Skip to content

Delhi Court February 1981 Judgments

Browse smarter

Turn browsing into brief-ready notes

Open any judgment and get a structured AI Brief in seconds — plus Semantic Search when you need to hunt by meaning, not keywords.

  • AI Brief & Ask
  • Semantic AI Search
  • Devil's Bench

Credentials emailed — log in to pick up where you left off.

Feb 12 1981

Snam Progetti S.P.A. Vs. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, New De ...

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Feb-12-1981

Reported in: [1981]132ITR70(Delhi)

KAPUR J. - M/s. Snam Progetti, S.P.A., is an Italian company carrying on businesses as engineers and contractors in the filed of petroleum and petroChemical plant at Milan in Italy. The petitioner commenced to do business in India from the year 1967, and for the purpose of Indian Income-tax it is to be taxed as a company under s. 2(17)(ii) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').In the assessment years 1968-69, 1969-70 and 1970-71, the petitioner was assessed to income-tax as follows :(i) In the year 1968-69 - business income -Rs. 53,63,899 and interest income - Rs. 8,60,499, making a total of Rs. 62,24,398.(ii) In the year 1969-70 - business income-Rs. 97,86,013 and interest income - Rs. 12,90,343, making a total of Rs. 1,09,76,356.(iii) In the year 1970-71 there was a business loss of Rs. 1,28,88,820 and interest income was Rs. 6,56,310 making a net loss of income of Rs. 1,22,32,510.In the year 1970-71, when the petitioner made a net loss, the question that has a...


Feb 11 1981

Precision Instrument Manufacturing Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, ...

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Feb-11-1981

Reported in: [1982]137ITR5(Delhi)

S. Ranganathan, J.1. The following question has been referred to us under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law to hold that a sum of Rs. 25,000 out of total sum of Rs. 35,619 paid by the assessed to Chandra Sales Corporation as commission on sales was not an expenditure laid out and expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business carried on by the assessed ?' 2. The reference arises out of the assessment of M/s. Precision Instrument Manufacture Co. for the assessment year 1965-66, the relevant previous year being the calendar year 1964. The assessed above named is a partnership concern. Its partners are Shri Sri Gopal, his two sons, Kailash Narain and Raj Narain, and one Prem Chand. Sri Gopal and his sons are entitled to 80 per cent. of the profits of the firm. The firm was carrying on a business in the manufacture and sale of voltmeters and ammeters. Its turnover during the calendar...


Feb 11 1981

Vidya Rani Vs. R.N. Khera

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Feb-11-1981

Reported in: 19(1981)DLT400

S.N. Kumar, J. (1) This is an appeal by the wife against the decree of divorce granted on grounds of cruelty and desertion.(2) The undisputed facts, briefly, are that the husband, a metriculate draftsman working with the Post & Telegraph Department married the appellant, who is M.A. B.Ed. on 10th December 1969. I have given the educational qualifications of the parties because the husband's case for cruelty has been built around the difference in educational qualifications.(3) It seems the parties did not get along well after the marriage. There are conflicting allegations about the causes of the estrangement but it is common case of the parties that the appellant-wife went to live with her mother and brother about September 1970. While she was living with her mother, a notice dated 26th September 1970 was sent on her behalf by Shri N.P. Aggarwal, Advocate of Khurja (U.P.) to the husband. The said notice is exhibited on the record as Exhibit P2 and the relevant portions of the said not...


Feb 10 1981

Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi Vs. Hindustan General Industries Ltd ...

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Feb-10-1981

Reported in: (1981)23CTR(Del)73; [1982]137ITR851(Delhi)

Ranganathan, J.1. These are three income-tax references at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax. They relate to the assessment years 1962-63, 1963-64 and 1965-66, the relevant previous years being the years which ended on 30th June, immediately preceding. The Commissioner of Income-tax is aggrieved by the decision of the Tribunal that the respondent-assessed is entitled to the exemption provided for in s. 84(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment years above-mentioned. It is common ground that the facts relevant for the decision of the questions are common for all the three assessment years. We shall, thereforee, confine ourselves to the statement of facts as well as the orders of the various authorities in I.T. Ref. NO. 25 of 1971 which relates to the assessment year 1962-63. Our conclusion for that years will equally apply even in respect of the other two assessment years, the question being common except that in I.T. Ref. No. 107 of 1972, the order of the two questio...


Feb 10 1981

The Commissioner of Income-tax, New Delhi Vs. Hindustan General Indust ...

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Feb-10-1981

Reported in: ILR1981Delhi763

S. Ranganathan, J. (1) These are three income-tax references at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax. They relate to the assessment years 1962-63, 1963-64 and 1965-66, the relevant previous years being the years which ended on 30th June immediately preceding. The Commissioner of Income-tax is aggrieved by the decision of the Tribunal that the respondent-assessed is entitled to the exemption provided for in section 84(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the assessment years above-mentioned. It is common ground that the facts relevant for the decision of the questions are common for all the three assessment years. We shall, thereforee, confine ourselves to the statement of facts as well as the orders of the various authorities in I.T.R. 25 of 1971 which relates to the assessment year 1962-63. Our conclusion for that year will equally apply even .in respect of the other two assessment years, the questions raised being common except that in I.T.R. 107 of 1972. the order of the two...


Feb 10 1981

Gabbe Vs. Union of India

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Feb-10-1981

Reported in: 1981RLR306

S.B. Wad, J.(1) Petitioner owns 28 big. 4 bis. of land in village Ghazipur. The lands were purported to be acquired by Noti. No. F.I 5 (iii)/59-LRG, dt. 13.11.59 published u/s 4 of Land Acquisition. Act in Govt. Gazette dt. 13.11.59. Petitioner's land formed part of Shahdra Circle for purposes of planned development of Delhi. Large number of lands in the villages of Delhi were intended to be acquired under the said notification for planned development. (2) Notifications u/s 6 of the Act were published in June, 1966. The petitioner complains that no public notice was published in the locality as required by Section. 4 of the Act. She could not file a representation/objections u/s 5A as she had no knowledge of the acquisition. She further complains that order u/s 6 was passed in absence of the objections u/s 5A. I The petitioner further complains that the Land Acquisition Collector did not/ serve any public notices as required by Section 9(1) of the Land Acquisition Act nor did he serve ...


Feb 10 1981

Gurbachan Singh Vs. Raj Paul

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Feb-10-1981

Reported in: 19(1981)DLT258; 1981(2)DRJ109

Sultan Singh, J.(1) This second appeal on behalf of the landlord under section 39 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter called 'the Act') is directed against the judgment and order dated 7th November, 197/ of the Rent Control Tribunal, Delhi, reversing the judgment and order dated 3rd April, 1976 of the Additional Re 'nt Controller and finally dismissing the appellant's application for eviction of the respondent under Section 14(l)(e) of the Act. The appellant inducted the respondent as a tenant in his house No. 49, Block No. 'A', Lajpat Nagar 1st, New Delhi, on 1st August, 1970, at Rs. 250.00 per month. He filed an eviction application, out of which this second appeal has arisen on 20th May, 1974. The ground of eviction is worded as follows:- 'THATthe premises in suit were let to the respondent-tenant for residential purposes and the same are required bona fide by the petitioner-landlord for occupation as residence for himself and for other members of his family dependent o...


Feb 10 1981

Vardesh Chander Channa Vs. Prem Nath and ors.

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Feb-10-1981

Reported in: 19(1981)DLT346

Sultan Singh, J.(1) This second appeal is-on behalf of the landlord under Section 39 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter2 called 'the Act') is directed against an order dated 19th September, 1977 of the nt Control Tribunal, Delhi reversing the judgment and order of eviction against the appellants passed by the Additional Controller on 31st July, 1972 and finally dismissing the eviction application. Behari Lal, prodecesssor of the respondents, was a tenant on the first floor and the Barsati floor of property No. 11320/1 Plot No. 14-A/41, Western Extension Area, Karol Bagh, New Delhi under the appellant. He died in 1962 leaving behind his widow Smt. Durga Devi, five sons and three daughters. Smt. Durga Devidied on 29th June, 1967 leaving behind the respondents as her heirs and legal representatives. The respondents thus 'became tenants being heirs of Behari Lal and Smt. Durga Devi under the appellant. After the death of Behari Lal, his widow (2) Smt. Durga Devi built a prope...


Feb 09 1981

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Feb-09-1981

Reported in: AIR1981Delhi135; 20(1981)DLT68; 1981RLR207

Sachar, J.(1) What is the effect of Section 80 of Indian Railways Act (to be called the act) as amended by Parliament Act 39 of 1961 viz-a-viz Section 20 of Civil Procedure Code is the question for decision by us. This is an appeal against the order of Sub- Judge 1st Class dated 11-7-1978 by which he directed the return of the plaint on the ground that Delhi Courts have no jurisdiction. The matter originally came up for hearing before S. S. Chadha, J. who doubted the correctness of the view expressed by Prakash Narain, J. (as his lordship then was) when disposing of preliminary objection in Suit No. 961971 decided on 8-2-72 and referred the matter to a larger bench. That is how the matter has come up before us. (2) The plaintiff delivered the consignment of 6 cases of machinery at Cernac Bridge on the Western Railways, Administration. The destination station was Kiratpur Saheb (in the Northern Railway Administration) which is outside the jurisdiction of Delhi Courts. Instead of six cas...


Feb 09 1981

J.R. Anand Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Feb-09-1981

Reported in: ILR1981Delhi877; 1981LabIC1286

S.B. Wad, J. (1) This is an application for intervention in Civil Writ No. 39179. The application raises a somewhat vexed question of law. The question is whether a relator in a quo warranto proceeding can be permitted to intervene in a connected certiorari proceeding. The applicant is one Om Prakash Modi. President of the Delhi Parivahan Mazdoor Sangh. Delhi Parivahan Mazdoor Sangh is a trade union registered under the Trade Union Act of the workers and employees of Delhi Transport Corporation (for short DTC). The application is made under Order I Rule 10(2) and Rule 8(A) read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Writ petition No. 39 of 1979 is filed by one J. R. Anand against the DTC. This writ petition is directed against the order of the Dtc removing him from service. At the relevant time Anand was working as a Traffic Manager in the DTC. The counsel for Anand fairly conceded at the time of the hearing that although one of the prayers in the application is for impleadin...


  • Last »

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial