Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: sashastra seema bal act 2007 section 6 enrolment Court: rajasthan Page 17 of about 5,884 results (0.171 seconds)

Assistant Commercial Tax Officer, Alwar Vs. Ms Kamdhenu Spat Ltd. and ...

Court : Rajasthan

..... , ajmer, whereby petitioner's appeal has been dismissed. 3. assessing officer vide its order dated 09.07.2002, levied penalty under section 78(10)(a) of the rajasthan sales tax act, 1994, but on an appeal filed by assessee, the same was set aside. thereafter, an appeal was preferred before the rajasthan tax board, but the same was also dismissed. 4 ..... order passed by the assessing officer. 6. learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute that all the required documents, as per provisions of section 78(2)(b) of the act of 1994, were available and produced at the time of checking of vehicle/goods and required tax had already been paid by the assessee. so far as seal of check ..... post of the state of rajasthan on the documents is concerned, the same is not a mandatory requirement, as per provisions of section 78(2)(b) of the act of 1994. 7. division bench of this court in state of rajasthan & another v. tajiander pal, reported in (2003) 6 tax update part 3 page no. 84 held that .....

Radhey Shyam Soni Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1992(3)WLC661; 1991(1)WLN291

..... but an authority created by a statute cannot question the vires of that statute or any of the provisions thereof where- under it functions. it must act under the act and not outside it.14. it may be stated that their lordships of the supreme court while quoting with approval the observations of derbyshire [c.j.]. ..... the chief justice may from time to time appoint. this committee shall be called the administrative committee.(2) subject to these rules, the administrative committee shall act for the court in its administrative business in respect of the matters enumereted in rule 17.rule 17. matters on which the administrative committee shall be consulted:-the ..... courts with a view to promote conciliation in, and secure speedy settlement of, disputes relating to marriage and family affairs and for matters connected therewith. before this act came into force, certain amendments were made in the criminal procedure code, 1973 and certain changes were made in the c.p.c. in the year 1976 as regards .....

Chief Settlement Officer and ors. Vs. Ladu Ram and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 2007(1)WLN134

..... and 10-a, pending proceedings in relation to rules 10 and 10 a also came to an end on two fold grounds namely that clause 6 of general clauses act does not apply to rules and secondly that omission of rules is not equivalent to repeal of rules and therefore, section 6 which applied only to repeals cannot be ..... preferred.6. learned single judge vide his judgment under appeal dated 21.08.2006 held that in view of section 6 of the general clauses act the proceedings which are pending cannot be deemed to have lapsed because that question prejudices all those who are affected. with these observations the writ petition was disposed off ..... who vide his order dated 09.01.2006 dismissed it inter alia on the ground that since there was no saving clause for saving the pending proceedings arising under the act of 1954, the pending proceedings cannot be continued and they have lapsed automatically.5. challenging the orders dated 09.01.2006 and 29.12.2005 this petition was .....

Umed Club Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1984WLN(UC)215

..... of the matter, in my opinion, it cannot be said that the petitioner is not liable to tax prima facie, under section 6 of the act. it is, however, open to the state government under section 21 if it feels satisfied with the working of the club, to make an ..... per se it does not appear to me that it comes within the provision of section 6 (e) or (f) of the 1964 act and it cannot be said that these lands and buildings were used for the common purpose of the community or for the public purpose as ..... the liability.5. the question, therefore, is whether the club is one which comes within the mischief of see and (f) of 1964 act.6. it appears from the memorandum of association of the club that the club was formed in 1239, in order to fulfill the long felt ..... that this is a club of some citizens and does not come within the mischief of either section 6(e) or (f) of the act. more over it is contended the as soon as the notice was given the petitioner rushed to the court and, therefore, he could have .....

State of Rajasthan Vs. Girvar Dayal Dave

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1975(8)WLN339

..... was not established against the accused. in the result, he acquitted the accused.5. we have heard learned public prosecutor. section 6 of the prevention of corruption act, 1947 runs as follows:6. previous sanction necessary for prosecution:(1) no court shall take cognizance of an offence punishable under section 161 or section 164 or section ..... on the date of hearing, and accordingly a boilable warrant was issued against him. a sanction for prosecuting the accused under section 6 of the prevention of corruption act accorded by the deputy inspector general of ponce was filed along with the challan; but the prosecution felt that this was defective. accordingly, a fresh sanction purporting ..... learned special judge, tonk dated 26/3/1970 acquitting the accused respondents of an offence under section 5(1)(d) read with section 5(2) of the prevention of corruption act, and under sections 161, 165, 165a, 420. 419, 120b. 117, 114 and 218, ipc.2. accused girvar dayal was, at the relevant time, a sub- .....

Ramjas Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1990(2)WLN46

..... against the appellant. apart from that, the appellant was below 21 years of age and the trial court should have given him benefit under the probation of offenders act. even the investigation officer was not examined by the prosecution and there were no blood stains on the lathi. the learned public prosecutor has supported the prosecution case. ..... it is punishable with imprisonment by either description for a term which may extent to 10 years with fine or with both. section 6 of the probation of offenders act, 1958 provides that if any person under 21 years of age is found guilty of having committed an offence punishable with imprisonment (but not with imprison-ment for ..... the circumstances of the case, including the nature of the offence and the character of the offender in determining whether the appellant was entitled to benefit of the act. he also did not call for a report from the probation officer and did not consider any report. he also did not refer to any other information available .....

Jodhpur University Temporary Teachers, Forum Vs. the University of Jod ...

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1990(2)WLN530

..... writ petition. it was contended that the petitioner has filed this writ petition as a vigilant teacher. he only wants that the respondent university should act according of law. the qualifications for selection of teachers(lecturers or assistant professors) prescribed in the advertisement annexurcs-5 and 6 are against the ordinance ..... rajasthan university and mohan lal sukhadiya university.11. it was also contended that section 3(3) of the rajasthan universities teachers and officers (selection for appointment) act, 1974 provides for appointment of adhoc teachers only for a period of one year and, therefore, the university cannot extend that period and hence, till ..... marked as annexures-2 and 3 respectively. it was further submitted that section 6(3) of the rajasthan university officers and teachers (selection for appointment) act binds every selection committee to the qualifications laid down in the relevant law. it was also submitted that the advertisement (annexure-6) dated 12.7.1990 .....

Gauri Shanker Vs. Madan Mohan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1983WLN419

..... shows that the entire intervening wall was part of that portion of the house, which was in possession of surajmal deceased.6. section 6 of the rajasthan pre-emption act, 1966 specifies the persons to whom right of pre-emption accrues in respect of sale of immovable property as under:(i) co-sharers of or partners in the property transferred ..... same was a court sale or involuntary sale, as such the right of pre-emption did not accrue on account of the provisions of section 5 of the rajasthan preemption act. surajmal had entered into an agreement to sell on december 14, 1968, but as already stated above, on his failure to execute a sale-deed, the purchaser madanmohan ..... vendor & purchaser alone in the latter the sale must be made by public auction conducted by a public officer, of which notice must be given as directed by the act, and at which the public are entitled to bid. under the former the purchaser derives title through the vendor, and cannot acquire a better title than that of the .....

Prakash Chand Kasliwal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1987CriLJ598; 1986(1)WLN652

..... petitioner that treating the aforesaid order of detention as alive the non-petitioner 3 the competent authority under the smuggling and foreign exchange manipulators (forfeiture of property) act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the safema'), issued a notice dt. 14-10-80 under section 6 of the safema. the petitioner submitted various applications ..... the case of the respondents is that they had supplied documents during the course of adjudication proceedings taken under the provisions of the foreign exchange regulation act much prior to the passing of the order of detention and that should be considered as sufficient compliance of supplying the documents along with the order ..... the basis of the grounds of detention along with the order of detention under cofeposa. the manner and scope of proceedings under the foreign exchange regulation act and cofeposa are entirely different and all the documents referred to or forming the basis of order of detention passed under cofeposa must be supplied to .....

The State of Rajasthan Vs. Mohammad Habib

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1973CriLJ703; 1972()WLN350

..... . indisputably the accused had arrested the complainant in the case. he had recovered opium from his possession and had also registered a case under the opium act against the complainant. in these circumstances it must be held that for the purpose of extorting illegal gratification from the complainant the accused induced a belief in ..... of the present case admittedly the accused had recovered opium from the possession of the complainant noorgul khan and had registered a case against him under the opium act and had also arrested noorgul khan. the accused was. therefore, connected with the prosecution of the case against noorgul khan in exercise of his official functions ..... penal code.9. in order to appreciate the contention advanced on behalf of the state we may reproduce here the relevant portion of section 4 of the act.4. presumption where public servant accepts gratification other than legal remuneration:(1) where in any trial of an offence punishable under section 161 or section 165 .....