Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Court: supreme court of india Year: 1999 Page 13 of about 188 results (0.094 seconds)

May 03 1999 (SC)

Tobacco Board Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-03-1999

Reported in : (2000)160CTR(SC)527; [2000]243ITR4(SC); 1999(2)MPLJ168; (2000)10SCC522

1. leave granted.2. the appellant filed a writ petition in the high court of madras seeking a mandamus to the chief engineer, madras port trust - respondent herein to accept the community certificate of the appellant dated 10.3.1987, issued by the tehsildar, mambalam, for the purpose of his appointment as a mazdoor in the madras port trust. it appears that the appellant was called for an interview for appointment to the post of mazdoor by the respondent by the letter dated 19th august, 1995 and subsequently he was called to appear for an interview on 17th november, 1995 together with all the testimonials and certificates. the appellant appeared before the respondent and produced the relevant documents including the community certificate issued by the tehsildar, mambalam, madras, dated 10.3.1987. that certificate was not acceptable by the port trust and on 20th november, 1995, the respondent-port trust required the appellant to produce 'latest original community certificate' from the revenue divisional officer. the request of the appellant to accept the certificate issued by the tehsildar in 1987 and not to insist upon the production of a fresh certificate from the revenue divisional officer was turned down and the appellant was told that if he did not produce the certificate from the revenue divisional officer on or before 30th december, 1995, his name would be left out of consideration for appointment. the appellant at that stage approached the high court. a learned single .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 30 1999 (SC)

State of Jandk Vs. Shiv Ram Sharma and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-30-1999

Reported in : AIR1999SC2012; [1999(82)FLR93]; JT1999(2)SC483; (1999)ILLJ1080SC; 1999(2)SCALE325; (1999)3SCC653; [1999]2SCR251; 1999(2)LC1108(SC)

s. rajendra babu, j.1. leave granted.2. respondents filed writ petitions in the high court of jammu & kashmir seeking quashing of the rules published vide notification no. sro: 328 dated november 22, 1992 to the extent it related to qualification bar in class-a categories i & ii and for further direction to fill up the posts on the basis of seniority irrespective of qualifications. respondent nos. 1 and 2 were initially appointed as rig-man in the months of march, 1967 and november, 1967 respectively. respondent nos. 3, 4 and 5 were initially appointed as boring mistry, grade ii in february, 1984, july, 1984 and january, 1984 respectively. respondent nos. 1 and 2 were promoted in the month of february, 1983 from the post of rig-man which was later on re-designated as boring-mistry, grade i and again re-designated as drill operator, grade i in the year 1990. respondent nos. 3,4 and 5 were working on the post of drill operator, grade ii. on november 22, 1990 rules were promulgated under section 124 of the constitution of jammu and kashmir styled as 'jammu & kashmir geology and mining (subordinate) service recruitment rules, 1990'. the rules were to come into force from the date of their publication in the government gazette, which, it is said, was done on november 22, 1990. under these rules, the requisite qualification for promotion of a drilling assistant was prescribed as matriculation with five years service as boring mistry, grade i or drill operator, grade i. for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 26 1999 (SC)

K. Venkatachalam Vs. a Swamickan and Another

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-26-1999

Reported in : AIR1999SC1723; 1999(3)ALLMR(SC)643; JT1999(3)SC242; 1999(3)SCALE12; (1999)4SCC526; [1999]2SCR857; 1999(2)LC1064(SC)

..... an elector, from that constituency could represent the constituency? he lacked the basic qualification under clause (c) of article 173 of the constitution read with section 5 of the act which mandated that a person to be elected from an assembly constituency has to be elector of that constituency. the appellant in the present case is certainly disqualified for being ..... 2 applied to the governor alleging that appellant had incurred a disqualification subsequent to his election under article 191(l)(e) of the constitution read with section 7 of the act. under the instructions of the governor of the state the chief secretary forwarded the said complaint to the election commission of india for its opinion. the appellant moved the punjab ..... tamil nadu legislative assembly as a member representing lalgudi assembly constituency. swamickan did not a present any petition calling in question the election of venkatachalam under section 81 of the act. he alleged that venkatachalam impersonated him for another person of the same name in the electoral roll of lalgudi assembly constituency and thus sworn a false affidavit that he was ..... nadu as he did not possess the basic qualifications prescribed in clause (c) of article 173 of the constitution read with section 5 of representation of the people act, 1951 (for short 'the act'). the division bench held that the appellant was not an elector for lalgudi assembly constituency and, therefore, did not possess the necessary qualification to be chosen from .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 20 1999 (SC)

Chief Engineer, Irrigation and Flood Control Department Vs. J.S. Ramth ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-20-1999

Reported in : (2000)10SCC276

the text below is only a summarized version of the order pronouncedthe disputed question of fact has to be resolved by a division bench of the high court after arriving at a clear finding on hearing the parties as to when the possession of the acquired land of the respondent was in fact taken by the appellant and then decide the claim of interest put forward by the respondents. the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed to the limited extent. the writ appeal no. 40 of 1997 is restored to the file of the gauhati high court, imphal bench.

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 12 1999 (SC)

State of Orissa Vs. Shri B.K. Routray

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jan-12-1999

Reported in : AIR1999SC1101a; 88(1999)CLT274(SC); JT1999(1)SC58

..... before the arbitrator would also be covered by the expression 'legal proceedings' in section 6(2). therefore interest act, 1978 does not apply to pending arbitration proceedings.6. in the premises, the present appeal is allowed and the award of interest for the pre-reference ..... where also this court said that where reference to arbitration was made prior to the commencement of the interest act, 1978, arbitrator is not empowered to grant interest for the period upto the date of submission of claim to arbitration.4. in this connection, ..... case to the effect that in respect of pre-reference period, interest cannot be awarded in respect of the period not covered by the interest act, 1978. our attention was also drawn to a decision in the case of state of orissa v. niranjan swain reported in : [1990]3scr821 ..... 1997]1scr704 . in paragraph 18, this court has held that interest cannot be given for the period prior to the coming into force of the interest act, 1978. this court has also held that the decision in the case of executive engineer irrigation) v. abhaduta jena reported in : [1988]1scr253 has ..... such suit or other legal proceedings.5. this section also clearly provides that the provisions of the interest act, 1978 shall not apply to any legal proceeding pending at the commencement of the said act. since the definition of 'court ' under section 2(a) includes a tribunal or arbitrator, the proceedings .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 20 1999 (SC)

Mohd. Zahid Vs. State of Tamil Nadu

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jul-20-1999

Reported in : AIR1999SC2416; 1999(2)ALD(Cri)328; 1999CriLJ3699; JT1999(5)SC5; 1999(4)SCALE173; (1999)6SCC120; 1999(2)LC1294(SC)

ordersantosh hegde, j.1. the appellant in the above appeal was charged with an offence punishable under section 302 i.p.c. before the vith additional sessions judge, madras in s.c. no. 83/86 who found him guilty of the said offence and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life. his appeal before the division bench of the madras high court in criminal appeal no. 1054 of 1986 came to be dismissed and he is now in appeal before us by special leave.2. the prosecution case stated briefly against the appellant is that he was married to one jabeena on 29th january, 1-984 and after the marriage for some time they resided in an independent house. in the year 1985, jabeena gave birth to a make child in her parents house and thereafter the appellant came to live in the house of his father-in-law mohd. ahamed (pw-1) in the house bearing door no. 22, 11th avenue, ashok nagar, madras. the said house contained one bed room in the ground floor which was occupied by pw-l's elder daughter and her husband. out of the four bed rooms on the first floor, one bed room was occupied by pw-1 and his wife, the second bed room next to that was occupied by the appellant and jabeena with their child, the third bed room was occupied by two unmarried sons of pw-1 and the fourth bed room was lying vacant.3. on 27-12-1985 at about 6.00 a.m. the wife of p.w. 1, by name maliga ahamed, (pw-3) heard the continuous cries of jabeena's child, hence, she came to the room of the appellant and knocked on the door .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 12 1999 (SC)

AzizuddIn Vs. the Board of Revenue and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-12-1999

Reported in : AIR1999SC1003; JT1999(1)SC474; 1999(1)SCALE434; (1999)2SCC563; [1999]1SCR618

..... appellant would be entitled for any relief under it? learned counsel for the appellant while challenging the high court finding that since there existed section 51 in the aforesaid 1932 act dealing with the unoccupied land, hence the appellant case would only be governed under it and not under the notification no. 71, he further submitted this to be erroneous and ..... or taken in accordance with law. no suit or other legal proceedings shall be maintained or continued against the government or any person whatsoever on the ground that any such acts or proceedings were not done or taken in accordance with law.11. it is admitted between the parties that this recovery for the tractorization charges including the penatly etc. under ..... power to survey and carry on eradicating operation. under sub-section (1) after issuance of notification under section 4, the reclamation officer notwithstanding the provisions of the bhopal land revenue act 1932, under sub-clause (b) take possession of the whole or any part of the kans area and carry on eradicating and other ancillary and subsidiary operations therein. section 7 ..... ).5. however, in the other proceedings, by some other agriculturists, on 9th april, 1956, chief commissioner, bhopal, struck down some of the provisions of the said ordinance and the 1954 act holding it to be ultra vires. thereafter, on 1st oct., 1959, pursuant to the reorganisation of the states, the state of madhya pradesh came into existence which issued similar ordinances .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 27 1999 (SC)

Jagdish Yadav Vs. State of Bihar

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jan-27-1999

Reported in : 1999(1)BLJR643; JT1999(1)SC439; 1999(1)SCALE440; (1999)9SCC99

ordernanavati, j.1. the appellant has been convicted under section 396 of the indian penal code and sentenced to death. he has filed this appeal against the order of sentence only in view of the limited leave granted by this court.2. what the prosecution has been able to prove is that during the night between first and second of june, 1989, the appellant along with 30 to 40 other dacoits committed dacoity in the house of deceased dhaneshwar, that the dacoits killed dhaneshwar, surendra, awadhesh, kharha and kanhai and also set on fire some of the articles belonging to the family of the deceased. in all 24 accused were put up for trial out of whom 13 were acquitted by the trial court. the other accused were convicted under section 396 and out of them only appellant jagdish was sentenced to death. all others were awarded sentence of life imprisonment. the high court agreed with the findings recorded by the trial court after re-appreciating the evidence and, dismissed the appeals and accepted the death reference. while confirming the death sentence the high court observed as under:in the case before me, it has already been noticed that there are so many as six eye witnesses, including the informant, who have categorically stated that this appellant shot at two innocent and unarmed persons from a close granted by rifle with a full determination to commit their murder.... for the reasons stated above, i have no option but to confirm the death penalty against appellant jagdish .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 10 1999 (SC)

Bileshwar Khan Udyog Khedut Shahakari Mandali Limited Etc. Vs. Union o ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-10-1999

Reported in : AIR1999SC1199; JT1999(1)SC543; 1999(1)SCALE468; (1999)2SCC518; [1999]1SCR569

..... to the appellants to raise this argument again. since in the present case sub-section (3) of section 3 of the act which provides for grant of interest on the excess realisation made by the appellant is applicable the appellants are liable to pay interest. we, therefore, reject the second contention of ..... to a case in which interim order made by a court has already come to an end as a result of termination of final proceedings before the commencement of the act. moreover, the special leave against the order passed by the high court directing the appellants to refund the excess realisation made by them was refused. thus, it is not open ..... the second argument is concerned, we have held hereinbefore that the interim orders passed in the writ petitions came to an end on dismissal of the writ petition before the act came into force, and under such circumstances section 3(4) and (5) can have no application in the appellants' case. the supreme court in the ankepalle co-operative agricultural & industrial ..... realisation having not set aside by the appellate or higher court, the realisation made by the appellants would not fall within the ambit of section 2(b)(ii) of the act. the contention is that interim orders passed in writ petitions although automatically lapsed on dismissal of the writ petitions, but were not set aside by the appellate or higher court .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 17 1999 (SC)

State of Kerala and ors. Vs. O.C. Kuttan and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-17-1999

Reported in : AIR1999SC1044; 1999(1)ALD(Cri)488; 1999CriLJ1623; 1999(1)Crimes104(SC); JT1999(1)SC486; 1999(1)KLT747(SC); 1999(1)SCALE505; (1999)2SCC651; [1999]1SCR696

..... wholly unwarranted. it was further urged that the allegations made by the lady not only amounts to commission of offence of rape alone but also the offence under immoral traffic act and the high court never applied its mind to find out whether the allegations taken at their face value would constitute other offences for which the criminal case had been ..... otherwise of the allegations made in the f.i.r. or the complaint and that the extraordinary or inherent powers do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the court to act according to its whim or caprice. it is too well settled that the first information report is only an initiation to move the machinery and to investigate into a cognizable ..... have scuttled investigation by quashing the f.i.r., particularly when the criminal case had been registered under several provisions of the penal code as well as under immoral traffic act. we also do not approve of the uncharitable comments made by the high court in paragraph (12) of the judgment against the woman who had given the f.i.r .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //