Rajasthan Court April 2003 Judgments
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Registhan (P) Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-28-2003
Reported in: (2003)185CTR(Raj)283
1. Heard learned counsel for the Parties.2. Mr. Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent-assessee submits that there was a circular that not to prefer the references in cases where the tax effect is less than Rs. 2,00,000.3. The same argument has been considered by this Court in case of CIT v. Rajasthan Patrika Ltd. , wherein, the view has been taken that in spite of circular on a policy decision, if Department wants to file reference application, this Court should entertain that.4. Considering our view taken in the aforesaid case, we found no substance in the argument of Mr. found no substance in the argument of Mr. Sharma, learned counsel for the assessee, and we direct the Tribunal to refer the following question for the opinion of this Court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in relying upon the tax auditors and allowing the guest-house expenses of Rs. 18,423 without first deciding as to whether the premises in question were us...
Tag this Judgment!NizamuddIn Vs. Cit
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-28-2003
Reported in: [2003]130TAXMAN781(Raj)
On an application under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act the Tribunal has referred the following question for the opinion of this court :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the gift made by the assessee in favour of his three minor sons in the form of Hiba under the Mohammedan Law attracts the provisions of section 64(1)(v) read with section 27(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and, therefore, the rental income of the three minors from the properties gifted to them by the assessee was includible in the total income of the assessee for the three years under consideration ?'2. Assessment years, in all, are 1983-84 to 1985-86. That assessee-respondent has made oral declarations on 1-1-1982 in favour of his minor sons Zahiruddin and Mohd. Zafar and similar declarations have been made on 1-12-1982 in favour of his minor son Moinuddin. The assessee, by these oral declarations, claimed that he has gifted the properties to ...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. Registhan (P) Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-28-2003
Reported in: [2003]131TAXMAN505(Raj)
ORDERHeard learned counsel for the parties.2. Mr. Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent-assessee submits that there was a court Circular that not to prefer the references in cases where the tax effect is less than Rs. 2,00,000.3. The same argument has been considered by this court in case of CIT v. Rajasthan Patrika Ltd. , wherein, the view has been taken that in spite of circular on a policy decision, if department wants to file reference application, this court should entertain that.4. Considering our view taken in the aforesaid case, we found no substance in the argument of Mr. Sharma, learned counsel for the assessee and we direct the Tribunal to refer the following questions for the opinion of this court :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in relying upon the tax auditors and allowing the Guest House expenses of Rs. 32,166 without first deciding as to whether the premises in question were used for business purposes.''Whether...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Udaipur Distillery Co. Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-25-2003
Reported in: (2003)182CTR(Raj)284; [2004]267ITR358(Raj)
Rajesh Balia, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that no substantial question of law for consideration arises in this appeal under Section 260A of the IT Act, 1961.3. The facts of the case are that in respect of asst. yr. 1990-91, return of income was furnished by the respondent-assessee on 31st Dec., 1990, declaring loss of Rs. 49,65,836. This return was processed under Section 143(1)(a) with certain adjustment in the loss returned and an intimation to that effect was issued and served upon the assessee. Thereafter, it has been noticed that deduction for Rs. 7,00,000 on account of deposit made against bank guarantee furnished has been wrongly claimed and allowed under Section 43B of the Act.4. After the intimation under Section 143(1)(a) was sent, a notice for regular assessment under Section 143(1)(a) was issued on 18th April, 1991, and proceedings for regular assessment under Section 143(3) came into exis...
Tag this Judgment!Official Liquidator of Rathi Alloys and Steel Ltd. Vs. Shashi Mohan Ma ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-25-2003
Reported in: [2004]49SCL579(Raj)
ORDERS.K. Keshote, J.1. Despite service of the notice, none appeared for the respondent.2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, perused the application and its enclosed documents.3. Rathi Alloys & Steels Limited (In Liquidation) was ordered to be wound up by this Court under the order dated 24th of August, 2001 passed in S.B. Company Petition No. 36/2000. The applicant was appointed its Official Liquidator with further direction to take necessary action in accordance with the law. As per the provisions of Section 456 of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short, 'the Act, 1956') all the assets and effects of the company (in liquidation) are under the deemed custody of the court with effect from the aforesaid date of winding up of orders. The ex-Directors of the Company (in liquidation) have filed the statement of affairs under Section 454 of the Act, 1956. As per the statement of affairs one Bajaj Scooter of the company (in liquidation) bearing registration No. DAM 8020 is in possess...
Tag this Judgment!Amar Bai (Smt.) Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-25-2003
Reported in: RLW2004(1)Raj704
A.C. Goyal, J.1. It was argued that dying declaration of the deceased was first recorded by learned A.C.J.M. on 21.10.02 and her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded on 24.10.02 and both the statements are inconsistent. It was also argued that according to doctors Mr. M.M. Sharma and Mr. M.M. Rawat, she was not in a position to state and husband and father both are on bail. Learned counsel placed reliance on Kanchy Ramchander v. State of A.P. (1), wherein it was held that dying declaration if found to be true and free then it is sufficient for recording conviction and merely because the dying declaration has been recorded by a Judicial Magistrate is not by itself a proof of its truthfulness. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed this application and argued that the father-in-law and husband of the deceased were enlarged on bail only on the ground that it was mother-in-law who put her ablaze.2. I have considered the said submissions. Without making any comments on merits, this a...
Tag this Judgment!Suresh Dutt Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-24-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ3342; RLW2003(4)Raj2552; 2003(3)WLC655
Joshi, J. 1. The learned Juvenile Court convicted the revisionist-petitioner for offences under Section 302 and 364 I.P.C. on 5th September, 1988 and referred the matter to the State Government Under Section 22(i) of the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 (in short 'the Act' hereinafter). On receipt of the letter dated 24th March, 1989 from the State Government, the Juvenile Court ordered on 19th June, 1989 to detain the petitioner for a period of 5 years in Juvenile Reformatory, Udaipur attached to the Central Jail, Udaipur.2. As per finding of the Juvenile Court, the accused was of 15 years, 3 months and 10 days of age on the date of occurrence i.e. 4.112.11981. As per certificate of School, the date of birth of the revisionist-petitioner was 24.8.1966 and the appeal Under Section 37 of the Act was preferred before the Court of Sessions on 30th May, 1989 against the above order, who transferred the same to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Jodhpur (Special Judge, E.C. Act), which was r...
Tag this Judgment!Bija Ram and Etc. Etc. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-24-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Raj338
N. N. Mathur, J.1. These 44 special appeals are directed against the common order of the learned single Judge dated 24-9-2002 dismissing the writ petitions.2. In the City of Jodhpur, a residential locality is alleged to have developed in the name of Haripura Vyas Colony. It is inhabited in Khasra No. 676 consisting of 92 Bighas & 7 Biswas of land. The inhabitants of the area claim that the colony is in existence for more than 30 years. They have constructed the houses and are living there with their families. They have their family Ration Cards, water and electricity connections and sewerage line connected with the sanitary line constructed by the Urban Improvement Trust. Jodhpur. The names of eligible electors appear in the Voter List of the Lok Sabha, Vidhan Sabha and Municipal Corporation. It is further case of the appellants that the Urban Improvement Trust conducted the survey from time to time and ultimately a decision was taken by the State Government to regularise the possessio...
Tag this Judgment!Krishan Murari Trivedi Vs. State of Raj. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-24-2003
Reported in: RLW2004(1)Raj21; 2003(4)WLC325
Sharma, J.1. The petitioner had filed writ petition challenging the termination order dated July 1, 1991. This court vide interim order dated July 19, 1991 stayed the order of termination. During the pendency of writ petition the respondent Panchayat Samiti Chhabra vide order dated July 24, 1991 set aside the order of termination and regularised the services of petitioner w.e.f. July 3, 1991. In view of the fact that the relief sought in the write petition was granted by the Punctuate Samiti itself, the petitioner prayed to withdraw the writ petition and vide order dated May 1, 2000, the writ petition stood dismissed as withdrawn. No sooner did the order of dismissal come to the notice of Panchayat Samiti, it again terminated the services of the petitioner vide order dated May 4, 2000. The petitioner has now prayed to recall the order dated May 1, 2000.2. I have heard the rival submissions and perused the reply filed on behalf of the Panchayat Samiti as well as the order dated May 4, 2...
Tag this Judgment!Kailash Chand Vs. Hindustan Engineering and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-24-2003
Reported in: 2004ACJ693; 2004(5)WLC535
Harbans Lal, J. 1. This civil misc. appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to in short 'the Act') is directed against the judgment and award dated 9.5.1995 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jaipur city, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') in Motor Accident Case No. 134 of 1989, whereby a sum of Rs. 30,000 has been awarded along with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum.2. Briefly stated, the relevant facts are that the appellant Kailash Chand was on 19.6.1988 talking to Munna Baba near the overhead water tank situated in Jawahar Nagar. A jeep No. RRX 1968, being driven rashly and negligently by its driver, came from Jawahar Nagar bypass road and dashed against him as a result of which he sustained fractures in his left leg and severe injuries on other parts of his body, as a result of which he had to remain admitted in hospital and had to undergo treatment after taking leave from his job. The said jeep belonged to...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »