Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Court: jharkhand Year: 2007 Page 1 of about 6 results (0.017 seconds)

Aug 27 2007 (HC)

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Shri Mahabit Prasad Bajaj

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Aug-27-2007

Reported in : (2008)217CTR(Jharkhand)233; [2008]298ITR109(Jharkhand); [2008(4)JCR709(Jhr)]

..... p. madhusudhanan v. commissioner of income-tax (supra) the fact of the case was that for the assessment year 1986-87, the assessee, a partnership firm, filed return of income and assessment was completed determining the total income of the assessee which included the income from other sources. however, the ..... the case k. c. builders and anr. v. assistant commissioner of income tax : [2004]265itr562(sc) . in that case, the assessee, a partnership firm, engaged in the business of construction and sale of flats, submitted income-tax returns. the assessments were initially completed under section 143(3). but ..... been distributed otherwise than in accordance with the share of the partners as shown in the instrument of partnership on the basis of which the firm has been registered under this act, and that any partner has thereby returned his income below its real amount, he may direct that such ..... added or deducted in such earlier assessment years.explanation 3. - where any person who has not previously been assessed under the indian income-tax, 1922 (11 of 1922), or under this act, fails, without reasonable cause, to furnish within the period specified in sub-clause (iii) of clause (a) of sub ..... department filed four complaints before the magistrate for an offence under section 276c(2), 277 and 278b of the income-tax act and sections 120b, 34, 193, 196 and 420 ipc. however, in the meantime, the income-tax appellate tribunal before whom appeals were preferred by the assessee held that there .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 13 2007 (HC)

Union Bank of India Vs. Annapurna Udyog and ors.

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Jul-13-2007

Reported in : AIR2007Jhar97; III(2008)BC292; 2007(2)BLJR2889; [2007(4)JCR41(Jhr)]

..... and 5 for recovery and realization of the aforesaid amount and for other reliefs, was dismissed.2. the case of the plaintiff is that the defendant no. 1 being a partnership firm represented by defendants no. 2 and 3 was extended a term loan facility to the extent of rs. 1.83 lakh by the plaintiff bank for the purpose of ..... hit under the provisions of the indian registration act and is not enforceable for non registration whereas under the law, no registration is required in case of equitable mortgage created merely by deposit of the title deed. further ..... and have also denied to have executed any deed of hypothecation of goods or property as security for repayment of the loan amount. they have also challenged the plaintiff's act of clubbing the term loan account and the cash credit account and the interest calculated at a higher rate on the total amount as being illegal and contrary to the ..... the fact that since the claim of the plaintiff is based upon equitable mortgage, the period of limitation would be 12 years as applied under article 62 of the limitation act and as such, the suit could not be barred under the law of limitation. it is further argued that the learned court below has wrongly held that equitable mortgage is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 18 2007 (HC)

Tata Steel Ltd. and ors. Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Jan-18-2007

Reported in : 2007(2)BLJR1153; [2007(2)JCR180(Jhr)]; (2007)7VST109(Jharkh)

..... from 6th may, 1999 to 5th may, 2007.w.p. (t) no. 5130 of 2006: (ram krishna industries v. state of jharkhand and ors.)petitioner in this case is a partnership firm, engaged in manufacture of biscuits, having its industrial unit at dumka road, jamtara. the unit was granted exemption certificates dated 16th august, 2002 under s.os. 478 and 479 ..... -and-fast rule to determine what is public interest. the circumstances in each case would determine whether government action was taken in public interest. (iii) union of india v. indian charge chrome : 1999ecr273(sc) :where the government on the basis of the material available before it is satisfied bona fide that the public interest would be served by either granting ..... benefits granted under 1995 industrial policy and various notifications. recommendation was, however, made on 11.08.2005 to withdraw the notifications in view of the. provisions of the vat act. again at page-107 apprehension was expressed of litigation in the event of withdrawal of notifications. however, at page-109 the minister concerned asked for implementation of his earlier decision ..... background that the state did extend assurance and promise to the entrepreneurs to grant exemption from payment of sales tax both central and state under central sales tax act and the bihar finance act, 1981 through the medium of its industrial policy of 1995, duly implemented through various statutory notifications. the existence of promise is also established in earlier litigations between .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 07 2007 (HC)

Yogendra Kumar Ojha, Vs. State of Jharkhand

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Nov-07-2007

Reported in : 2008(56)BLJR955

..... ojha and anil kumar ojha and it was within the knowledge of the appellant jitendra bohra that he used to visit the premises since he was in partnership with the appellants yogendra kumar ojha and anil kumar ojha.3. the appellants had denied the charges and preferred to be tried. their case in ..... singh @ surendra singh bangali were charged with and put on trial for offences under section 25(1a) and section 35 of the arms act and section 414 of the indian penal code. the case against the appellants was registered on 24.6.1997 at 5.00 p.m. on the basis of a written ..... the prosecution could at best give a reason to support culpability of the appellants yogendra ojha and anil kumar ojha to attract the offence under section 201 ipc against them for harbouring/screening a notorious criminal surendra singh @ surendra singh bangali and for enabling him to use their premises, but even such offence ..... with lalpur ps case no. 31 dated 4.4.1996 which was registered for offences under sections 302/307/324 of the indian penal code, and section 27 of the arms act. s.i. rajiv ranjan kumar informed that the arrested accused had confessed that he had kept illegal firearms under the care of ..... unless he has been specially authorized by the central government in this behalf. the term 'prohibited arms' has been defined in section 2(1)(i) of the act, which reads as follows :(i) 'firearms so designed or adapted that, if pressure is applied to the trigger, missiles continue to be discharged until pressure .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 01 2007 (HC)

Roy Estate, Through One of Its Partner Smt. Kiran Roy Vs. State of Jha ...

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Oct-01-2007

Reported in : [2008(1)JCR178(Jhr)]

..... central government on the consent of the owner of the land in the year 1942.(iii) thereafter the building in question was used for accommodating the indian army. later on it was pressed into service for accommodation of auxiliary nurses and midwives. the premises was vacated by the nurses. thereupon, the deputy ..... the said building was found to be un-inhabitable, dangerous and unsafe. therefore, in exercise of powers under section 247(1) of the ranchi municipal corporation act, the said building was declared as dangerous. the petitioner-appellant was directed either to demolish the said building or carry on extensive repair works to make ..... -appellant on the ground that the preliminary issue cannot be decided at that stage without any evidence.36. so, the petitioner-appellant, having chosen to act upon the order of single judge by approaching the deputy commissioner seeking for relinquishing; having obtained the order in their favour from the deputy (sic) the ..... no. 1690, commonly known as 'katras house' shall be deemed to have been requisitioned under section 23 of 'the requisitioning and acquisition of immovable property act of 1952' with effect from 25th january 1952 until further orders of the competent authority. and whereas the competent authority has now decided that the said property ..... m. karpaga vinayagam, c.j.1. roy estate, a partnership firm, the appellant in this appeal is the petitioner in the writ petition.2. the petitioner-appellant filed the writ petition numbered .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 05 2007 (HC)

indrasan Singh and ors. Vs. Yudhisthir Singh and ors.

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Nov-05-2007

Reported in : [2008(1)JCR189(Jhr)]

..... was presented before the registrar of gorakhpur. from all these facts, i agree with the finding of the learned sub-ordinate judge that the partnership deed was executed without explaining contents thereof to the plaintiff. it is also too well established principle of law that those who want to take ..... custom and states the principle on which the presumption is based. the learned lord observed:in this it has only given the special development, which indian social usages make necessary, to the general rules of english law, which protect persons, whose disabilities make them dependent upon or subject them to ..... held that none of the co-villagers or relatives including her sons-in laws were attesting witness on the said gift deed, rather three strangers acted as attesting witnesses.15. considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, we fully agree with the finding recorded by the learned single ..... , none of co-villagers or relatives, including her sons-in-law or daughters were attesting witnesses on the said gift deed; rather three strangers acted as attesting witnesses. two of them were local tayeeds and third one was also a resident of different village and very surprisingly none of them ..... fourth daughter, brijbas devi and her husband rameshwar prasad singh for declaration that execution of deed of gift by kismati devi was not her conscious act and it was in-operative and ineffective document and did not confer any title upon defendant no. 1, plaintiffs' case inter alia is that .....

Tag this Judgment!

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