Rajasthan Court September 2003 Judgments
Man Mohan Gupta Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-19-2003
Reported in: (2004)189CTR(Raj)331; [2005]274ITR179(Raj)
S.K. Keshote, J.1. This is an income-tax appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act, 1961') and is directed against the order dt. 31st Oct., 2001 of the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur (for short, 'the Tribunal') in IT Appeal No. 2143/JP/1992 for the asst: yr. 1985-86 titling Man Mohan Gupta v. Asstt. CIT, Circle I (1), Jaipur. The appeal was placed on the board for preliminary hearing on 4th July, 2002. The Court was pleased to admit the appeal in terms of the following question:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the statutory provisions of Section 271(1)(c) as existing during the relevant year were correctly applied by learned Tribunal in arriving at the findings and upholding the penalty in relation to trade advances of Rs. 3,20,000 received from various traders, against supply of goods and in pursuance of which goods were duly supplied to them?'2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the ...
Tag this Judgment!S.D. Shastri Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-18-2003
Reported in: RLW2004(1)Raj286; 2004(1)WLC234
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. By this writ petition the petitioner seeks to quash the judgment dated April 9, 2002 of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur Bench (in short CAT Jaipur) with the further prayer that the respondents be directed to implement the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court issued vide order dated July 30, 1999 and promote the petitioner to Junior Time Scale (in short JTS) grade of Indian Broadcasting Programmes Service (in short IBPS) against the vacancy of 1988-89 or 1989 w.e.f. June 91. Direction in regard to consequential promotion to Senior Time Scale (in short STS) grade of IBPS w.e.f. March, 1997, arrears of salary w.e.f. June, 1991 and compensatory costs has also been sought.2. Contextual facts depict that the petitioner was selected by the Union Public Service Commission (in short UPSC) for the post of Programme Executive (Hindi spoken word) and he was figured amongst the toppers in the batch of 1977. The petitioner joined his duties on Feb. 16, 1978 at ...
Tag this Judgment!Hari Singh Mathur Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-18-2003
Reported in: [2004(101)FLR124]; RLW2004(1)Raj466; 2004(1)WLC682
Panwar.J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.2. By the instant writ petition, petitioner has challenged the order dt. 8.4.2003 by which he was suspended. Nothing was contemplated and during the enquiry, he was suspended. Suspension cannot be said to be a punishment. The petitioner is facing enquiry relating to matter in which the FIR was lodged by Anti Corruption Bureau.3. It is settled legal proposition that during suspension, relationship of master and servant continues between the employer and the employee. However, the employee is forbidden to perform his official duties. In certain cases, suspension may cause stigma even after exoneration in the departmental proceedings or acquittal by the criminal court, but it cannot be treated as a punishment even by stretch of imagination in strict legal sense.4. A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in R.P. Kapur v. Union of India and Ors. (1), observed that the Authority entitled to appoint a public servant would be entitled to s...
Tag this Judgment!Fazal Ali Vs. Amna Khatun and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-18-2003
Reported in: II(2004)ACC655; 2005ACJ29; AIR2004Raj39; 2005(1)KLT828; RLW2004(3)Raj1454; 2004(1)WLC339
Mathur, J. 1. At the motion stage, a question of wide ramification arises for consideration is whether the Special Appeal filed under Article 225 of the Constitution of India against the judgment of a learned single Judge passed in an appeal preferred under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act is not maintainable in view of Section 100A introduced by the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2002 with effect from 1-7-2002?2. The impact of Section 100A with respect, to special appeals preferred under Section 18 of Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949, as stood before commencement of the Constitution and imported under Article 225 of the Constitution, against an original or appellate decree or order passed by the learned single Judge after 1-7-2002 was examined by the Division Bench of this Court in UCO Bank v. Roopa Ram reported in (2003) 6 ILD 421 : (AIR 2003 Rajasthan 222), to which one of us (Mathur, J.) was a party. The Division Bench held that in view of Section 100A of the Cod...
Tag this Judgment!Suresh Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-18-2003
Reported in: II(2004)DMC350
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The appellant was placed on trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu in Sessions Case No. 9/96 (138/94) for having committed dowry death of his wife Suman. Learned Judge vide judgment dated January 1, 1998 convicted and sentenced the appellant as under:Under Section 304B, I.P.C. : To suffer Imprisonment for life.Under Section 49-A, I.P.C. : To suffer three years Rigorous Imprisonmentand fine of Rs. 2,500/- in default to furthersuffer six months' Simple Imprisonment.Sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. The Police Station Kotwali, Jhunjhunu commenced the Investigation under Sections 498A and 304B, I.P.C. on the written report submitted on July 13, 1994 by Virendra Pratap Singh, the brother of deceased Suman. It was inter alia stated in the report that Suman, who was married to appellant in the month of April, 1992 used to be harassed and humiliated by the appellant. On July 13, 1994 she was admitted to the hospital. The informant foun...
Tag this Judgment!Shambhu Dayal Sharma and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-18-2003
Reported in: RLW2004(4)Raj2146; 2004(1)WLC330
Ashok Parihar, J.1.Petitioners have challenged the Circular dated 1.7.2003, by which, certain directions have been issued by the State Government in regard to giving appointment to the post of Teacher Gr. III in pursuance to the selections made for the year 1998-99 apart from some other ancillary prayers.2. It has been contended on behalf of the petitioners that violating the directions issued by the Supreme Court in case of Kailash Chand Sharma v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. (1), the respondents intend to re-open the whole panel of select list which expired long back in the year 1999 itself, thereby, infringing the rights of the candidates, who might otherwise became eligible for appointment to the post for the vacancies after 1999.3. While admitting the writ petition on 23.7.2003, this court also stayed further process in pursuance to the impugned order dated 1.7.2003.4. Subsequently, an application for withdrawing the writ petition was submitted by the petitioners on 30.7.2003, howe...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Bhanwar Kanwar Vs. the Civil Judge and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-17-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Raj54; RLW2004(3)Raj1469; 2004(1)WLC475
ORDERB. Prasad, J.1. Heard learned counsel for parties.2. This writ petition is filed against the order passed by the learned Election Tribunal whereby the election of the petitioner has been annulled on an election petition filed by the respondent No. 2 Smt. Chandra Kanwar. While setting aside the election, the Tribunal has also declared the respondent No. 2 Smt. Chandra Kanwar (election petitioner) to be elected.3. The ground given for setting aside the election was that the nomination paper of Smt. Bhanwar Kanwar was wrongly accepted because the proposer, as required under Rule 58 (5) (e) of the Rajas than Panchayati Raj (Election) Rules, 1994 (for short referred to 'as the Rules'), should be a voter of that constituency of which the candidate seeks election, only such person should propose the name of candidate. The question which was required to be answered by the Election Tribunal was whether Mangi Lal was an elector of the Constituency of which the writ petitioner has sought ele...
Tag this Judgment!Ratan Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-17-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ228; RLW2004(2)Raj1131; 2004(1)WLC243
K.C. Sharma, J.1. This criminal appeal under Section 374 Cr.P.C. arises out of the judgment and order dated 26.6.97 passed by the learned Special Judge, Women Atrocities and Dowery Cases, Jaipur, thereby convicting and sentencing the accused appellant in the manner stated below:Under Section 302 IPC Life Imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default thereof, to further undergo 4 months, simple imprisonment.Under Section 376(2)(F) IPC Ten years rigorous imprisonment wit, fine of Rs. 500/-, in default thereof, to further undergo 2 months simple imprisonment.Under Section 366 IPC Seven Years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default thereof, to further undergo 2 months, simple imprisonment.2. On 28.10.91, at about 7.00 PM, PW 2 Dr. Amolak Chand Mewara lodged a written report, Ex.P1 at Police Station, Phulera, District Jaipur to the effect that his daughter Bebu @ Vandana aged about 4-1/2 years who was playing which the children in front his house at about 4.30 PM,...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Laxman Parashar
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-17-2003
Reported in: (2004)188CTR(Raj)468
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. Considering the submissions, we direct the Tribunal to refer the following questions for the opinion of this Court:'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that income from tractor belonged to Shri Shailendra Kumar notwithstanding the fact that Shri Shailendra Kumar was found to be totally dependent on his father?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in deleting the addition of Rs. 40,000 representing the investment in FDR in the name of Shri Manoj Kumar, notwithstanding his specific statement that he was unemployed, had no source of income and was totally dependent on his father and whether the finding of the Tribunal is perverse?'3. The Tribunal is further directed to refer the aforesaid questions along with statement of the case within two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.4. The application sta...
Tag this Judgment!Dhanesh Cotton Ginning Dal and Oil Mills Vs. Ito
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-17-2003
Reported in: (2004)86TTJ(NULL)425
ORDERB.L. Khatri, A.M.This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the learned Dy, Commissioner (Appeals), Jodhpur, for the assessment year 1993-94.2. The ground No. 1 relates to the addition of Rs. 5,262 on account of low yield of rice bran.3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant materials available on records. In this case, the learned assessing officer had accepted the yield of rice the main product shown at 65.4 per cent to be reasonable but took the yield of the rice bran recovered at 8.18 per cent to be lower than 8.45 per cent shown in the assessment year 1991-92, though in the assessment year 1992-93, the same was recovered at 8.16 per cent. The assessing officer should have pointed out defects in maintenance of accounts in the absence of which no addition can be made for low yield. Besides, the assessing officer should have compared the results of current year with immediate past year i.e., assessment year 1992-93. We are also of the opi...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »