Advanced Search Results

Daya Shankar Tiwari Vs. Chief of the Army Staff, New Delhi and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Subject : Service

Acts : Army Act, 1950 - Sections 20(3) and 106; Army Rules - Rule 17

Reported in : 2002(3)AWC2142; (2002)2UPLBEC1634

such, he was declared deserter with effect from 2.5.1996. A Court of Inquiry was heldunder Section 106 of Army Act, 1950 and being a peace deserter, the petitioner was dismissed from service w.e.f. 21.10.1999 in terms of Army Act … to the A.M.C. Record (M.T.) Bangalore, formed an opinion that petitioner can be re-enrolled in terms of para 143 of Regulations for the Army Vol. I Revised Edition, 1987. Acting on the aforesaid directions, Medical Examination was

Ms. Madhushree Gupta Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Direct TaxationConstitution

Acts : Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 30(2), 80HHC, 90, 139, 143(1), 143(2), 144, 147, 148, 158B, 162, 164(2), 234A, 240, 256(1), 256(2), 260A, 269SS, 270, 271, 271(1), 271(1B), 271(5), 271D, 273, 273(2), 273B, 274, 275, 276C; Finance Act, 2008; Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987; Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1989; Income Tax Act, 1922 - Sections 22(1), 22(2), 23, 28, 28(1), 28(2), 28(6) and 34; Finance Act, 1964; Taxation Laws (Amendment in Misc. Provisions) Act, 1986; Wealth Tax Act; Haryana Civil Services (Executive Branch) and Allied Services and Other Services, Common/ Combined Examination Act, 2002; Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959; Maharashtra Tax Laws (Levy, Amendment and Repeal) Act, 1989 - Sections 26; Army Act, 1950; Bombay Sales Tax Rules; Army Rules; Constitution of Ind

Reported in : (2009)225CTR(Del)1; [2009]317ITR107(Delhi); [2009]183TAXMAN100(Delhi)

petition of the petitioner was required to record reasons. The Supreme Court after discussing the scheme of the Army Act, 1950 and the Rules framed thereunder came, to the conclusion that under Section 162 of the said Act reasons … petitioner filed a return of income declaring a loss of Rs 53,54,135/-. The said return was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. However, on 25.10.2002 notices under Section 143(2) of the Act were issued. Consequent thereto, even

Constable Uma Shankaran vs.union of India and Ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

SCM in the manner known to the law i.e. strictly confines to Section 116 and 120 of the Army Act, 1950. The second aspect was the convening of the SCM itself. Here the Supreme Court fully endorsed and affirmed … so much its failure to give reasons but the failure to strictly comply with the mandatory requirement of Section 143 (2) (a) of the BSF Rules, in the case of a person who is arrayed before the SSFC

Nirmal Lakra Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Service

Acts : Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Sections 15, 16, 40, 45, 47, 63, 70, 75, 83, 87, 115, 120, 121, 153 and 164(2); Evidence Act - Sections 3, 4 and 87; Border Security Force Rules - Rules 22, 25, 45, 47, 62, 63, 64, 134, 135, 138, 139, 140, 142, 143 to 145, 147, 148, 149, 153 and 161(1); Constitution of India - Articles 20, 20(2), 21, 33, 121, 226 and 227; Army Act, 1950 - Sections 121 and 162; Court Martial (Appeals) Act, 1951; Court Martial (Appeals) (Amendment) Act, 1968; Uniform Code of Military justice Act, 1950; Administration of Justice Act, 1968; Military Justice Act, 1968; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 193 and 228; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 480 and 482

Reported in : 2003(1)SLJ151(Delhi)

Ors., The learned counsel has drawn our attention to the fact that Sections 162 and 121 of the Army Act, 1950 are in pari material with Sections 115 and 75 of the BSF Act.8. It was further submitted that … when a plea of 'Guilty' or 'Not Guilty' is entered into. Rules 143 to 145 deal with the procedure after plea of 'Guilty', withdrawal of … the same had not been made part of the proceedings.The learned counsel would contend that in terms of Section 87 of the BSF Act, the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act would apply and in that view

income Tax Officer Vs. Ashok Suri.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (1997)58TTJ(Del)162

1981-82 Income Tax Act 1961 s.68 - LABOUR & SERVICES Disability Pension: [Vikramajit Sen, Sanjiv Khanna & S.L.Bhayana,JJ] Army Act (46 of 1950), Section 192 & Pension Regulations for the Army (1961), Regulation. 173 Claimant was on casual … 144 on 6th Feb., 1984 which was reopened under s. 146. Again the assessment was made under s. 143(3) on 31st March, 1987. The AO while making the said assessment had, inter alia, disallowed the assessees claim

Samtel Color Limited Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Direct Taxation

Acts : Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 28, 80I, 139, 142(1), 143, 143(1), 143(1A), 143(2), 154, 156, 263 and 264; Income Tax Rules, 1962 - Rule 6B

Reported in : 99(2002)DLT764

which the return had been filed - LABOUR & SERVICES Disability Pension: [Vikramajit Sen, Sanjiv Khanna & S.L.Bhayana,JJ] Army Act (46 of 1950), Section 192 & Pension Regulations for the Army (1961), Regulation. 173 Claimant was on casual … of by this judgment.2. The intimation letters sent to the petitioners, hereinafter referred to as the assessed, under Section 143(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), after making certain adjustments to the total income returned

Deepak Dewan Vs. Income Tax Officer.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (1996)54TTJ(Del)567

s.143 Income Tax Act 1961 s.144B - LABOUR & SERVICES Disability Pension: [Vikramajit Sen, Sanjiv Khanna & S.L.Bhayana,JJ] Army Act (46 of 1950), Section 192 & Pension Regulations for the Army (1961), Regulation. 173 Claimant was on casual

N.R. Ajwani Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Service

Acts : Army Act, 1950 - Sections 18, 19, 63, 69, 117(3), 154, 160(4) and 165; Army Rules, 1954 - Rules 17, 23, 23(5), 82(3) and 147A; Indian Official Secrets Act, 1923 - Sections 3, 3(1) and 5; Army Pension Regulations, 1961 - Regulations 3 and 22; Constitution of India - Articles 1, 11, 14, 19(1), 19(5), 21, 31(1), 33, 53, 74, 74(1), 77, 154, 163(1), 226, 309, 310, 310(1), 311, 311(2) and 356; Air Force Act, 1950 - Sections 18 and 19; Air Force Rules, 1969 - Rule 16; Railway Establishment Code - Rules 148, 148(3), 149 and 149(3); Government of India Act, 1919 - Sections 96B; Constitution of India (Fiftieth Amendment) Act, 1984

Reported in : 95(2002)DLT770

neighbourly relations.' 35. The argument before the learned Single Judge was that order under Section 18 of the Army Act, 1950 had been passed without any justifiable reasons and it is an order of dismissal on account of misconduct

Extra Judl.Exec.Victim Families Assnandanr Vs. Union of India and Anr

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

that “a militant or terrorist or insurgent, is an ‘Enemy’ within the aforesaid definition [Section 3(x) of the Army Act, 1950]. and it is the bounden duty of all Army Personnel to act against a militant or a terrorist

Gujarat Rajya Police Inspectorassociation Vs. State of Gujarat and anr ...

Court : Gujarat

Subject : Civil

Acts : Police Forces (Restriction of Rights) Act, 1966 - Sections 3(1), 6, 6(1), 220(2A) and 408(1); ;National Security Act; ;Army Act, 1950; ;Air Force Act, 1950; ;Navy Act, 1957; ;Police Force (Restriction of Rights) Amendment Rules, 1970 - Rules 3, 8 and 9; ;Police Forces (Restriction of Rights) Rules, 1966; ;Police Forces (Restrictions of Rights) Amendment Rules, 1967; ;Constitution of India - Articles 14 and 16, 19, 19(1), 19(4), 21, 33, 226, 227 and 311

Reported in : (2006)2GLR1399

maintenance of public order. In exercise of this power conferred in Article 33 of the Constitution, in the Army Act 1950, the Air Force Act, 1950 and the Navy Act, 1957 provision has been made for the restriction or … Byles J in Cooper v. Wandsworth Board of Works (NS) 180 : 143 ER 414 is apposite. The decision in the(1863) 14 CB last mentioned … Force (Restriction of Rights) Amendment Rules, 1970 made in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (1) of Section 6 of the Police Forces (Restriction of Rights) Act, 1966. The matter was, therefore, adjourned so as to