Rajasthan Court January 2003 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.
Mamta Surgical Cotton Industries and ors. Vs. Assistant Commissioner o ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-23-2003
Reported in: (2003)181CTR(Raj)234; RLW2003(4)Raj2208; [2004]136STC317(Raj)
Bhagwati Prasad, J. 1. All these revision petitions involve similar question of law and facts and, therefore, they are being decided by a common order.2. For factual matrix, S.B. Civil Sales Tax Revision Petition No. 931/2002 (M/s Mamta Surginal Cotton Industries v. Asstt. Commr. (Anti-Evasion, Bhilwara & Ors.) is taken up. The petitioner is a partnership firm duly registered under the Rajasthan Sales-tax Act, 1994, Central Sales-tax Act, 1956, and rules framed thereunder. The petitioner is carrying on the business of processing the cotton and making it amenable for surgical cotton. The petitioner during the relevant period had purchased cotton after paying tax at the rate of 4 per cent and carried out the process for transforming the ordinary cotton into surgical cotton. The case of the petitioner is that in such a process, cotton does not get changed into such a new commodity which can be said to be one making it to be taxed over again. This contention raised by the petitioner prevai...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ajanta Dyeing and Printing Mills
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-23-2003
Reported in: [2003]264ITR505(Raj)
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. These two income-tax appeals under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, are directed against the order dated December 29, 1999 passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur, in I. T. A. No. 624/JP of 1993 and I. T. A. No. 858/JP of 1993 for the assessment year 1991-92 and order dated October 21, 1999 passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur, in I. T. A. No. 245/JP of 1993 and I. T. A. No. 339/JP of 1993 for the assessment year 1990-91. Since the facts and the question involved in these matters are identical, we propose to decide both these appeals against the two common orders as aforesaid by this common judgment and order as under.3. We have heard learned counsel Sh. Bhandawat and gone through the question as was framed by the court while admitting Appeal No. 7 of 2000 on August 18, 2000. The question framed by the court was as under :'Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is justified in directing the Deputy Commis...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. New Rajasthan Trading Co.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-23-2003
Reported in: (2004)186CTR(Raj)268; [2004]271ITR511(Raj)
1. This IT appeal is directed against the order dt. 11th Oct., 1999 passed in ITA No. 2168/Jp/1994 for the asst. yr. 1989-90. The Tribunal had passed the aforesaid order allowing the appeal in favour of the M/s New Rajasthan Trading Company, Udaipur. This 'order is subject-matter of challenge in this appeal under Section 260A of the IT Act, 1961. While admitting this appeal on 27th Nov., 2000, the Court had framed following questions :'Whether the newly inserted proviso vide the Finance Act, 1991 w.e.f. 1st Oct., 1991 to Section 272A(2) of the Act is applicable to the respondent-assessee whose default relates to asst. yr. 1989-90 requiring the assessee to file returns on or before 30th April, 1989 for the period ending on 31st March, 1989.'2. It is nobody's case that the newly inserted proviso vide the Finance Act, 1991 w.e.f. 1st Oct., 1991 to Section 272A(2) of the Act has been given retrospective effect. In absence of any retrospective effect to such provisions, this newly inserted ...
Cit Vs. New Rajasthan Trading Co.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-23-2003
Reported in: [2003]133TAXMAN388(Raj)
ORDERThis income-tax appeal is directed against the order dated 11-10-1999 passed in ITA No. 2168/JP/1994 for the assessment year 1989-90. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal had passed the aforesaid order allowing the appeal in favour of the M/s. New Rajasthan Trading Company, Udaipur. This order is subject-matter of challenge in this appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. While admitting this appeal on 27-11-2000, the court had framed following question :'Whether the newly inserted proviso vide the Finance Act, 1991 with effect from l- 10- 1991 to section 272A(2) of the Act is applicable to the respondent-assessee whose default relates to assessment year 1989-90 requiring the assessee to file returns on or before 30-4-1989 for the period ending on 31-3-1989?'2. It is nobody's case that the newly inserted proviso vide the Finance Act, 1991 with effect from 1-10-1991 to section 272A(2) of the Act has been given retrospective effect. In absence of any retrospective effect ...
Akhey Ram Ishwari Prasad Trust Vs. Cit
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-23-2003
Reported in: [2003]130TAXMAN827(Raj)
ORDERHeard learned counsel for the revenue.On an application filed under section 256 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal has referred the following question for our opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the income of the assessee-trust was not entitled to exemption under section 11(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act ?'2. The assessee is a trust. It was constituted by Shri Jeewanmal Tapadia, who was the Manager of certain religious and charitable funds. A formal declaration for creating trust in respect of the religious and charitable funds was made by the aforesaid Shri Jeewanmal Tapadia on 26-8-1957.3. There were number of funds, which Shri Tapadia was managing. By the deed of indenture dated 26-8-1957, it was declared that the respective assets of the religious and charitable funds will be in favour of the trustees, who will hold the management and operate the respective asset of these funds for the purposes stated...
Cit Vs. Ajanta Dyeing and Printing Mills
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-23-2003
Reported in: [2003]130TAXMAN442(Raj)
ORDERBy the courtHeard learned counsel for the parties.2. These two Income Tax Appeals under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are directed against the order dated 29-12-1999 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur in ITA No. 624/JP/93 and ITA No. 858/JP/93 for the assessment year 1991-92 and order dated 21-10-1999 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur in ITA No. 245/JP/93 and ITA No. 339/JP/93 for the assessment year 1990-91. Since the facts and the question involved in these matters are identical, we propose to decide both these appeals against the two common orders as aforesaid by this common judgment and order as under.3. We have heard learned counsel Shri Bhandawat and gone through the question as was framed by the court while admitting the Appeal No. 7/2000 on 18-8-2000. The question framed by the court was as under :'Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is justified in directing the Deputy Commissioner to re-calculate the penalty under secti...
Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-22-2003
Reported in: (2003)179CTR(Raj)432; [2003]260ITR41(Raj)
N.N. Mathur, J.1. The issue arising for decision in these two special appeals is whether the additional conveyance allowance paid by the Life Insurance Corporation of India (in short, 'the LIC') to its Development Officers in terms of the norms of the business fetched by them as per circular dated March 3, 1987, issued by the Life Insurance Corporation is exempt under Section 10(14) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1961', as special allowance or not2. Since the learned single judge has disposed of the writ petitions by a brief order having found the controversy covered by an earlier decision of this court rendered in CIT v. Shiv Raj Bhatia , a brief resume of facts would be necessary for focussing the issue involved in these appeals.3. The appellant, Shivraj Bhatia, Development Officer with the Life Insurance Corporation of India, during the assessment proceedings for the year 1986-87, claimed 40 per cent. deduction (Rs. 27,282) from a sum of Rs. 68, ...
Shekhawat Explosives Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-21-2003
Reported in: RLW2003(1)Raj648; [2004]137STC326(Raj); 2003(2)WLC398; 2003(1)WLN462
Calla, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. This appeal under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance is directed against the order dated 24th Nov., 2001 whereby the writ petition filed by the appellant against the order of assessment in the matter of Sales Tax has been dismissed as not maintainable by the learned Single Judge on the ground that a statutory remedy of appeal was available to the petitioner. The parties are not at dispute that the remedy under Section 84 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 is there so as to challenge the order passed by the Assessing Officer against the order of assessment.3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the remedy of the appeal as aforesaid is coupled with an onerous condition of depositing the amount as assessed by the Assessing Officer under the Sales Tax Act and, therefore, unless the due amount is deposited, the appeal cannot be entertained. It is also the case of the appellant that he is not in a position even t...
Jethu Singh Vs. Bhanwar Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-21-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)WLC745; 2003(1)WLN489
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. All these petitions involve identical questions of law and facts and, therefore, they are being disposed of by this common order.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to these cases are that one Sugan Singh was having agricultural land but he did not have a male issue. He died of illness on 29.9.1991. Subsequent thereto, mutation in respect of the said agricultural land was entered in the name of petitioner Jethu Singh on the basis of adoption being his daughter's son, vide order dated 20.12.1991. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, five appeals were preferred against the said order of mutation by the contesting respondents Bhanwar Singh and Arjun Singh on the ground that Wills had been executed in their favour by Sugan Singh on 27.9.1991. The appellate authority rejected all the five appeal vide order dated 13.6.1995 observing that the mutation proceedings, being fiscal in nature, did not manifest title over the property and the matter should be adjudicated befor...
Ram Dhan Vs. the Judge, Labour Court No. 2 and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-20-2003
Reported in: (2003)IILLJ959Raj; RLW2003(2)Raj999; 2003(2)WLC485
Keshote,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. Admit.3. Shri G.K. Garg and Shri Saransh Saini, Advocates, waives the service of notices for respondents No. 2 and 3. The respondent No. 1 is neither necessary nor proper party Jo this appeal and accordingly service of notice of this appeal on the respondent No. 1 is dispensed with.4. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties the appeal is taken up for final hearing.5. The appellant's case is that he was in service of the respondents No. 2 and 3. His services were terminated under the order of the respondent corporation dated 19th of April, 1990. He challenged this order of termination of his services by filing the writ petition before this Court but that has been dismissed with the liberty to the appellant to raise industrial dispute. The industrial dispute was raised. The learned Labour Court No. 2, Jaipur under its award dated 8th of May, 2001 declared the order of the respondent Corporation of terminating the serv...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »