Rajasthan Court April 2002 Judgments
Jodhpur Chartered Accountants Society and anr. Vs. Union of India and ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-22-2002
Reported in: (2002)176CTR(Raj)177
N.N. Mathur, J.By this judgment three writ petitions filed under article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the constitutional validity of the provisions of Finance Act by which service offered by the chartered accountants, real estate agents (property dealers) and the architects have been brought under the tax net, which is to be charged at 5 per cent of the value of the taxable services provided by them.Since the question involved in all the three writ petitions is identical, all the petitions are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The first writ petition being D.B. Civil Writ Petri. No. 4018/1998 has been filed by the Jodhpur Chartered Accountants Society. The society is aggrieved of levy of service-tax on the persons belonging to the profession of chartered accountants. The second writ petition being D.B. Civil Writ Petn. No. 4263/1998 has been filed by an association of property dealers in Jodhpur known as Jodhpur Property Dealers Association. It is claimed tha...
Tag this Judgment!Mst. Bibi and anr. Vs. the Board of Revenue and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-22-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)WLC624; 2002(3)WLN592
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. In the instant writ petition filed Under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the question to be determined is whether Hindu Women Right to Property Act, 1937 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1937) which came into force with effect from 14.4.1937 was applicable in the erstwhile State of Bikaner or not at the relevant time.2. It arises in the following circumstances:(i) The present writ petition relates to Araji Nos. 24, 25 and 44 respectively measuring 52.5. 5.11 and 22.11 bighas situated in village Killawali, Tehsil Sadul Shahar, District Sri Ganganagar. (hereinafter referred to as the land in question).(ii) That the present litigation substantially is between the petitioners on the one hand and the respondents No. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 on the other hand.(iii) The petitioners' mother Smt. Narain Kaur filed a suit on 28.7.1960 against late Shri Kishan Singh for partition and declaration of the land in dispute alleging inter alia that the land in disp...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Karim Vs. Smt. Kulsum
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-22-2002
Reported in: 2003(3)WLN160
O.P. Bishnoi, J.1. This revision petition has been filed by the husband Abdul Karim against an order dated 7.9.2001 by which, the application of the wife Smt.Kulsum was accepted and an order to the effect that Rs. 400/- per month will be paid by the husband to the wife under Section 125 of the CrPC was passed.2. The petition for maintenance was moved in the Family Court, Udaipur wherein it was stated that after divorcing his wife, the petitioner married Smt. Kulsum. However, he not only started to treat her with cruelty but ultimately threw her out of the house as a result of which she has been living with her sister, who is not able to maintain her. According to the application, the husband remained in Kuwait for a long period. Presently he is working and earning as a property dealer. He owns a jeep which is run as Taxi.3. The husband Abdul Karim in his reply admitted the factum of his marriage with smt. Kulsum but denied that she was illiterate or was thrown out of the house. Accordi...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Kasturi Bai and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-22-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)WLC267; 2002(4)WLN523
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners under Article 226 and puporting to be under Article 227 of the Constitution of India on 10.1.1991 against the respondents with the prayer that by an appropriate writ, direction or order, the judgment of the Board of Revenue dated 31.8.1990 (Annex. 6) be quashed and the order of the Assistant Settlement Officer, Jaisalmer dated 29.10.1971 (Annex. 3) be restored.2. It arises in the following circumstances:The Mandir Shri Mahadeoji was tenant of 230 bighas of the agricultural lands known as Dariyanathji-ki-Baori. During settlement operations, that land was entered as tenancy of the Mandir in Samvat year 2014. A copy of the Khatoni prepared by the Assistant Settlement Officer, Jaisalmer during settlement operations is marked as Annex. 1. Subsequently, at the time of the final settlement, Parcha Lagan (Annex. 2) was issued to Mandir Shri Mahadeoji through Kalyan Nath for only 19 bighas and 7 biswas. On 12.5.1971, on...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. (Mrs.) Kirti Rajat Vs. University of Jodhpur and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-19-2002
Reported in: RLW2003(1)Raj222; 2002(3)WLN650
Garg, J. 1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner on 30.10.1991 against the respondents with the prayer that the recommendations of the Selection Committee in pursuance of the interviews held on 26.10.1991 for the post of Assistant Professor of Botany be quashed in toto and the respondents be asked to hold fresh interviews and in that, the petitioner may also be called. 2. It arises in the following circumstances:- Certain posts of Assistant Professors in the Department of Botany in the University of Jodhpur were advertised through Annex. 1 on 10.9.91 in the newspaper 'Hindustan Times'. The petitioner, who is Msc. (Botany) and Phd. from the recognized University, applied for the said post and submitted the application form. The qualifications for the said post are mentioned in Annex. 2 and the same are as follows:- (a) A Doctorate's degree or research work of an equally high standard; and (b) Good academic record with atlea...
Tag this Judgment!Rishabh Textiles Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-19-2002
Reported in: (2004)186CTR(Raj)758; [2003]260ITR424(Raj)
1. This is a reference application under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, seeking the opinion of this court on the following questions :'1. Whether, the Tribunal was justified in ignoring the material collected by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) under Section 250(4) of the Act and reversing the finding of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) based on such material solely on the ground that material so collected by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) was inadmissible ? 2. Whether there is any material to hold that higher commission paid on bulk sales amounts to diversion of profit ?' 2. The assessee is a company manufacturing dyes and sale thereof. It also does job work for stantering of cloth. The Assessing Officer found that the assessee had claimed expenses on the discount of Rs. 54,928. The assessee had also paid discount at the rate of eight per cent. to two of its sister concerns as against payment of discount at the rate of three per cent. to others. ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Simarjeet Kaur and ors. Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-19-2002
Reported in: RLW2003(3)Raj1484; 2002(5)WLN78
Lal, J. 1. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is directed against the order dated 13.2.2002 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jodhpur and seeks quashing of the criminal proceedings pending against them in criminal case No. 99/95. 2. Briefly stated the relevant facts are that the then Drugs Inspector Heeralal Bansal inspected the shop of M/s.Mahesh Medical Store, Sarrafa Bazar, Jodhpur on 13.3.93 and took sample of Gentapar (tropical cream) and Gentamycin Sulphate cream and sent one of the samples directly to the Director, Central Indian Pharmacopoeia Laboratory, Rajnagar, Gaziabad (CIPL) and on examination and analysis, the same was found to be substandard. So, a complaint was filed before the learned Court below on 28.11.95 for various offences under Indian Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act of 1940'). The learned lower Court took cognizance of the offences and summoned the petitioners whereupon they filed S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition N...
Tag this Judgment!Cwt Vs. Champalal Chopra
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-19-2002
Reported in: (2002)176CTR(Raj)263
By the CourtThis is a reference under section 27(6) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957, by the Tribunal, Jaipur seeking opinion of this court on the following questions :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in cancelling the order of the Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Jodhpur, passed under section 25(2) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957, by holding that :(a) the assessee had claimed partial partition of the jewellery in the preceding year 1980-81 and the partition has been accepted whereas no such partial partition was accepted by the department after due enquiry and satisfaction,(b) when the partial partition was accepted in 1980-81 the order of Wealth Tax Officer is not to be revised for assessment year 1981-82 ?'2. The facts giving rise to the instant reference is that respondent-assessee HUF filed return of net wealth for the assessment year 1981-82 on 26-12-1981, declaring net wealth of Rs. 1,55,178 which included value of gold ornaments and jewel...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Bhawan Va Path Nirman (Bohra) and Co. ( ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-18-2002
Reported in: [2002]258ITR431(Raj)
R. Balia, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. These two appeals filed by the Revenue relate to the assessment years 1994-95 and 1996-97. 3. The core question raised before us, as is apparent from the question framed at the time of admission, whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law allowing interest paid to third parties. 4. Reference to CIT v. Jain Construction Co. , is primarily for the purpose of showing that whether on reaching this conclusion, reliance can be placed on that judgment laying down any such rate. 5. Having perused the judgment under appeal and other material, which has been referred to by both learned counsel, we are of the opinion that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the decision of Jain Construction Co. referred to above which was rendered in an application under Section 256 really does not call for any consideration in this case as the finding has been reached on appreciation of facts concerning the assessment in questi...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Bhawan Va Path Nirman (Bohra) and Co. ( ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-18-2002
Reported in: [2002]258ITR440(Raj)
R. Balia, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur, relating to the assessment year 1995-96. 2. While admitting the appeal, the following two questions have been framed on April 4, 2002 : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law allowing interest paid to third parties placing reliance on the judgment of CIT v. Jain Construction Co. , whereas in the said judgment, the High Court has not held that interest to third parties are allowable out of income arrived by applying net profit rate 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and position of law, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in giving the relief on account of the sales tax refund which was credited by the assessee-firm itself in his profit and loss account and declared it as the part of its income under Section 41(1) of the Act ?' 3. So far as que...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »