Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: competition amendment act 2007 section 24 amendment of section 31 Sorted by: recent Court: rajasthan Page 13 of about 1,353 results (0.147 seconds)

Mar 21 1985 (HC)

Dr. C.P. Trivedi Vs. University of Jodhpur

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1985(2)WLN290

..... service) under the state by a legislative enactment. on that basis irrespective of original status all became government servants. by gujarat panchayats (third amendment) act, 1978 a differential classification in relation to their original position was made whereby the ex-municipal employees were deprived of their present status of government ..... in the university service on their selection by the selection committee. the correspondence came to be made when the process of appointment through open competition in different departments had already commenced and the date of submission of applications had already expired. the government was accommodated to allow the optees ..... selection committee and so, his appointment for all intents and purposes should be taken to be an appointment on deputation and not through open competition. the correspondence exchanged between the director of college education and officer-on-special duty and other attendent circumstances make it abundantly clear that the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 24 1985 (HC)

State of Rajasthan Vs. the Maharaja Shree Umaid Mills Ltd.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1985(1)WLN745

..... hang over of the feudalism and capitalism combined in the form of concessions to capitalists and honoured the guarantee, so that other citizens can also do business in competition to them, whatever might have been other intentions, i have spelt out from the constitutional history which is of common knowledge and well recognised in catena of judicial ..... court that the objection of limitation though permissible under law, should not be taken by a welfare state. the suit was contested at all stages and even the amendments were contested, with the result that three revision petitions were accepted by this court vide judgment of jagat narayan, j., as he then was, dated the 5th july ..... and as the suit would be governed by article 96 of the old limitation act and section 17(1)(c) of the new limitation act, the suit is within limitation of 18th march, 1955 when the original suit was filed and further when the amendment application was made on 27th november, 1964 and also on 23rd december, 1964 when .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 18 1985 (HC)

Kashiram Radhakishan Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : [1985]155ITR609(Raj); 1985(1)WLN649

..... the directors and shareholders of the company may have been.'13. sections 2(25) and 348 of the companies act, 1956 (before amendment in 1960), came up for consideration while examining the provisions of section 10(2)(xv) of the old act in cit v. ramakrishna mills (coimbatore) ltd. : [1974]93itr49(mad) . their lordships of the madras ..... 7. the question is whether the assessee could claim the expenditure as its business expenditure for the assessment year 1974-75. section 37 of the i.t. act, 1961 ('the act'), occurs in chapter iv, part d which deals with ' profits and gains of business or profession '. it is a general provision. at the relevant time, ..... high court have observed as under (headnote):' even if the payment infringed section 348 of the companies act, the company .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 17 1984 (HC)

Rajasthan State Industrial Development and Investment Corporation Limi ...

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1985(1)WLN709

..... dev v. secretary of state air 1953 pc 31 after quoting section 26 it was observed that appeal lies to the privy council, although prior to the amendment of the land acquisition act such an appeal was not maintainable to the privy council and it became maintainable as the award would be deemed to be a 'decree'. so for the ..... observed that on award under section 26 is also a decree by virtue of the deeming provision in section 26(2) of the said act. even before the amendment of section 26(2) of the land acquisition act, the adjudication of the land acquisition court was an 'order', and it has now become a decree within the meaning of section 2 ..... of the expression 'decree' has been traced and the matter has also been viewed in the light of the amendment made in schedule ii, article 11 of the central court fee act. having considered the connotation of the word 'decree' in court fees act their lordships proceeded to examine the provisions of section 14 of the displaced persons (debts adjustment .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 11 1984 (HC)

Budha Ram and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR1985Raj104; 1984()WLN291

..... khudkasht or an occupancy tenant or a maurusidar or a khatedar tenant or a tenant with transferable and heritable rights, notwithstanding section 15-a of the rajasthan tenancy act. by this amending act, after sub-section (a), sub-section (1-aa) of section 19 came to be inserted. according to this provision of law, every person who, ..... than grove land, shall, subject to the exceptions contained in the provisos to sub-section (1), as from the date of the commencement of the rajasthan tenancy (amendment) act, 1979, hereinafter in this chapter referred to as the 'said date', become subject to the other provisions contained in this chapter, the khatedar tenant of that part ..... in this respect. similarly, under sub-sections (1) & (2) of section 15-aaa of the tenancy act, as inserted vide tenancy (amendment) act, 1979 and, in sub-section (3) of section 15-aaa as inserted by tenancy (amendment) act, 1983, it has been provided that khatedari rights can be given to the persons covered by section 15-aaa .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 22 1984 (HC)

Additional Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Surana and Company

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : (1984)40CTR(Raj)68; [1985]151ITR775(Raj)

..... by him before the issue of demand notice has now been rendered a matter of academic interest only on account of the subsequent amendments made in the provisions of section 271(1)(a)(i) by the direct taxes (amendment) act, 1974 with retrospective effect. it appears that after the decision of their lordships of the supreme court in vegetable products' case : [ ..... of the assessed tax' in place of the expression 'two per cent. of the tax', which earlier occurred in the aforesaid provision. the explanation which was added by the amending act of 1974 made the position still clearer, as 'assessed tax' was defined in the explanation as the gross tax assessed under the ..... ) have been brought into force with retrospective effect from april 1, 1962, the cancellation of the penalty by the tribunal cannot be upheld. in view of the amended provisions of the act, the amount of penalty which was determined by the ito, on the basis that the assessee had failed to file the return of its total income within the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 19 1983 (HC)

Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Maharaja Shri Devi Singhji of Jodhpur

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : [1985]155ITR333(Raj); 1983()WLN732

..... 274 continued and he could dispose of the penalty proceedings. it was also observed that the iac would continue to have jurisdiction in matters pending before him despite the amendment act of 1970, as there is no intention either by express words or by necessary implication that the iac will not have jurisdiction even in pending matters. in other ..... answer to question no. 2, if the answer is that obtaining the previous approval of the iac to proceed under section 18(1)(a) was necessary even after the amending act no. 46 of 1964 came into force, for levying penalty after april 1, 1965, then there would be no necessity for any reference to a third member. but ..... first case, their lordships were pleased to observe that as regards the jurisdiction of the iac to pass the order of penalty, in view of the amendment to section 274 by the amendment act, it is well-settled law that every litigant has a vested right in the procedural law, so far as substance is concerned. if the substantive question .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 22 1983 (HC)

Delhi Cloth and General Mills Ltd. Vs. the State of Rajtasthan and ors ...

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1983WLN760

..... would only be justified under article 304(b) with regard to taxes if it falls within its purview. the imposition of the tax is by the act itself and the amending act although it did not receive the previous sanction of the president, but received the subsequent assent after it was passed on november 11,1952.6. learned ..... wishes to make money out of that business. it is true that section 3- of the acts says:'subject to the provisions of this act, all lotteries and all prize competitions are unlawful.' but if the prize competitions comply with the provisions of the act, if they carry out the conditions of the licence, and they pay the tax imposed by ..... the provisions of the act, then the state, far from looking with disfavour upon this type of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 05 1983 (HC)

The Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation Vs. the State Transport ...

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1983WLN(UC)184

..... once say that the considerations which apply to a private bus operator who happens to be a monopolist are not applicable to the corporation. the act was amended by the motor vehicles (rajasthan amendment) act (rajasthan act no. x of 1974) whereby the following proviso has been added to sub-section (2) of section 58 of the ..... unnationalised routes.since i have found that the criticism of the tribunal against the corporation is justified and in that context permitting the private bus operators to have competition with the corporation on these routes would result in providing better facilities to the traveling public, i am of the opinion that the judgment of the tribunal ..... on this route and if private operator are allowed to ply six vehicles alongwith the 18 permits of the corporation then the public would benefit as the healthy competition would result in the efficient services without any set back to the service of the corporation. recently, the rsrtc has come in for severe criticism from .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 07 1983 (HC)

Mahendra Surana and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1983WLN165

..... 13 of the rajasthan administrative service (emergency recruitment) rules, 1936. praveen chand became a member of the rajasthan administrative service on the basis of selection through a competitive examination held by rajasthan public service commission in january 1956 and was appointed by order, dated august 20, 1956. on may 31, 1956, emergency rules of ..... 1981, (annexures 6 and 7 in writ petition no. 569/81) by which rule 23 of the emergency recruitment rules of 1956 and 1959 has been amended. this amendment has been given retrospective effect from june 4, 1956 and december 4, 1959 respectively (the dates en which the rules of 1956 and 1959 were promulgated). ..... corporation. for the purpose of eligibility under rule 11(2)(b) even there was no requirement of particular monthly emoluments. this rule has not been an acted necessarily with the object of having experienced hands only. a broad object of the rule was only to recruit persons to rajasthan administrative service necessitated by .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //