Rajasthan Court November 2003 Judgments
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Udaipur Distillery Co. Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-18-2003
Reported in: (2004)187CTR(Raj)377
1. This appeal under Section 260A of the IT Act, 1961, is directed against the order of the Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur, dt. 26th Aug., 2002 and relates to asst. yr. 1986-87.2. The following substantial questions of law were framed at the time of admission which arise for consideration in this appeal:'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 3,19,208 by holding that unpaid amount of bottling fee, on furnishing of bank guarantee has to be treated as actual payment and accordingly the deduction in respect of the same cannot be denied under Section 43B of the IT Act, 1961? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal is correct in holding that since the words 'cess or fee' have been inserted w.e.f. 1st April, 1989, the amended provisions are relevant for the asst. yr. 1989-90 onwards and not prior thereto?'3. As the questions suggest they relate to applicabi...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Rajasthan Spg. and Wvg. Mills Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-17-2003
Reported in: (2004)189CTR(Raj)539; [2005]272ITR487(Raj)
Rajesh Balia, J.1. Appeal is heard on merit, as requested by both the learned counsel.2. The substantial questions of law which have been raised by the Revenue in this case read as under :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in allowing the expenditure of Rs. 2,16,000 incurred for construction of Manikyalal Verma Rajkiya Textile Institute as revenue expenditure, following its earlier order in ITA Nos. 741, 742 and 615/Jp/1992 in assessee's case for asst. yr, 1987-88 ignoring the fact that : (i) admittedly the expenditure is on construction of building and Sections 30 to 36 r/w Section 37 do not provide for deduction of expenditure of capital nature.(ii) transfer of capital assets cannot be construed to mean that capital nature into revenue and the reference to accrual of a benefit of enduring nature is quite irrelevant and in fact superfluous.(iii) the provisions of Section 37(1) expressly excludes the allowability of capital expend...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. Rajasthan Spg. and Wvg. Mills Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-17-2003
Reported in: [2004]137TAXMAN249(Raj)
R. Balla, J. Appeal is heard on merit, as requested by both the learned counsel.2. The substantial questions of law which have been raised by the revenue in this case read as under :-' 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in allowing the expenditure of Rs. 2,16,000 incurred for construction of Manikyalal Verma Rajkiya Textile Institute as revenue expenditure, following its earlier order in ITA Nos. 741, 742 and 615/Jp/1992 in assessee's case for assessment year 1987-88 ignoring the fact that --i. admittedly the expenditure is on construction of building and sections 30 to 36 read with section 37 do not provide for deduction of expenditure of capital nature.ii. transfer of a capital assets cannot be construed to mean that capital nature into revenue and the reference to accrual of a benefit of enduring nature is quite irrelevant and in fact superfluous.iii. the provisions of section 37(1) expressly excludes the allowability of capital e...
Tag this Judgment!Mahendra Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-15-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ1606; 2003(4)WLC616
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J. 1. The appellant was placed on trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sikar in Sessions Case No. 24/96 for having committed murder of Parma Devi. Learned Trial Judge vide judgment dated July 3, 1997 convicted and sentenced the appellant as under :--Under Section 302, IPC to undergo Imprisonment forlife and fine of Rs. 1000/-in default to furthersuffer Three months' Simple Imprisonment.Under Section 452, IPC to undergo Six Months'Rigorous Imprisonment and fine of Rs. 200/- in default to furthersuffer One Month Simple Imprisonment,Under Section 324/34, IPC to undergo Six Months'Rigorous Imprisonmentand fine of Rs. 200/-in default to further suffer One Month SimpleImprisonment. All the sentences were ordered torun concurrently.2. As per written report Ex. P-18 the incident occurred on May 13, 1993 around 4.30 p.m. and the police station Laxmangarh registered a case against the appellant under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 452, 323 and 379, IPC. The appell...
Tag this Judgment!Lala Alias Lal Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-14-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ1218; 2004WLC(Raj)UC342
O.P. Bishnoi, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by Lala alias Lal Chand against a judgment dated 2-9-2002 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Anoopgarh, District Sriganganagar whereby the appellant has been found guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 450 and 376/511 of the I.P.C. For the first offence rigorous imprisonment of 5 years and a fine of Rs. 100/- has been awarded and on account of non-payment of fine, additional rigorous imprisonment for one month has been awarded. Similarly, for the offence punishable under Sections 376/511 of the I.P.C. also, the appellant has been awarded rigorous imprisonment for 5 years with a fine of Rs. 100/- and additional rigorous imprisonment for one month in lieu of non-payment of fine.2. The incident allegedly took place at about 8.00 p.m. on 16-3-2001 in the township of Suratgarh in the house of P.W. 7 Pancharam. Pancharam lodged a written FIR Ex. P/9 on the next day at 11.30 a.m. at police station, Surat...
Tag this Judgment!Mohd. Hanif and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-14-2003
Reported in: RLW2004(3)Raj1704; 2004(1)WLC560
Khem Chand Sharma, J.1. Since these two, appeals arise out of the judgment in Sessions case No. 10/94, therefore, both the appeals are being decided by a common judgment.2. The aforementioned two appears under Section 374 Cr.P.C. arise out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 19.11.1999 passed by the Special Judge (Communal Riots Cases/Man Singh Murder Case), Jaipur whereby the learned trial Judge convicted the four appellants for offence under Sections 302, 120B IPC and sentenced each of them to undergo life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 5000/-each. In default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for one year,3. Succinctly stated the facts of this case are that on 10.8.91 at 12:30 AM, Iqbal Ahmed (PW 25) made an oral report at the Police Station Shastri Nagar, Jaipur alleging that on 9.8.91 at about 11.00 P.M. he and Iqbal son of Noor Mohammad Qureshi went on Motor Cycle to the house of Iqbal situated in Bhindon Ka Rasta on a motor cycle...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Rajasthan State Agro Industries Corporation Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-14-2003
Reported in: [2004]56SCL58(Raj)
ORDERS.K. Keshote, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the contents of the application.2. The applicant filed a writ petition bearing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3493/2002 in this Court against the Rajasthan State Agro Industries Corporation. It is stated therein that in case the writ petition is allowed the consequential monetary benefits are to be provided by the Rajasthan State Agro Industries Corporation (in liquidation).3. The Rajasthan State Agro Industries Corporation was ordered to be wound-up by this Court under its order dated 3rd of September, 1997. This application is filed under Section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956 for grant of permission to the applicant to proceed with the writ petition against the Rajasthan State Agro Industries Corporation (in liquidation).4. Shri L.L. Jain, the learned counsel for the applicant, has produced for the perusal of the court the certified copy of the order dated 7-9-2001 in S.B. Company Application No. 52/2001. It is...
Tag this Judgment!Ganpat Lal and ors. Vs. Rajasthan Housing Board and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-13-2003
Reported in: RLW2004(2)Raj1208; 2004(2)WLC146
B. Prasad, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. Present writ petitions have been filed by the sons of Late Ram Chandra alias Chandriya by caste Mali, resident of Khema Ka Kuwa, Jodhpur. Petitioners claim that they had cultivatory possession of Khasra No. 125 and 123 situated in Village Suthala, Tehsil & District Jodhpur. In Khasra No. 125, they had 16 bighas and 11 Biswas and in Khasra No. 123, they had 9 Bighas land. In the record of 1943 A.D., the ancestors of the petitioners were recorded as tenants. Ram Chandra, father of the petitioners died on Jeth Sud 9 Svt. Year 2027 (corresponding to 1970 approximately) and the petitioners continued to be in cultivatory possession of the land as khatedar tenants.3. Petitioners filed a suit on 11.2.1981 for declaration of khatedari rights and injunction. Notices issued under Section 91 of The Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 has also been challenged. These notices have been exhibited in the writ petition. These notices give a clear sha...
Tag this Judgment!Raju @ Rajkumar @ Rajesh Joshi Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-13-2003
Reported in: RLW2004(4)Raj2259; 2004(2)WLC348
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the accused appellant against the judgment and order dated 6.11.2001 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Udaipur in Sessions Case No. 335/2000 by which he convicted the accused appellant for the offence under Section 376(1) and 379 IPC and sentenced him in the following manner:------------------------------------------------------------------------Name of accused Convicted Sentence awarded appellant under Section-----------------------------------------------------------------------Raju @ Rajkumar 376(1) IPC RI for 10 years and to pay fine@ Rajesh Joshi of Rs. 500/-, in default ofpayment of fine, to furtherundergo 2 months RI.379 IPC RI for one year and to pay fineof Rs: 500/-, in default ofpayment of fine, to furtherundergo 2 months RI.-----------------------------------------------------------------------Both the substantive sentence were ordered to run concurrently.2. It arises in the following circumstances:-On 30.10.2000 at ab...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Banswara Fabrics Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-12-2003
Reported in: (2004)186CTR(Raj)52; [2004]267ITR398(Raj)
RAJESH BALIA, J. 1. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.2. This appeal is directed against the order of the Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur dt. 28th Aug., 2002. The Tribunal has decided three appeals for asst. yrs. 1986-87, 1987-88 and 1988-89 in relation to same assessee by a common order. This appeal relates to asst. yr. 1987-88. It was an appeal by the Revenue before the Tribunal.3. The appellant has suggested that the following substantial questions of law arise for consideration in this appeal:'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in deleting the addition on account of interest chargeable on the debit balances of (i) M/s Jai Mangal Investment and Trading Go. and (ii) M/s Banswara Textile Mills Ltd. on the group that the debit balances were trade debts, ignoring the fact that both the companies are owned by the same group of persons and non-charging of interest is not due to their poor financial position but in fact...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »