Delhi Court March 1982 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.
Anil Sachdeva Vs. Two Brothers Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-22-1982
Reported in: 22(1982)DLT194
Yogeshwar Dayal, J.(1) This appeal is directed against the order dated 27th November, 1980 passed by the Rent Control Tribunal, Delhi, passing an order under Section 15(1) of the Delhi Rent Control Act 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the act). (2) The Tribunal by the impugned order set aside an order dated 19th July, 1980 whereby the Additional Rent Controller, had deferred passing an order under Section 15(1) of the Act. (3) The Tribunal found that there is a relationship of Iandlord and tenant between the parties. The Tribunal also found that in view of two agreements dated 3rd September, 1975 and 29th July, 1976 prima facie there is no deprivation of any portion of the premises let out by the landlord to the tenant. The Tribunal also found that prima facie the rate of rent is Rs. 2,000/ per month and a sum of Rs. 16,000.00 are in arrears towards rent until June, 1978, and thereafter the petitioner-tenant is in arrears of rent @ Rs. 2000.00 per month and, thereforee, the Tribunal di...
Jawahar Lal Vs. Competent Authority (i.A.C.), Range Ii, New Delhi, and ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-22-1982
Reported in: (1982)32CTR(Del)131; [1982]137ITR605(Delhi)
GOSWAMY J. - This petition, under art. 226 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the notice dated July 26, 1979 (annex. L), issued under s. 269D(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, for quashing the directions issued y the Commissioner of Income-tax to that effect.The petitioner along with respondents Nos. 3, 4 and 5 purchased property bearing No. XIV-219, Gali Post Office, Sadar Bazar, Delhi, by a sale deed dated November 20, 19978, for a consideration of Rs. 1,70,000. The sale deed was registered on November 28, 1978. The property was purchased from a charitable trust known as Sethani Indermani Jatia Charitable Trust, having its office at Seth Ganga Sagar-ki-kothi, Junction Road, Khurja, Uttar Pradesh. Before selling the property, the trustees of the said trust filed an application under s. 7 of the Charitable and Religious Trusts Act, 1920, in the court of the district judge. The district judge, vide his order dated February 24, 1978, allowed the application and observed :'This pro...
K.C. Khanna Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-20-1982
Reported in: (1982)1ITD1008(Delhi)
1. These three appeals are preferred by the assessee against the common order dated 7-12-1981 passed by the Commissioner, Delhi-V, whereby he had directed the ITO to include the assessed income of K.C. Khanna & Sons, HUF, for the assessment years 1977-78, 1978-79 and 1979-80 as part of the income of Shri K.C. Khanna for each of these assessment years, enhancing the individual assessments of Shri K.C. Khanna suitably. Shri K.C. Khanna, his wife Smt. Pushpa Rani, his minor son Sundeep and his two unmarried daughters, according to the assessee, constitute his family of which he is the karta. Prior to the assessment year 1977-78, his family was not assessed to tax. However, both Shri K.C. Khanna and wife Smt. Pushpa Rani are assessees in their individual capacities and their permanent account numbers are 22-003 ; Dx-4390/DLI/I (1) and 22-024/PQ-2685/DLI (2). Right from the assessment year 1964-65, Shri K.C. Khanna is earning income as a broker in wholesale cloth business. However, for...
B.R. Duggal Vs. Wealth-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-1982
Reported in: (1982)2ITD55(Delhi)
1. These cross appeals arise out of the common order of the AAC and, hence, for the sake of convenience, they are disposed of by a common order.2. The assessee, Shri B.R. Duggal, filed the original return of wealth-tax on 28-8-1976 declaring a net wealth at Rs. 8,20,538. In the original return, the assessee had shown the value of 3,360 shares in Atul Glass Industries (P.) Ltd., which he inherited from his late father, Shri F.C. Duggal, at Rs. 200 per share, i.e., the total value was shown at Rs. 6,72,000. Later on, along with a letter dated 14-9-1977, the assessee filed a revised return of net wealth. In this return, firstly the value of 780 shares of Atul Glass Industries (P.) Ltd. was excluded on the ground that these shares were given over to Smt. Shant Duggal by virtue of a probate issued in her favour.Secondly, the value of the remaining 2,580 shares was taken at Rs. 226 per share. This valuation was adopted on the basis of the order of the Assistant Controller in the case of lat...
Vishal Andhra Industries Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-1982
Reported in: 1983LC1559D(Delhi); 1983(14)ELT2265(Del)
T.P.S. Chawla, J.1. The petitioner-company is a manufacturer of aluminium and stainless steel. Item No. 68 of the Schedule of the Central Excises Act undoubtedly covers items and thereforee the above items are excisable goods. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (i) of rule 8 the Central Government has exempted goods falling under item No. 68 of the First Schedule and cleared for home consumption by a manufacturer whose sum total of the value of the capital investment is not more than Rs. 10 lakhs. The petitioner satisfies this test but there is a provision which lays down that this exemption shall not be applicable to a manufacturer if the total value of all excisable goods cleared by him or on his behalf in the preceding financial year had exceeded rupees thirty lakhs. The Central Government also exempted utensils made of aluminium falling under item No. 68 of the Schedule from whole of the duty. Admittedly, the clearance during 1977-78 of the petitioner was over Rs. 30 l...
Talwar and Khullar (P.) Ltd. Vs. Inspecting Assistant
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-18-1982
Reported in: (1982)1ITD1025(Delhi)
1. The assessee is a private limited company which was incorporated on 17-5-1966. According to the memorandum and articles of association, the objects of the company were to carry on business in India as exporters, importers, manufacturers and commission agents of brassware and a number of other articles mentioned in the main objects. The previous year for the assessment year 1977-78 ended on 30-6-1976. During this year the company was engaged in work of manufacture and processing of brasswares and E.P.N.S., through artisans in cottage industries particularly centred in Moradabad city. The artisans are supplied with raw materials and semi-finished materials with the construction to apply specific processes for engraving, scraping, colouring, polishing, numbering, etc., on behalf of the assessee on agreed wages per Item.The sales in this year amounted to Rs. 64,15,420. In the return of income filed on 30-6-1977 the income was declared at Rs. 10,02,050. A revised return was filed on 17-...
Vijay Pal Gupta, Delhi Vs. the State and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-18-1982
Reported in: 21(1982)DLT436; 1982(3)DRJ270
ORDER1. This revision petition raises a short but an important question relating to the procedure, governing the proceedings before a Collector, under S. 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act (for short, 'the Act'), for confiscation of the essential commodity seized, for contravention of an order made, under S. 3 of the Act in relation thereto. This question has arisen in the background of the following facts :- 2. On 10th March, 1981, at about 8-00 p.m., officials of the special cell (crime branch), Delhi Police, accompanied by the staff of the Food and Supplies Department, Delhi Administration, raided the business premises bearing No. A56/1 Guru Nanak Pura of M/s. Sudha Gupta Store. The petitioner, Vijay Pal Gupta, who is husband of Smt. Sudha Gupta was present there. He opened the lock of the said premises with a key which was with him at the time. On checking 8 quintals 76.5 kgs. edible oils of different varieties were found stocked in the premises. Since it was in excess of the per...
State (Delhi Administration) Vs. Ravinder Kumar Bhatnagar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-16-1982
Reported in: 21(1982)DLT442; 1982(3)DRJ205
ORDER1. The respondent was arrested on 30th December, 1981 in connection with the kidnapping of a young boy. The dead body of the boy was found on 1st January 1982. In the first instance, the Magistrate authorised the detention of the respondent in police custody till 6th January, 1982. By a further order, that period was extended up to 8th January, 1982. After that date the respondent has been held in judicial custody. 2. On 23rd February 1982, the police again applied to the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate for custody of the respondent. They said they needed him to recover certain articles and, also, to find out who were the other participants in the crime. By an order dated 25th February, 1982 the Magistrate declined to grant custody to the police. Against that order the State has now come in revision. 3. It is manifest from the order of the Magistrate that he refused to give custody to the police because more than fifteen days had passed since the respondent's arrest. Counsel for the...
Madan Lal JaIn Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-16-1982
Reported in: AIR1982Delhi282; [1985]57CompCas782(Delhi); 21(1982)DLT432; 1982RLR549
Sultan Singh, J. (1) This appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') challenges the judgment and order dated 16-7-1981 of the Motor Accident Clainls.Tribuiial, Delhi dismissing the claim petition of the appellant on the ground that the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to award compensation against persons other than those mentioned in Section 110-B of the Act. The appellant Madan Lal Jain filed a petition under Section 110-A of the Act claiming Rs. 25,000.00 as damages against the respondents, namely. Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Contractor of the Corporation and the Water Supply and Swerage Disposal Undertaking, alleging that on 24-7-1979 he was driving two-wheeler scooter on ring road with front head-light on between 10 a and 11 P.M., that the front wheel of the scooter fell in a pit on the road and the scooter overturned as a result of which he fell down and received grievous injuries, that the accident occurred on account of the...
Brij Singhvi Vs. Rani Devi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-16-1982
Reported in: 21(1982)DLT418
Yogeshwar Dayal, J.1. This revision petition has been filed under the proviso to Sub-section (8) of Section 25-B of the Delhi Rent Control Act 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') against the order September 15, 1980 passed by the IIIrd Additional Rent Controller, Delhi dismissing the application filed by the petitioner for leave to appear and contest the eviction application filed by the respondent-landlady against the petitioner.2. Smt. Rani Devi wife of Late Sh. S.R. Vohra filed an ejectment application on the ground of her bonafide personal requirement as contemplated by Clause (e) to the proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 14 of the Act.3. In the ejectment application the respondent-landlady averred in paragraph 18 (a) as under :--'The petitioner is the owner of the premises in question and premises in question were let out to the respondent for residential purposes and the same are now 'bona fide required by the petitioner for use and occupation as residence for herself ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »