Rajasthan Court August 2002 Judgments
Smt. Suman Vs. Surendra Kumar
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-30-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Raj155; I(2003)DMC805; RLW2004(2)Raj1258; 2003(1)WLC257; 2002(5)WLN718
ORDER1. This review petition has been filed seeking review of the order dated 2-12-1999 whereby an appeal filed by the applicant against the decision of the Family Court rejecting an application under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act (in short, referred to hereinafter as 'the Act') was dismissed After hearing counsel for the parties, the review application is allowed. The impugned judgment of this Court which is sought to be reviewed, in our view, suffers from an error apparent on the face of the record and, therefore, the review application is allowed.2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties on merit.3. Briefly, the facts are that a marriage was solemnised between the parties at Jodhpur on 24th May, 1995. Soon thereafter differences arose between the parties and they started living separately. We need not go into further details of the dispute. On 15-1-1999, the parties filed a Joint petition under Section 13B of the Act for obtaining a decree of divorce with mutual conse...
Tag this Judgment!Guljag Industries Limited Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-30-2002
Reported in: [2003]129STC3(Raj)
N.N. Mathur, J.1. These three special appeals are directed against the judgment of the learned single Judge dismissing the writ petitions on the ground of availability of alternate remedy and relegating the appellant to a statutory remedy under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994. The appeals involve common questions of law and, as such, are disposed of by a common judgment.2. By three different petitions, for the assessment years 1995-96, 1996-97 and 1997-98, the appellants challenged the authority of the Assistant Commissioner, Special Circle-II, Commercial Taxes Department, Jodhpur, making a demand under Section 29 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994, hereinafter referred to as 'the RST Act', by treating the inter-State sales of goods effected in terms of Section 3(b) and Section 6(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, hereinafter referred to as 'the CST Act' as a local sale and thereby imposing tax at the rate of 4 per cent under the RST Act.3. The appellant, a public limited compa...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Lal Chand Agarwal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-29-2002
Reported in: (2002)178CTR(Raj)56; [2003]259ITR497(Raj)
1. This appeal is directed against the order of the Tribunal dated July 31, 2000.2. A search operation was carried out on July 7 and 8, 1987, in the residential premises of the assessee situated at Katla Purohitji, Jaipur. The residence was jointly occupied by the assessee and his two brothers, namely, Ghanshyam Das Agarwal and Goverdhan Das Agarwal, and also their mother, Smt. Radha Devi. During the course of search, some cash, gold ornaments and certain jewellery were seized, as per annexure C-14. Some jewellery was also found in addition to the jewellery seized, which was however released. The list of the jewellery is as per annexure D-4. The assessee has made a surrender of income of Rs. 9,28,516 during the course of search. Some time after the search, the Gold Control authorities attached jewellery belonging to the assessee kept in a locker. This jewellery was valued at Rs. 13,57,900. Again that was revalued by the Gold Control authorities at Rs. 7,985 only. The total income of th...
Tag this Judgment!Udaipur Mineral Development Syndicate (P) Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-29-2002
Reported in: (2003)181CTR(Raj)251
1. This appeal is directed against the order of Tribunal, dt. 16th Jan., 2001.2. The only issue for our consideration in this appeal is whether Tribunal was justified in restoring the view taken by the ITO regarding disallowance of the expenses accrued on account of agreement with the State Government regarding restoration of the land in its original shape.3. There was an agreement between the assessee and the State that as far as possible lessee shall restore the surface land so used to its original condition. Thus as soon as the assessee has dug the pits, he is duty-bound under the contract to fill those pits before restoring the lease land to the State in its original shape. ITO denied the claim on the ground that liability stipulated in the lease agreement to restore the land has not been accrued in the assessment year in hand and it does arise when he has filled the pits.4. In appeal before the CIT(A), CIT(A) has considered the submissions and the provision in the agreement regard...
Tag this Judgment!Udaipur Mineral Development Syndicate Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissione ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-29-2002
Reported in: [2003]261ITR706(Raj)
1. This appeal is directed against the order of the Tribunal dated January 16,2001.2. The only issue for our consideration in this appeal is whether the Tribunal was justified in restoring the view taken by the Income-tax Officer regarding disallowance of the expenses accrued on account of agreement with the State Government regarding restoration of the land in its original shape.3. There was an agreement between the assessee and the State that as far as possible a lessee shall restore the surface land so used to its original condition. Thus as soon as the assessee has dug the pits, he is duty bound under the contract to fill those pits before restoring the lease land to the State in its original shape. The Income-tax Officer denied the claim on the ground that the liability stipulated in the lease agreement to restore the land has not accrued in the assessment year in hand and it does arise when he has filled the pits.4. In appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), the C...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-29-2002
Reported in: RLW2004(1)Raj546
Arun Madan, J.1. This writ petition arises out of an order of removal of the petitioner from service duly upheld by the appellate Authority (respondents) in disciplinary inquiry initiated for the charges as to the absence from head quarter station at Shamgarh (Kota) and overstay permitted ten days during the period of suspension.2. In nut shell, the facts relevant for the present controversy are thus:-After completion of initial training course from 15.12.86 to 14.7.87 and further practical training from 15.7.87 to 14.8.87, the petitioner was appointed as Constable and then confirmed as such. However, he was placed under suspension in contemplation of a disciplinary inquiry by suspension order dated 15.1.90 (Annex. 1), whereby he was directed to report his attendance daily at Kota (W) but with a specific condition that he is not permitted to leave his headquarter during suspension without permission of the competent authority since otherwise he will be liable to the taken up for necess...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. Ghanshyam Das Agarwal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-29-2002
Reported in: (2002)178CTR(Raj)61
By the CourtThe facts in this appeal and in the appeal of assessee's brother i.e., D.B. IT Appeal No. 74 of 2000 are common, therefore, following the view taken by us in the case of CIT v. Lal Chand Agarwal in (D.B. IT Appeal No. 74 of 2000), we find no merit in the appeal. Consequently, the appeal stands dismissed....
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jodhan Real Estate Development Co. P. L ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-29-2002
Reported in: [2004]268ITR432(Raj)
N.N. Mathur, J.1. The instant reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the Revenue is referred by the Income- tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur, for seeking opinion of this court on the following question :'Whether the Tribunal was right in treating sanitary fittings as plant installed in the cinema hall on the analogy of the Supreme Court's decision in CIT v. Taj Mahal Hotel : [1971]82ITR44(SC) ?'2. The reference is required to be considered in the background of specific provision granting depreciation to building, machinery and plant under Section 32 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the decision of the apex court in CIT v. Taj Mahal Hotel : [1971]82ITR44(SC) .3. The respondent-assessee, Jodhan Real Estate Development Company (P.) Ltd., Jodhpur, is having source of income, as per the return filed, from dealing in the real estate business and exhibiting films at its own cinema hall, namely, Darpan Cinema. For the assessment year 1986-87, the assessee ...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. Jodhana Real Estate Development Co. (P) Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-29-2002
Reported in: (2002)178CTR(Raj)39
N.N. Mathur, J.The instant reference under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act at the instance of the revenue is referred by the Tribunal Jaipur, for seeking opinion of this court on the following question :'Whether the Tribunal was right in treating sanitary fittings as plant installed in the cinema hall on the analogy of the Supreme Court's decision in CIT v. Taj Mahal Hotel : [1971]82ITR44(SC) .2. The reference is required to be considered in the background of specific provision granting depreciation to building, machinery and plant under section 32 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the decision of the Apex Court in CIT v. Taj Mahal Hotel (supra).3. The respondent-assessee Jodhana Real Estate Development Company (P) Ltd., Jodhpur, is having source of income, as per the return filed, from dealing in the real estate business and exhibiting films at its own cinema hall namely, Darpan Cinema. For the assessment year 1986-87 the assessee claimed depreciation on sanitary fittings at the r...
Tag this Judgment!Rajasthan Rajya Vidhyut Prasaran Nigam Ltd. and ors. Vs. State of Raja ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-29-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)WLC230; 2003(1)WLN565
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners on 9.10.2000 against the respondents with the prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the judgment and award dated 2.12.1999 (Annex. 10) passed by the learned Judge, Labour Court, Jodhpur by which he ordered regularisation of services of respondent No. 3 Mohan Lal Solanki with effect from 18.10.1974 alongwith arrears etc., be quashed and set aside and the services of respondent No. 3 be regularised with effect from 8.2.1978 in place of 18.10.1974.2. The case of the petitioners as put forward by them in this writ petition is as follows:The respondent No. 3 Mohan Lal Solanki was initially appointed as Casual Labour on Muster-Roll basis on 6th September, 1971 in the erstwhile Board and, thereafter, he was conferred the pay scale of the post of Helper Gr.II with effect from 1st April, 1974.It was submitted by the petitioners that the respondent...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »