Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Decided on : May-29-1998
Reported in : (1999)68ITD288(All.)
1. By this common order, we propose to dispose of two appeals by two different assessees of the same group against the orders dt. 22nd September, 1997, of the Asstt. CIT, Circle II (1), Lucknow, (hereinafter referred to as "the AO") under s. 158BC of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for brief) for the block period 1st April, 1986, to 25th September, 19961 as they involve similar facts and common questions of law and were argued by the same set of counsel from both sides.2. Dr. R. M. L. Mehrotra, assisted by his son, Dr. Sanjay Mehrotra, the other appellant, his wife, Dr. Bandana Mehrotra and certain other doctors, is running a pathology clinic in the capital city of Lucknow.The aforesaid trio of doctors together with other connected doctors, all members of a bigger family, were subjected to search on 25th September, 1996, when certain assets, account books and other documents, etc. were found and seized. The assessments of the present appellants were completed by...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Dec-17-1998
Reported in : 1998(4)AWC665
O.P. Garg, J.1. This is an appeal under Rule 47 of the U. P. Panchayats (Election of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha and Settlement of Election Disputes) Rules, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 1994') against the order dated 13.4.1998 passed by 4th Additional District Judge, Ghaziabad, in an Election Petition No. 21 of 1995 filed under Rule 33 of the Rules of 1994 whereby the election petitioner-Hari Raj-present respondent No. 1 was declared to have been duly elected as Adhyaksha Zila Panchayat, Ghaziabad.2. Counter and rejoinder-affidavits have been exchanged. Heard Dr. R. G. Padia, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri N. K. Sharma. learned counsel for the respondent No. 1--Hari Raj.3. An election to the office of Adhyaksha, Zila Panchayat. Ghaziabad, was held on 22.5.1995. Admittedly there are 28 members who were entitled to vote for electing the Adhyaksha out of whom 27 members participated in the election as one of the members was absent on account of illness. Out of t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : May-02-1998
Reported in : 1999ACJ1035
D.K. Seth, J.1. Leave is granted to the learned Counsel for the petitioners to convert this petition into one under Article 227 of the Constitution. Learned counsel for the petitioners shall take steps to amend the cause title course of today.2. The claim petition of the petitioners being Claim Case No. 23 of the 1990 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ballia, was dismissed in default on 12.8.1992. It appears that an application for restoration was filed on 29.10.1992. The said application was registered as Application No. 74 of 1992. The restoration application was dismissed in default on 27.51994. A restoration application against the said order was filed on 11.7.94, which was registered as Case No. 3-A of 1994. By an order dated 18.11.1997 the said application was rejected. All these orders have since been challenged in this petition.3. Mr. Ashish Srivastava, the learned Counsel for the petitioners, contends that the court below had taken a very technical view of the matter...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Oct-06-1998
Reported in : 1999(1)AWC252; (1998)3UPLBEC1989
R.R.K. Trivedi, J.1. Dispute in this bunch of cases, consisting of Special Appeals and Writ Petitions, pertains to selection of principals by U. P. Secondary Education Services Commission for various recognised private aided Intermediate College in the State of Uttar Pradesh. On the basis of the challenges raised and the reliefs sought in the cases, they may be put in different groups. The factual matrix of the cases is as under :2. U. P. Secondary Education Services Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Commission) by advertisement dated 13.12.1995 invited applications for the post of Principal of private recognised and aided higher secondary Institutions in the State. In pursuance of the aforesaid advertisement, large number of applications were received by the Commission. The proceedings for selection of Principals with regard to institutions located in different regions of the State were initiated. The Commission finalised the selection, prepared the panel of the selected cand...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Jul-30-1998
Reported in : 1999(1)AWC413
J.C. Gupta, J.1. This is landlord's petition arising out of the judgment and order dated 31.7.1992 passed by respondent No. 1 in the revision filed against the Judgment and decree dated 12.8.1988 passed by Additional J.S.C.C., Kanpur. The revisional court has allowed the revision and dismissed the plaintiff's suit for ejectment.2. A suit for recovery of arrears of rent, damages and ejectment was filed by the petitioner against Sri A. K. Gaur, the tenant, alleging therein that the defendant was tenant at the rate of Rs. 100 per month and he was in arrears of rent from 1.10.1965. The premises were post 1951 construction and hence U. P. Act No. III of 1947 did not apply. The tenancy was terminated by serving upon the tenant a notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act on 10.12.1986. During the pendency of the suit Sri A. K. Gaur died before the enforcement of U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972. His heirs wife and others, present respondent Nos. 3 to 5 were brought on record. The def...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : May-12-1998
Reported in : 1999(1)AWC157
D. K. Seth, J.1. Opposite party Nos. 3, 4 and 5 instituted Suit No. 1951 of 1958 before the Munsif. Deoria against the petitioner as defendant for injunction and demolition of Kuchha structure made by the defendant, on the alleged ground that the said opposite parties had purchased the said land by a registered deed of sale dated 29.8.1953, after which their names were so recorded as tenure-holders in respect of the said land. The suit was decreed on 7.9.1962 on contest. An appeal being Appeal No. 3667 of 1962 was filed by the petitioner against the said order. The appeal was dismissed on contest by an order dated 25.9.1968. The opposite parties decree holders levied Execution Case No. 67 of 1968 on 15.11.1968. In thesaid execution case, the petitioner-judgment debtor filed an objection under Section 47 of the Civil Procedure Code on 12.9.1977. In the said objection, it was pleaded that the land being an agricultural land, it is subject to Section 122C of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : May-04-1998
Reported in : 1998(3)AWC2006
D. P. Mohapatra, C. J.` 1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioners have chalknged the Notification No. 325-E-2/XIII-40 (280)-83, dated 30.1.1991, by which Governor of Uttar Pradesh. In exercise of powers under sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the U. P. Excise Act. 1910 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), declared all patent or proprietary medicinal preparations containing more than 12 per cent alcohol manufactured under the Medicinal and Toilet Preparations [Excise Duties) Act. 1955, together with 49 spirituous medicinal preparations to be deemed to be liquor for the purposes of transport, possession, sale and supply within the meaning of the Act. Petitioners have further challenged the order dated 21.9.1991 by which Excise Commissioner directed Collectors of all the districts and enforcement authorities under the Excise Act to ensure compliance of the Notification No. 310-E-2/XII1-40/280-83, dated 29.1.1991, under Section 75 of the Act. and the No...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Oct-27-1998
Reported in : 1999(1)AWC535
O.P. Garg, J.1. This is plaintiffs Second Appeal arising out of Suit No. 290 of 1997 which was instituted for the reliefs (1) cancellation of the sale deed dated 8.2.1996 executed by Smt. Shanti Devi-defendant No. 3. Radhey Shyam and Santosh Kumar, defendant Nos. 1 and 2 in favour of Kameshwar Nath-defendant No. 4 ; (2) for cancellation of the gift deed dated 24.8.1967 executed by Kameshwar Nath defendant No. 4 in favour of his son Rajesh Kumar-defendant No. 5 and, (3) for permanent injunction to restrain the defendant Nos. 4 and 5 from interfering with the possession of the plaintiffs over the disputed grove existing in plot Nos. 906M, area 0.533 acres and 906-M area .35 acres, total .68 acres, situate in village Bailjery of Tahsil Kashipur, in district Nainital (now Udham Singh Nagar).2. The suit of the plaintiffs was decreed by the trial court on 16.8.1975. The defendant Nos. 4 and 5 preferred an appeal (No. 72 of 1975) which was allowed reversing the decree passed by the trial cour...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Feb-17-1998
Reported in : 1999CriLJ521
S.H.A. Raza, J.1. The fate of this writ petition hinges on the upright on the following questions :1. Whether the duties of the public prosecutor/Government Advocate are statutory in nature? If so, its effect?2. Whether the public prosecutor/Government Advocate is a public servant holding a civil post and cannot be removed without affording him a reasonable opportunity as contemplated under the provisions contained in Article 311 of the Constitution or the principles of natural justice?3. Whether before appointing a public prosecutor/Government Advocate, consultation with the High Court is necessary, in view of the undertaking given by the Advocate General and the practices or conventions?4. Whether a tenure appointment can be cut short by removing the appointee without giving him an opportunity to show cause?5. Whether a public prosecutor/Government Advocate appointed under a spoils system and can be removed by the spoils system and can be removed by the sweet discretion of the State ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Apr-23-1998
Reported in : 1998CriLJ4655
P.K. Jain, J.1. These two writ petitions have been filed by petitioners Vinod and Sunder respectively challenging the orders dated 8-5-1997 (separately against each of the petitioners) directing their detention under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act. The petitioners have prayed for issue of a writ in the nature of habeas corpus directing them to be released forthwith.2. Petitioner Vinod surrendered before the C.J.M., Meerut on 5-5-1997 in case crime No. 163/97, under Sections 302/376 and 323, IPC, P.S., Sardhana, Meerut and he was taken into custody and thereafter sent to district Jail, Meerut. Petitioner Sunder was arrested in connection with the aforesaid case crime No. 163/1997 on 22-4-1997 and was detained in district jail in connection with the aforesaid case.3. While both the petitioners were in jail in connection with the aforesaid case crime No. 163/ 1997, under Sections 302/376 and 323, IPC, P.S. Sardhana, district Meerut, the impugned orders dated 8-5-1997 passed sep...
Tag this Judgment!