Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : RLW2003(1)Raj203
Mathur, J. 1. This appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated 27.7.2000 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jodhpur directing the Commissioner of income-tax, Jodhpur to grant registration to the applicant society under Section 12-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.2. This appeal has been admitted by the order of this court dated 24.7.2001 on the following substantial question of law :-'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that on the proper construction of aims and objects of the assessee association as disclosed in its Constitution fall within the purview of Section 2(15) of the income Tax Act so as to entitle the assessee society to registration under Section 12-A of the Income Tax Act?'3. The respondent assessee is a society registered under the Rajasthan Society Registration Act, 1958 in the name of 'Jodhpur Chartered Accountants Society, Jodhpur'. The as...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : RLW2003(2)Raj993; 2002(3)WLC555
Rathore, J. 1. For conducting the elections of Gram Panchayat, State of Rajaslhan has issued a notification dated 11th January, 2000 and in pursuance of the notification dated 11th January, 2000, the election of the Sarpanch Gram Panchayat Jatwada was held on 31.1.20,00.2. The petitioner was declared elected as Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat Jatwada on 31.1.2000 itself.3. The petitioner submitted his nomination paper before the Returning Officer, Jatwara Panchayat Circle for contesting the election of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Jatwara. At the time of submission of nomination paper, nobody has objected his candidature and the petitioner has contested the election of Sarpanch Gram Panchayat Jatwada and was duly declared elected as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Jalwada as the petitioner got the highest votes, The certificate to this effect was also issued on 31 st January, 2000 by the Election Office.4. The defeated candidate Shri Ladu Ram-respondent No. 2 filed an election petition before ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 2003(161)ELT94(Raj)
N.N. Mathur, J.1. The petitioner M/s. Shree Cement Ltd., Beawar is engaged in manufacture of cement and clinker falling under Chapter sub-heading 2502.29 and 2502.10 respectively of the Schedule appended to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.2. According to the respondent-revenue, the assessee has incorrectly availed the Modvat credit amounting to Rs. 6,37,523/- under Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 during the period September, 1999 to January, 2000. Thus, by the impugned show cause notice dated 18-2-2000 (Annexure 4), the petitioner has been called upon to show cause as to why the amount recovered under Rule 57-I of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and the amount of Rs. 20,941/- be not appropriated in the Government account and further the interest and the amount so determined under Rule 57-I(1) should not be recovered under Rule 57-I(3) of the Rules. The petitioner has also been called upon to show cause as to why the penalty should not be imposed upon him under Rule 173-Q(...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 2003CriLJ1995; RLW2003(2)Raj752; 2003(2)WLC461; 2003(1)WLN467
Joshi, J. 1. The instant Criminal Revision No. 1016 is against the order of the Special Judge, S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities Cases), Udaipur passed on 26.10.2002 in Sessions Case No. 59/2000. By the impugned order, the learned trial Judge had ordered to frame charges against the accused-persons under Section 285, 286, 304 of the Indian Penal Code.2. The facts of the case are that the Station House Officer, Surajpole, Udaipur got a Parcha Bayan recorded on 20.11.1999 that Macsen Laboratories situated at Tekri, Udaipur has caught fire. Before he reached the said laboratory, the fire had already been extinguished. He found the body of a burnt person in a room of the said laboratory. The said labourer was working at Distillator machine. The deceased Naval Ram Gameti and Lalooram had put the Toluene oil in the machine and there were toluene fumes which are inflammable. The labourer went inside the room to make the switch off of the machine and died inside the room. As per site report,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
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...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 2004(177)ELT133(Raj); RLW2004(1)Raj246; 2003(4)WLC418
Singh, C.J.1. Reference has been made to us by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, under Section 35G(1) of the Central Excise Act, to consider the following question of law:'Whether the explosive used in the respondents' mines situated outside the premises of their cement factory, for the purpose of excavating limestone as raw material for manufacture of cement, can be considered as inputs (as used in relation to the manufacture of cement) eligible for Modvat credit in terms of Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944'.2. The facts giving rise to the Reference are as follows:3. The respondent company manufactures cement in it's factory located in Udaipur. One of the raw materials for manufacture of cement is Limestone. The respondent obtained Limestone from mines owned by it. It used duty paid explosives to extract Limestone from the mines. It is not disputed that the Limestone so extracted was exempt from payment of excise duty by reason of exemptio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 2005ACJ211; 2004WLC(Raj)UC706
Rajesh Balia, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. This appeal is by the insurance company to limit its liability towards third party to indemnify the insured within the precincts of the statutory liability fixed under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (in short 'the Act of 1939'), which was in force at the time the accident in question had taken place.2. This is the second time in this case the insurance company is before this court.3. The accident in question took place on 20.9.1984 resulting in the death of one Prabhu Ram whose legal representatives are respondent Nos. 1 to 9. The respondent No. 10 is driver and the respondent No. 11 is owner of the vehicle.4. The Motor Accidents Claims Case No. 119 of 1984 was lodged by the claimants and by award dated 27.4.1988, a sum of Rs. 1,04,000 was determined as compensation payable to the claimants which the owner of the vehicle was liable to pay to the dependants/legal representatives of the deceased, Prabhu Ram. That part of the award i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : III(2004)ACC810; AIR2005Raj124; RLW2004(4)Raj2074
A.C. Goyal, J.1. This first appeal is preferred by the plaintiffs against the judgment and decree dated 26.9.1987 whereby learned Additional District Judge No. 1, Kota, dismissed the civil suit No. 50/1983.2. The relevant facts in brief are that the plaintiffs filed a suit on 2nd April 1983, for recovery of Rs. 18,500/- with the averments that in compliance of the orders of the plaintiffs, M/s Bhatia Stones Company, Ramganjmandi, district kota, booked polished stones worth Rs. 990.81 with the defendant Railway, vide Railway Receipt No. 334787 on 7.4.1980. The delivery of the goods was to be given to the plaintiffs at Bombay, but the same were not delivered by the defendants. The plaintiffs informed the defendants vide letters dated 1.6.1980 and 17.7.1980 and thereafter served a notice under Section 80 C.P.C. on 25.8.1980 vide registered post, which was received but with no result. The plaintiffs prayed for decree of the suit amount inclusive of interest at the rate of 18% p.a. (3. The ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : RLW2005(1)Raj389
Harbans Lal, J.1. These writ petitions, which have been filed by way of public interest litigation, highlight issues of grave environmental and ecological degradation due to large scale illegal, un-authorised, un-scientific and un-systematic mining activities being undertaken in violation of the provisions of various enactments, rules framed and notifications issued thereunder, and the orders of the Supreme Court and this court. Some of the petitioners have made a grievance with regard to the operation of the stone crushers and use of explosive substances for winning the minerals from the mines on the ground that they are causing air and nose pollution. Since these writ petitions pertain to and address the common issues, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this order.2. D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7544/03 has been filed by one Ashwani Chobisa, who is a practicing lawyer, in the Rajasthan High Court and claims himself to be a public spirited and keenly interested...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : RLW2005(2)Raj779; 2005(2)WLC465
Dalip Singh, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner Manish Dixit who is undergoing the sentence awarded to him in Sessions Case No. 158/1994 having being convicted for offences under Sections 302,397 and 364 I.P.C. and 7/25(1)(a) of the Arms Act. The petitioner was sentenced to life imprisonment for offence under Section 302 I.P.C. and lesser sentence for the other offences and at present he is lodged in Central Jail, Jaipur.2. The petitioner in this writ petition has sought the relief that in accordance with the provisions contained in the Rajasthan Prisoners Open Air Camp Rules, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 1972'), he is entitled to be sent to the Open Air Camp at Sanganer and he seeks a direction for being sent to the said Open Air Camp. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was taken in the custody on 12.07.1994. He has already served the sentence of seven years for the offence under Section 397 I.P.C. yet he has been...
Tag this Judgment!