Uttaranchal Court December 2005 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra Vs. State of Uttaranchal and o ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Dec-20-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Utr49
Cyriac Joseph, C.J.1. The petitioner Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra claims to be a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and wedded to the empowerment of the rural poor and the protection of environment. The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a writ 'in the nature of quo warranto declaring respondent No. 2 to be ineligible for holding the office of State Chief Information Commissioner of Uttaranchal and further that he is an usurper of Office of the State Chief Information Commissioner Uttaranchal'. There is also a prayer for permanently restraining the second respondent from holding or discharging any functions or duties of the office of State Chief Information Commissioner, Uttaranchal.2. According, to the petitioner, the second respondent Sri R. S. Tolia is a member of the Indian Administrative Service of 1971 batch and he was allotted to the Uttar Pradesh cadre. On bifurcation of the S...
Commissioner of Income-tax and anr. Vs. Oil and Natural Gas Corporatio ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Dec-15-2005
Reported in: (2007)207CTR(Uttranchal)651; [2006]282ITR520(Uttaranchal)
P.C. Verma, J.1. This is an income-tax appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, against the judgment order dated September 28, 1999, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (Delhi Bench 'C' New Delhi) in S.T.A. No. 17 (Delhi) of 1992 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), whereby the Tribunal has held that the assessee was not liable to surtax under the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964, by virtue of exemption available under Notification No. G.S.R. 307(E), dated March 31, 1983 see [1983] 142 ITR 88, issued under Section 24AA of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. The question raised in the memo. of appeal is being reproduced as under:Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was legally correct to hold that the assessee was not liable to surtax under the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964, by virtue of exemption available under Notification No. G.S.R....
Atif Ali Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Dec-12-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Utr14
Cyriac Joseph, C.J.1. The petitioner was a student of Class-X in the Children's Senior Academy School, Roorkee during the academic year 2003-04. According to the petitioner, owing to his illness, he could not secure the minimum attendance required for appearing in the Class-X examination conducted by the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE). Hence he applied for condonation of shortage of attendance through the Principal of the school. His application for condonation of shortage of attendance was forwarded to the Regional Office of C.B.S.E. at Allahabad by the Principal along with similar applications of three other students as per his letter dated 10-2-2064. Later, a separate letter dated 14-2-2004 was sent by the Principal to the Regional Office of CBSE at Allahabad annexing necessary medical certificates and recommending condonation of shortage of attendance. The said letter dated 14-2-2004 (the date was wrongly written as 14-2-2003) was in respect of the petitioner and anoth...
Commissioner of Income-tax and anr. Vs. Chief Officer, State Bank of I ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Dec-02-2005
Reported in: (2006)205CTR(Uttranchal)340; [2006]285ITR321(Uttaranchal)
J.C.S. Rawat, J.1. Since similar points of dispute are involved in all these appeals, therefore, they are being disposed of by this common order.2 These appeals have been filed by the appellants against the common order passed by the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'C' Delhi (in short 'ITAT') dated August 1, 2001, in T. D. S. Appeal No. 47 (Del)/95, T.D.S. Appeal No. 80 (Del)/95 and T.D.S. Appeal No. 28 (Del)/95, respectively. All these appeals are relating to the assessment years 1991-92 and 1992-93. By the said impugned order the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal had confirmed the findings of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Dehradun (in short 'the CIT (Appeals)'), by which the appeals were decided in favour of the assessee.3 The brief facts are that, the assessing authority on scrutiny of the annual return of salaries filed by the assessee before the Assessing Officer noticed that many of the employees were not paid house rent allowance whereas some w...
Deepak Garg and anr. Vs. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Dec-02-2005
Reported in: II(2006)ACC586
Rajesh Tandon, J.1. Heard Mr. Nagesh Agarwal. learned Counsel for the petitioners and Sri R.C. Arya, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 1.2. By the present writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 25th August, 2005 passed by the respondent No. 1 M.A.C.T./III Fast Track Court, Haridwar (contained in Annexure No. 6).3. Briefly stated, the respondent No. 2 filed a claim petition under Section 166, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the father of the petitioners and one Mr. Ajay Kumar respondent No. 3, which was registered as M.A.C.T. Case No. 56/ 2002. Son of the respondent No. 2 Sri Dinesh Kumar died on account of the accident took place on 14th April, 2002 with a Vikram (Three Wheeler) having Registration No. U.P. 10-A-7772 which was beingdriven by one Mr. Ajay Kumar i.e. defendant No. 2 in the said claim petition.4. The name of the father of the petitioners was shown as the owner of the vehicle in question, however, the father of th...
Cit Vs. Chief Officer, Zonal Officer, State Bank of India
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Dec-02-2005
Reported in: [2006]155TAXMAN477(NULL)
ORDERJ.C.S. Rawat, J. Since similar points of dispute are involved in all these appeals, therefore, they are being disposed of by this common order.2. These appeals have been filed by the appellants against the common order passed by learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'C', Delhi (In short 'ITAT'), dated 1-8-2001 in T.D.S. Appeal No. 47 (Delhi)/95, T.D.S. Appeal No. 80 (Delhi)/95 and T.D.S. Appeal No. 28 (Delhi)/95 respectively. All these appeals are relating to assessment years 1991-92 and 1992-93. By the said impugned order the learned 1TAT had confirmed the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals), Dehradun (in short 'Commissioner (Appeals)'), by which the appeals were decided in favour of the assessee.3. Brief facts are that the assessing authority on scrutiny of annual return of salaries filed by the assessee before the assessing officer noticed that many of the employees were not paid house rent allowance whereas some were paid. On being made the inquiries it was rev...
Dayal Singh Vs. Janki Devi and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Dec-02-2005
Reported in: III(2006)ACC171
B.S. Verma, J.1. This appeal has been preferred under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short the Act) against the judgment and award, dated 5.9.1998 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/District Judge, Chamoli (in short the Tribunal) in M.A.C. Petition No. 1 of 1994, Smt. Janki Devi v. Dayal Singh and Ors. whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 1,00,000 in favour of the claimant as against the owner and driver of the Bus No. UP-07/0838 along with interest @ 10% per annum. The claim petition against the Insurance Company was dismissed.2. Relevant facts of the case are that Sunil Kumar, aged 16 years, a student, son of the claimant, lost his life in a motor vehicle accident on 11.7.1993 at about 9-30 a.m. involving Bus No. UP 07-0838 which was being driven rashly and negligently by its driver. According to the claimant on the fateful day, Sunil Kumar was going on foot to Karanprayag market from his home. When he reached near the bend at Uma Devi templ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›