Delhi Court November 1979 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 1979 Page 4 of about 42 results (0.021 seconds)S.K. Bhattacharya and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: ILR1979Delhi525b; 1980RLR234
V.S. Deshpande, C.J. (1) This is an appeal against the decision of H. L. Anand, J., holding that the petitioner respondents (petitioners in the writ petition) have been duly absorbed in the Post and Telegraph Department and that the Union of India cannot repatriate them to the Central Public Works Department without their consent. The question again, thereforee, is whether the petitioner-respondents had the right to the relief so obtained by them. Salmond has defined a right as 'an interest recognised and protected by a rule of right'. His editor, J. L. Parker, explains what is meant by 'A rule of right' as follows : 'Here it means no more than a principle judicially enforced, so far as it is a legal rule.' (Jurisprudence, Ninth Edition, page 287). This case is an apt illustration of right being based on a rule of right in the above sense. The Facts : (2) The petitioner respondents, that is, officers and subordinate employees belonged to the Cpwd which was doing the Civil Engineering w...
Tag this Judgment!Dalmia Dadri Cement Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Delhi
Reported in: [1980]125ITR425(Delhi)
S. Ranganathan, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ' B ', has referred for our decision the following question under Section 66(1) of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922 :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessed was entitled to deduction of Rs. 9,000 representing commission paid on borrowing shares for the purpose of pledging them as security to the income-tax department for securing stay of recovery of taxes, in the computation of profits and gains of business of the assessed '2. The reference relates to the assessment year 1961-62, the previous year for which was the calendar year 1960. The Tribunal has answered the above question in the negative following the order passed by the Tribunal for an earlier year and none of the orders on record or the statement of the case give the full details of the nature of the amount of Rs. 9,000 which was claimed as a deduction by the assessed. However, the references at the request of the assessed for the e...
Tag this Judgment!Hindustan Times Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Delhi
Reported in: [1980]122ITR977(Delhi)
1. Both these are references to this court under Section 66(1) of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922, at the instance of the assessed, The Hindustan Times Ltd., New Delhi. The references arise out of the I.T. assessments of the above company for the assessment years 1961-62 and 1962-63. For the assessment year 1961-62, the following two questions have been referred for the decision of this court :' (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in upholding the disallowance of Rs. 14,260, being the value of car given to Shri Durgadas, on the ground that it was not an expenditure allowable under Section 10(2)(xv) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the sum of Rs. 23,600 is capital expenditure and, as such, could not be allowed? ' 2. For the assessment year 1962-63, the question referred is :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the ca...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi-i Vs. Punjab Electric Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: [1981]132ITR276(Delhi)
RANGANATHAN J. - The following question has been referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under s. 66(2) of the Indian I.T. Act, 19022 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the entire interest of Rs. 6,000 was not assessable as income of the assessed company.'The question arises out of the proceedings of assessment, for the assessment year 1961-62, of the Punjab Electric Ltd. The relevant previous year ended on December 31, 1960. The assessed has advanced a sum of Rs. 1,46,614 to All India Finance and Commerce Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as the 'debtor company'). It is common ground that the amounts advanced were bearing interest at 12% per annum. For the assessment year 1961-62, the assessed-company included in its income-tax return interest in respect of outstanding due from the debtor company only in respect of a period of 6 months. i.e., a period up to August 31, 1960. No interest for the rest of the accounting year was take into consid...
Tag this Judgment!Nanak Ghand Gupta Vs. Ish Kumar Verma
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 18(1980)DLT118
A.B. Rohatgi, J.(1) The revision petition filed by the landlord from the order of the Rent Controller raises one question. It is about the meaning of the term 'dwelling house' as used in the provision to Section 14A(1) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (the Act).(2) The undisputed facts of this case are these. Nanak Ghand Gupta, Petitioner, is the landlord of house No, 6349, Block No. 7, Gali No. 1 in Dev Nagar, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. The respondent Ish Kumar Verma, is his tenant in a portion of this house. One room was let to him on November 11, 1962 at a monthly rent of Rs. 35.00 . He was also given the right to use the W.G. and bath in common with the landlord. (3) The landlord is a government servant. He was living in this house till 1974. He had three rooms in his possession. On August 9, 1974 he was allotted Government quarter No. N/552, Sector 8, in R.K. Puram, New Delhi. When he shifted he kept out of the three rooms which were with him two rooms in his possession. And in the...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kulwant Kaur and ors. (L.Rs. of Late Gu ...
