Uttaranchal Court April 2009 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.
Pooran Chandra Lohani S/O Sri Jai Dutt Lohani Vs. Kailash Chandra Chil ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-27-2009
Reported in: AIR2010Utr3
Prafulla C. Pant, J. 1. This appeal, preferred under Section 100 of the of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, is directed against the judgment and decree dated 16.09.1985, whereby the first appellate court (District Judge, Pithoragarh), dismissed the civil appeal No. 4 of 1984, affirming the judgment and decree dated 19.10.1984, passed by the trial court (Civil Judge, Almora, Camp Pithoragarh), in Suit No. 03 of 1983.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.3. Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that plaintiff / respondent Kailash Chandra Chilkoti instituted suit No. 03 of 1983, before the trial court with the pleading that the defendant (present appellant) took loan of Rs. 13,000/- from the plaintiff on 10.06.1980, and executed a pronote. It is further pleaded that 14% interest per annum was agreed to be paid by the defendant to the plaintiff. It is alleged in the plaint that the defendant failed to repay the loan. It is further alleged that neither the a...
The Commissioner of Income-tax and Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-24-2009
Reported in: (2009)227CTR(Uttranchal)588; [2009]317ITR14(Uttaranchal); [2009]181TAXMAN46(NULL)
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. This appeal, preferred under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as the Act) is directed against the order dated 1st February 2006, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'B', New Delhi (hereinafter referred as ITAT), in Income Tax Appeal No. 3869 / Del of 2002, for the assessment year 1998- 99.2. Following is the question of law involved in this appeal:Whether, reimbursement of catering charges is not liable to be included in 'amount' mentioned in Sub-section (2) of Section 44BB of the Income Tax Act, 1961? 3. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.4. Brief facts of the case giving rise to this appeal are that assessee, a non-resident company, received a sum of Rs. 98,49,041.15 from M/s Oil and Natural Gas Company Limited and M/s Paramount Offshore as consideration for loss of down hole equipment. The assessee further received catering charges amounting to Rs. 16,12,958/-. But the aforesaid two charges were not offere...
The Commissioner of Income-tax and Asstt. Commissioner of Income-tax, ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-24-2009
Reported in: [2009]181TAXMAN62(NULL)
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. This appeal, preferred under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as the Act) is directed against the order dated 22.12.2006, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'H', New Delhi (hereinafter referred as ITAT), in Income Tax Appeal No. 324 / D / 2005, for the assessment year 2001- 02.2. The question of law involved in this appeal, is as under:Whether, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has erred in law in holding that mobilization / demobilization charges in respect of voyage conducted in Indian territorial waters only, are to be included in the gross revenue and the remaining amount of such charges are not part of the gross revenue, for the purposes of computation of income under Section 44BB of the Income Tax Act, 1961? 3. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.4. Brief facts of the case giving rise to this appeal are that assessee, a non-resident company, engaged in business of extraction of mineral oils, submitted i...
Flex Foods Ltd. Vs. Appellate Comittee and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-02-2009
Reported in: AIR2009Utr58
ORDERSudhanshu Dhulia, J.1. The petitioner is a limited company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956. The company is engaged in cultivation of mushrooms, which is done at a farm In Village Chhiddarwala, Dehradun. The mushrooms, which are subsequently processed and packed in a factory needs continuous supply of electricity. Therefore, in the year, 1991, the petitioner had applied for two power connections; one for 1600 KVA for its mushroom cultivation at Village Chhiddarwala and another for 900 KVA for preservation and processing of mushroom fruits and vegetables at Lal Thappar. Both these places are in Dehradun, Uttarakhand.2. According to the petitioner for technical reasons, but primarily due to fear of overloading, he was not given electricity connection directly from Bhaniawala sub-station. Consequently, the petitioner pleaded before the Power Corporation that it may be given connection by extending 33KV Independent feeder of M/s. Birla Yamaha Limited. At this juncture...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›