Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: the east punjab extension of limitation act 1947 Court: rajasthan Page 1 of about 11 results (0.025 seconds)

Jan 09 1951 (HC)

Madangopal Kabra Vs. the Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR1951Raj94a; [1951]20ITR214(Raj)

..... over the difficulty of separate assessment of tax for the period from 1st april to 12th april as regards individuals in patiala & east punjab states union. in this second clause the words 'for any of the purposes of -this act' clearly signify that the aforesaid territory including rajasthan is a taxable territory for the purposes of levy, assessment & collection of ..... of 'taxable territories' did not include part b states. the fourth period is from 1.4.1950, when the taxable territories were to include part b states except patiala & east punjab states union. the fifth period starts from 13-4-1960, when the whole of india, except the states of jammu & kashmir became included in 'taxable territories.'17. so ..... india was rapidly changing after the indian independence act, 1947, & instead of defining india separately for the different periods of its expansion, the legislature provided different meanings to the expression 'taxable territories' according to the successive stages of expansion of india. upto 14-8-1947, the operation of the income-tax act has been limited to what was british india, including berar. ..... reference may be made to the states merger (governors' provinces) order, 1949, & the states merger (chief commissioners' provinces) order, 1949. the taxation laws (extension to merged states and amendment) act, 1949, extended the income-tax act to the merged states mentioned in the order, & was brought into force in the merged states on 1-4-1949. so during the second period .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 28 1960 (HC)

HarnaraIn Vs. Gordhandas

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR1961Raj271

..... c. is controlled by section 15 of the limitation act. untrammelled therefore by the force of any authority of our court or by the deci-sions of other high courts, i feel no hesitation in saying that the language of section 15 is quite wide and extensive and should be held to control the twelve years ..... ramgopal bhutada v. sidram aunayya air 1943 bom 164 and the nagpur high court in deorao suryabhanji v. ramchandra amrutlal, air 1948 nag 272 & the east punjab high court in firm daulat ram vidya pargash v. sodhi gurbaksh singh, air 1949 ep 213 have, broadly speaking, expressed themselves in favour of the view ..... brings me to the question of the true impact of section 15 of the limitation act on section 48 of the code of civil procedure. section 15 of the limitation act reads as under :'15(1) in computing the period of limitation prescribed for any suit or application for the execution of a decree, the institution ..... period during which the execution of decrees remained so suspended is allowed to the decree-holder under section 15 of the limitation act, the application was certainly within time. i hold accordingly.11. in the result this appeal fails and i herebydismiss it with costs. ..... have, therefore, no hesitation in holding that section 48 is a provision which prescribes a period of limitation and in fact with all respect it might very well have been incorporated in the limitation act itself rather than in the code of civil procedure. it only remains for me to point out that both these .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 26 2011 (HC)

Nab Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors

Court : Rajasthan

..... relief of declaration that the order against him is inoperative and not binding upon him. he must approach the court within the prescribed period of limitation. if the statutory time limit expires the court cannot give the declaration sought for. 12. for the aforesaid reasons, we are of the considered opinion that no case for ..... order dated 19.04.2011 passed by the learned chief judicial magistrate, ajmer (misc. application no.85/2007), whereby the application filed by the prosecution for extension of time to file challan was allowed. the said revision petition came to be dismissed on 27.05.2011. subsequent to the passing of the order by ..... sessions, ajmer but was unsuccessful. this view of our is supported by the principles laid down by the hon'ble suprme court in the case of state of punjab & others versus gurdev singh, ashok kumar; air 1991 supreme court 2219. the hon'ble supreme court has observed in paras 6, 7 and 8, which reads ..... 19.04.2011 was without jurisdiction and a nullity because it was the special court alone, under the act of 2008, which is empowered to pass such an order. accordingly, he has submitted that the order of extension of time, passed by the learned magistrate, for filing of challan within 180 days is illegal and ..... de facto operation unless and until it is declared to be void or nullity by a competent body or court. in smith v. east elloe rural district council, (1956) ac 736 at p. 769 lord redcliffe observed. an order even if not made in good faith is still an .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 22 1981 (HC)

M.A. Admani and ors. Vs. A. Admani and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1981WLN(UC)526

..... questions arise for my consideration:--(1) whether the award as given should be treated within limitation and (2) whether there should be extension of time as prayed for by the non-petitioner.section 3 of the act runs as follows:provisions implied in arbitratration agreement an arbitration agreement, unless a different intention ..... on february 10, 1975 to near the objections of the petitioner about limitation and jurisdiction.12. the other question is whether there could be extension of time as prayed for by the non-petitioner. under section 28 of the act, power has been given to the court to enlarge the time for ..... had entered upon the reference after the appointment of r.l. shah of january 25, 1975, wherein they decided to hear the objections relating to limitation and jurisdiction. the period of four months will, thus, commence from january 25, 1975. the power has been given to the court to extend ..... are as under:(1) whether the award requires registration; if not what is the effect:(2) whether the award made by the arbitrators is within limitation ?(3) whether the arbitrators were within their jurisdiction to pass the award as referred ?the learned district judge by his order dated november 9, 1976 ..... service of the notice.8. a learned judge in s.d. ghai & co. v. punjab university held that an arbitrator is said to enter on reference when he applies his mind and does some judicial act for progress of the reference.9. before the division bench, the expression 'entering on the reference .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 23 2004 (HC)

Nemichand Burad and anr. Vs. Shri Jorawarmal and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR2005Raj235; RLW2005(2)Raj1096; 2005(2)WLC660

..... v. rajiv kumar) 2002 (8) scc 400, wherein the hon'ble supreme court has held that exercise of jurisdiction under article 227 of the constitution is limited and restrictive, in nature. it is so exercised in normal circumstances for want of jurisdiction, errors of law, perverse findings and gross violation of natural justice, ..... enactment, that there may be speedy disposal of such cases, that it has been provided that reply it to be filed within 30 days and the extension of time may not exceed 15 days. this provision envisages that proceedings may not be prolonged for a very long time without the opposite party having ..... was refused by the petitioner defendant and then was deposited in the court. now applying on the ratio decided by the andhra pradesh as well as punjab and haryana high court in the case of amar singh, which has been referred by learned counsel for the petitioner, an application for amendment of plaint ..... in cpc under section 148. as per the provisions of section 148 any period is fixed or granted by the court for the doing of any act prescribed or allowed by this code, the court may, in its discretion, from time to time, enlarge such period (not exceeding thirty days in total ..... not necessarily to be rejected. all facts and circumstances of the cases must be taken into account. the statement of objects and reasons of the act also provides that principles of natural justice have also to be kept in mind.8. after referring the aforesaid judgment mr. maloo referred order 8 rule .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 05 2000 (HC)

Raman Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 2001CriLJ800; 2001(2)WLC632; 2000(3)WLN39

..... if he exercised due care and attention and his conduct shows that there has been no negligence on his part.(68). section 14 of the limitation act qualifies prosecuting the proceedings in the court which ultimately is found to have no jurisdiction. the plea of good faith may be negatived on the ..... section 42 would apply.(76). in sumer chand (supra), the apex court held that application of section 42 of the police act is limited if the person is charged under the said act alone. this court has taken this view about half a century ago in mangi lal vs. state (106) after placing ..... court, to applicant raman lal for filling it up and as the applicant did not fill it up and returned the same, rather asked for extension of time, he was informed through the registrar of the gujarat high court to remain present on 30.1.98 at pali. applicant was further ..... of bhivandi and nizampur (91); gulabchand bhandarbhai soni vs. state of gujarat & anr. (92); n. subramania iyer vs. official receiver, quilon & anr. (93); chaman lal vs. state of punjab (94); brijendra singh vs. state of u.p. & ors. (95); vijay kumar rampal & ors. vs. diwan devi & ors. (96) and ghasi ram & ors. vs. chait ..... is: whether the judge could be prosecuted for offence under the prevention of corruption act, 1947 (for short, 'the act').' therefore, the hon'ble apex court had considered whether the judge can be prosecuted under the prevention of corruption act and the court has not considered the entire aspect of criminal liability of a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 08 1954 (HC)

State Vs. Gulab Singh

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR1954Raj211

..... of the view that dishonest intention was established, held that section 409, penal code, was by implication repealed by section 5 (1) (c), prevention of corruption act, 1947, and relied on -- 'the state v. gurucharan singh', air 1952 punj 89 (a) in this connection. he, therefore, acquitted the accused.5. this appeal ..... matter was considered at length by the punjab high court in 'gurucharan. singh's case (a),' and it was held that there was repeal by implication of section 409 so far it related to public servants, by section 5 (1) (c), prevention of corruption act, 1947. the learned judges pointed out that the ..... not permit him to touch the safe, he went home and kept the money there. thereafter, he went away on leave.later he applied for extension of leave from time to time. he denied that he had absconded. the accused also produced the document ex. cl which bears the date 24th ..... -- 'allahabad case', mentioned above, the act was not an offence under two enactments, but under two provisions of the same enactment, and ..... be liable to be punished twice for the same offence.'where, therefore, an act or omission is an offence under two different laws, section 26 gives option to the prosecutor to prosecute under either of the two laws, with this limitation that no person would be punished twice for the same offence. in the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 29 1968 (HC)

Bikaner Gypsum Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : [1969]73ITR778(Raj); 1968()WLN242

..... so much of the income, profits and gains included in the total income as accrue or arise in any state other than the states of patiala and east punjab states union and tr a vancore-cochin-- ......' '6a. income, profits and gains chargeable to tax in the assessment years 1952-53, 1953-54 and ..... by one single judgment.2. the facts giving rise to these references, briefly stated, are these:'the assessee-company is a public limited company incorporated on 7th may, 1947, under the company law prevalent in the erstwhile state ofbikaner. it carries on business of extraction of gypsum from jamsar mines in bikaner ..... for stocking of gypsum...rs. 4,199- 3-9total ...rs. 20,898-13-34. during the said year, the assessee-company also did extensive overburden removal work in expectation of the sindri contract and incurred an expenditure of rs. 47,386-15-0 out of which rs. 7,696- ..... commercial practice and trading principles, was a deduction which, if there was no specific provision for it under section 10(2) of the income-tax act, was certainly an allowable deduction. the expenditure (sic) was actually incurred or the liability in respect thereof had accrued even though it may have ..... these two references have been made by the income-tax appellate tribunal, delhi bench 'b', under section 66(1) of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (hereinafter called the act). the assessee in these two references is messrs. bikaner gypsum ltd., bikaner (hereinafter called the assessee-company). the facts of these cases as .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 12 1984 (HC)

Bhanwarlal and ors. Vs. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation and ...

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : (1985)ILLJ111Raj

..... (per g.m. lodha, j.,) in this reference to the full bench are mentioned hereunder:(1) whether section 25j of the industrial disputes act, 1947 permits the application of clause 13 of the rajasthan state road transport workers and workshop employees standing orders, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the ..... need to have constitutional conscience: and 3 so, that interpretation, language permitting, which makes governmental agencies, whatever their mien, amenable to constitutional limitations must be adopted by the court as against the alternative of permitting them to flourish as an imperium in a imperio.56. the commonsense signification ..... ) permanent, (iii) temporary, and (iv) apprentice. the period of 'probationer' prescribed under clause 8 of the standing orders is six months, normally and extension can be of another six months. the confirmation of a 'probationer' is provided under sub-clause (iii) of clause 8 of the standing orders. clause 9 ..... 1981 lab ic 1313 sc decided by three judges of supreme court and another decision of jyoti pershad v. union territory of delhi : [1962]2scr125 , state of punjab v. khan chand : [1974]2scr768 , pannalal brijraj v. union of india : [1957]1scr233 , harishanker bagla v. state of m.p. : 1954crilj1322 , ..... articles 14 and 16 of the constitution or not. in this regard the most important case is moti ram deka v. general manager, north east frontier railway, (supra) decided by their lordships of the supreme court. in the above case rules 148(3) and 149(3) of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 04 1955 (HC)

The State Vs. Shantilal and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR1955Raj141; 1955CriLJ1205

..... was not referred to in this case.14. in 'amir chand v. the crown' air 1950 ep 53 (fb) (k) a full bench of the east punjab high court was considering the question of what is colloquially called anticipatory bail. in that connection, das c. j., as he then was, in the referring order ..... unfettered by the restrictions contained in section 497, though that power must be exercised judicially and not arbitrarily after taking all circumstances into consideration including the limitations under section 497 (1).12. learned government advocate however urges that in view of the decision of their lordships of the privy council in 'jan- ..... .pc gives wider powers to the high court or the sessions judge than those envisaged by section 497, and it is not controlled by the limitations imposed by that section. at the same time, we should like to point out that the principle enshrined in that section, namely that a person ..... amirchand's case (k) we have already given reasons why we cannot with all respect agree with the learned judges, who decided that case, in the extension that they have made of the privy council's decision in jairamdas's case (i)'.21. we are, therefore, of opinion that section 498, cr ..... emperor' air 1931 aj1 504 (sb) (d) a special bench of the allahabad high court has held that section 498 was not controlled by the limitations of section 497 and confers upon the sessions judge and the high court wider powers to grant bail, which are not handicapped by the restrictions in the preceding .....

Tag this Judgment!


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