Court: Delhi
Reported in: [1980]121ITR914(Delhi)
Deshpande, C.J. 1. The question referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (the Act), is as follows: 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the cash credits of Rs. 11,724 came out of the intangible additions made in the past two years ?' 2. At the outset we may point out, as we did during the course of argument by the learned counsel, Mr. Monga, for the respondent that the question needs to be refrained. The words in the appellate order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, dated 20th August, 1966, as also in the referring order, dated 21st November, 1969, are 'should be treated to have come out'. These words will be substituted in place of the words 'came out' in the question. 3. In the assessment year 1961-62, income shown by the assessed in his return was not accepted but was estimated at Rs. 13,000 for 1960-61 and at Rs. 11,000 for 1961-62. 4. In the asses...
Tag this Judgment!S.D. Khanna Vs. Trilok Nath Trehan
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 17(1980)DLT246; 1980RLR187
M.L. Jain, J. (1) The petitioner is a tenant and the respondent is the landlord. The tenanted premises are in the second floor of the house. The landlord terminated the tenancy by a notice dated February 18, 1976. He made the eviction application on April 16,1976. In the application the tenanted premises were said to be one Barsati with temporary kitchen one open bath-cum-latrine on the second floor which were also shown in red in the plan attached. The portion in red did not include the open space. The ground for eviction was that the landlord required the premises bona fide for residence of himself and the members of his family dependent upon him as the first floor in which the family was residing had become insufficient for their requirement. The tenant filed a written statement on August 25, 1976. He contended that he was a tenant of the entire second floor including the open space and one bath-room on the ground floor which was illegally occupied by the landlord. He also denied th...
Tag this Judgment!K.C. Raj and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Delhi
Reported in: ILR1979Delhi761
Khanna, J.1. M/s. K.C. Raj & Co. is a partnership concern having four partners. In the partnership deed it was recited that three of the partners, namely, Prem Nath, Bal Kishan and Kishan Lal, had entered into partnership in representative capacities of their respective Hindu undivided families. They held the status of kartas in those families. The firm allowed various amounts as salaries to these partners for the services rendered by them to the partnership as working partners. They claimed that they were being paid the salaries in their individual capacities, and not as kartas of their Hindu undivided families.2. The income-tax authorities, however, disallowed the deductions of these salary amounts in the hands of the firm for the assessment years 1957-58 to 1961-62. Reference in this regard was made to Section 10(4)(b) of the I.T. Act, 1922, which prohibited allowance of any expenditure by way of interest, salary, commission or remuneration paid by a firm to any partner of the firm....
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner, Sales Tax Vs. Standard Metal Industries
Court: Delhi
Reported in: [1980]45STC229(Delhi)
N.N. Goswamy, J.1. This judgment and order will also dispose of Sales Tax Reference No. 3 of 1978. In these two sales tax references, at the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, Delhi, the following common question of law has been referred to this Court for opinion:Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Additional District Judge was justified in directing that calcium carbide, oxygen gas, electrodes and acetylene gas be included in the certificate of registration of the dealer for purposes of Section 5(2)(a)(ii) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, as then extended to the Union Territory of Delhi2. The relevant facts are that the assessed is a registered dealer and carries on the business of manufacturing iron chains and bolts. The assessed moved an application on 1st December, 1973, to the Sales Tax Officer for addition of the following items in columns 3(a) and 3(b) of the certificate of registration issued under the Bengal Finance (Sale...
Tag this Judgment!Swaran Singh Kanwar Vs. Wealth-tax Officer
Court: Delhi
Reported in: [1981]130ITR402(Delhi)
S. Ranganathan, J. 1. These are three connected writ petitions and can be disposed of by a common judgment. The petitioners are kartas of HUFs and are assessed to wealth-tax. The net wealth of each of the petitioners consists of shares held in a number of companies, some of which are quoted on the stock exchange and some are not quoted. The dispute in the present case arises out of common facts and it may be sufficient to set out the brief facts in C.W. No. 968/79 to illustrate the position.2. For the assessment year 1970-71 (valuation dated March 31, 1970) the petitioner submitted a return of net wealth of a sum of Rs. 6,42,683. Among the assets owned by the petitioner were 145 equity shares of Raunaq & Co. Pvt. Ltd. The face value of each of these shares was Rs. 1,000 but since the said company was a private company and its shares were not quoted in any recognised stock exchange, the market value of its shares had to be computed under Rule 1D of the W.T. Rules, 1957. The petitioner a...
Tag this Judgment!