618
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This second appeal has been filed by the appellant-defendant against the judgment and decree dated 31-10-1987 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Bikaner in Civil Appeal No. 58/86 by which he allowed the appeal of the plaintiff and decreed the suit of the plaintiff for eviction of the defendant-appellant from the suit premises on the ground of default as envisaged under Section 13(1)(a) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rent Control Act') and reversed and set aside the Judgment and decree dated 20-1-1983 passed by the learned Addl. Munsiff, Bikaner in Civil suit No. 54/78 by which the learned Addl. Munsiff dismissed the suit of the plaintiff holding the defendant-appellant as first defaulter.Note :--It may stated here that the suit premises were purchased by one Manoharlal from the original-plaintiff-respondent Hari Narayan and, therefore, he moved an application on 2-9-1994 for impleading hi...
Tag this Judgment!National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Smt. Deewa and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-24-2002
Reported in: RLW2003(1)Raj652
Panwar, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 16th June, 1993 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rajsamand (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 106/1989, whereby the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- (rupees one lac) in favour of respondent-claimants No. 1 to 4 (for short 'the claimants') and against respondents No.5 and 6 and appellant National Insurance Company Limited (for short 'the insurer'). Aggrieved by the judgment and award of the Tribunal, the appellant insurer has filed this appeal.2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the judgment and award impugned.3. Three separate claim petitions were filed by legal representatives of deceased Legal representatives of deceased Bhagwanlal filed MAC Case No. 106/1989, legal representatives of deceased Manjur Hussian filed MAC Case No. 107/1989 and legal representatives of deceased Bhanwarlal filed MAC No. 108/1989. The Tri...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »