Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : May-02-2008
Reported in : (2008)218CTR(Raj)30; [2008]307ITR226(Raj)
Vineet Kothari, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner Umaid Charitable Trust, Pali being aggrieved by the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Jodhpur dated 16.12.2004 refusing to renew the registration of exemption of the petitioner - Trust by the impugned order passed under Section 80G(5(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. According to the said order, exemption certificate granted to the petitioner Trust under Section 80G of the Act by order dated 20.3.2002 was effective for a period from 1.4.2001 to 31.3.2004 and the petitioner - Trust by application for renewal of said exemption on the prescribed from No. 10G on 23.8.2004. However, the learned Commissioner found that in income and expenditure statement of the trust for the period ended on 31.3.2004, the trust had spent a sum of Rs. 20,000/- for repairing and colouring of Lord Vishnu's temple out of its total income for the said previous year of Rs. 26,727/- and therefore since the petitioner - Trust had...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Oct-24-2008
Reported in : RLW2009(1)Raj870
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. By way of filing this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned order of suspension dated 3.10.2008 and prayed that the order of suspension may be quashed and set aside and the petitioner may be restored to her position as if she was never placed under suspension and she may be relegated to the position, which was obtaining prior to passing of the impugned order and the entire proceedings conducted so far may be quashed and the Government may be restrained from holding inquiry on the premise of inquiry report of the Deputy Director (Regional), Ajmer.2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was elected as Ward Member from Ward No. 11 in the month of August 2005 in the Parbatsar Municipal Board. Thereafter, elected members of the Municipal Board elected the petitioner as Chairman unanimously. Since then she 'was continuing until passing of the impugned order of suspension. In the writ petition, it is pointed out by the petitioner that sh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Jul-24-2008
Reported in : (2009)11VatReporter133; (2009)26VST333(Raj)
Vineet Kothari, J.1. Heard learned Counsels.2. The Tax Board by the impugned order dated 1.2.2006 upheld the decision of the State Level Screening Committee Annex.2 dated 17.11.2004 whereby the said State Level Screening Committee (SLSC for short) acting under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Incentive Scheme, 1998 found that since the assessee industrial unit manufacturing ready made garments had shifted its some part of plant and machinery from Tonk to Bhilwara unit, another unit of the same company, the benefit given to the assessee industrial unit under such incentive scheme was to be reduced to that extent of plant and machinery shifted i.e. Rs. 84.31 lacs. The assessee took the matter further before the Tax Board against the decision of the SLSC and Tax Board vide its impugned order dated 1.2.2006 approved the decision of the SLSC and being aggrieved of the same, the assesse has approached this Court under Section 86 of the RST Act, 1994 raising the question of law as to whether the SLSC ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Mar-26-2008
Reported in : 2008CriLJ3850
Prakash Tatia, J.1. The accused Mahendra Singh s/o Gurbachan Singh has preferred this appeal to challenge the judgment and order of the trial court dated 12.11.2002 passed in Sessions Case No. 74/2002, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 302, IPC and has been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay Rs. 1000/- as fine and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo one year's additional simple imprisonment and the appellant has been convicted under Section 307 IPC and has been sentenced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 500/- and in default thereof, to undergo six months' simple imprisonment.2. As per the prosecution case, on 12.11.1999 an FIR No. 282/99 was registered at Police Station Sadulshahar for the offences under Sections 302 and 307 IPC on the written report submitted by one Gurcharan Singh s/o Babu Singh, Head Cashier, Punjab National Bank, Sadulshahar Branch. In the said written report, it was stated that D.K. Mahendru w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : May-19-2008
Reported in : [2008(119)FLR286]
Ajay Rastogi, J.1. At joint request, matter is finally heard at admission stage.While working as Gram Sevak/Ex Officio Secretary in Panchayat Samiti, Piprali (Sikar), petitioner suffered with a sever a headache in May, 2006 and initially consulted a local doctor at Sikar and after some preliminary diagnosis, doctor at Sikar advised him to consult an expert doctor at Jaipur. Ultimately, on 27.6.2006, petitioner consulted Dr. M.S. Punia, Associate Professor, Neurosurgery (Unit-1) SMS Hospital, who advised for MRI Brain-on its medical test, petitioner was advised to undergo surgical operation forthwith as he was suffering from brain tumour. As alleged, since there was long queue at SMS Hospital for such surgical operation of patients and in view of emergent situation being brain tumour, petitioner was able to take decision and being dependent upon family members at that point of time, they decided to get him surgically operated through Dr. S.R. Dharkar in S.K. Soni Hospital Jaipur where h...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Apr-03-2008
Reported in : RLW2008(4)Raj3381
K.S. Rathore, J.1. The petitioners preferred this criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Code of Criminal Procedure against the order dated 23.6.2005 passed by Session Judge, Jhunjhunu in Criminal Appeal No. 45/2001 whereby learned Judge has dismissed the appeal filed by the appellants-petitioners and upheld the order dated 24.7.2001 passed by Collector, Jhunjhunu in Case No. 100/2001 under Section 6A of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1955').2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that on 2.6.2001 an information was received at Police Station-Pilani, District: Jhunjhunu from an informer that Kerosene will be transported to Delhi from Jhunjhunu illegally and thereupon at 6.30 AM a truck was seized near Village-Narhad by the police party consisting of C.I. Nawab Khan, ASI-Narendra Singh and Head Constable-Somdev and others. On search of the tanker/truck, it was found filled with 11000 liters Kerosene, whic...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Jun-30-2008
Reported in : RLW2008(4)Raj3695
ORDERDinesh Maheshwari, J.1. By way of this writ petition, while putting a challenge to the phraseology of Rule 7(1) of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Medical Attendance) Rules, 1970 ('the Rules of 1970'), the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the communication dated 25.06.2001 (Annex.9) and directions to the respondents to make payment of the expenditure incurred by him for bypass surgery at Escorts Heart Institute, New Delhi (hereinafter also referred to as 'Escorts' for short).2. While pointing out that he entered the services of Government of Rajasthan in the Department of Revenue as LDC in the year 1968, was promoted to the post of UDC, and is working on such a post in the Collectorate at Banswara, the petitioner has averred that he suffered heart attack in the month of September 1999 and after primary treatment at Banswara, he was referred to and was treated at RNT Medical College Hospital, Udaipur; that after treatment at Udaipur for some time, he was referred for investigati...
Tag this Judgment!