Delhi Court March 1987 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jagjit Industries Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-03-1987
Reported in: [1987]168ITR602(Delhi)
S. Ranganathan, J.1. These are three applications by the Commissioner of Income-tax under section 256(2) which relate to the assessment years 1973-74, 1974-75 and 1975-76. The question raised which is common to all the three years is : 'Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law and on facts in allowing the relief under section 80J in respect of the Viva division of the assessed-company ?' 2. We have heard counsel at some length and we are of the opinion that a question of law does arise out of this aspect of the Tribunal's order. The Income-tax Officer and the commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) had denied the assessed relied under section 80J on the ground that the Viva unit was not entitled to the relief as it was formed by the transfer of machinery previously used by the assessed. The Tribunal, however, appears to have allowed the relief on the footing that the Viva unit constituted a mere expansion of the unit previously in existence. On the other hand, the cont...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Himalaya Trading Co.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-03-1987
Reported in: (1987)61CTR(Del)317; [1987]168ITR586(Delhi)
S. Ranganathan, J.1. These two applications raise the question of valuation of a property on Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. The Wealth-tax Officer valued the property on the assumption that a multi-storeyed structure could be put on it and flats built and disposed of at fabulous rent. On appeal, the Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals) rejected this method and instead applied the land and building method after taking into account the portion of the land which was of commercial nature and the land which could be used only for residential purpose. The Tribunal has confirmed the order of the Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals). The question regarding the method of valuation is purely a question of fact and the Tribunal has applied a well recognised method in this regard. Even assuming that the method outlined by the Wealth-tax Officer could be described as a reasonable method of valuation, the Tribunal's order decides which method is more suitable to the particular case and that was on appr...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Himalaya Trading Company
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-03-1987
Reported in: [1987]168ITR596(Delhi)
S. Ranganathan, J.1. These are five reference application filed at the instance of the Commissioner of Wealth-tax relating to the assessment years 1965-66 to 1969-70. They raise one question of law which is framed in these terms by the applicant : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in directing the Wealth-tax Officer to recalculate the value of the property at 14, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi ?' 2. The question does not really bring out the controversy between the parties which arises in the following way. 3. The Tribunal in disposing of the appeal by a common order approved of the direction given by the Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals) that the value of the above property should be determined in accordance with rule 1BB of the Wealth-tax Rules. The grievance of the department is that this has been done overlooking the fact that rule 1BB came into operation only on April 1, 1979, and, thereforee, according to the Department, it wil...
Sardar Parduman Singh Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-03-1987
Reported in: ILR1987Delhi9; [1987]166ITR115(Delhi)
1. The challenge by Sardar Parduman Sing in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to the legality and validity of order dated December 24, 1985, passed under section 132(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter for the sake of brevity called 'the Act'), restraining the petitioner and one Harish Chander from removing, parting with or otherwise dealing with property shop No. 235, Lajpat Rai Market, Delhi, without his previous permission. On the same day, vide seizure memo (annexure U), Shri P. L. Uppal A. D. I. (Investigation) sealed shop No. 235, Lajpat Rai Market. The search and seizure proceeding were conduct by Shri P. L. Uppal in the presence of Shri. Parduman Sing and Shri Harish Chander. The seizure memo further in column records as follows : 'Shri Parduman Singh having right in Shop No. 235, L. R. Market, Delhi. Shri Harish Chander keeping the key of shop No. 235, -do-.' 2. On April 23, 1986, the petitioner through his advocate wrote to the Deputy Dir...
R.S. JaIn Vs. R. Srinivasan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-03-1987
Reported in: 32(1987)DLT340
Sunanda Bhandare, J.(1) By this petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure the petitioner is seeking transfer of the suit no. 290 of 1985pending in the Court of Shri V.K. Jain, Sub Judge, 1st Class, Delhi filed by the respondents against the petitioner for permanent and mandatory injunction restraining her, through her agents, representatives, employees or associates from constructing rooms and digging the Barsati floor of Flat No. 402, 5Kaushalya Park, Hauz Khas, New Delhi and other consequential relief on the ground that another suit filed by Shri Ashok Kumar Jain who is the son of the petitioner herein, for recovery of damages against the petitioner and fiveothers, is pending in this Court and it is expedient to hear the two suitstogether.(2) Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the issues in the two suits are somewhat similar and if both the suits are tried together, it will avoid multiplicity and conflicting decisions. Learned counsel referred to the jud...
Ashok Kumar Alias Ashoki Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-03-1987
Reported in: 33(1987)DLT16
Malik Sharief-ud-Din, J. (1) This appeal has in fact been filed through Mr. D.R. Sharma, Advocate, but unfortunately he has not appeared despite the matter being shown on the regular board, thereforee, I heard Sodhi Teja Singh, counsel for the State, who has very fairly taken the case. (2) Three persons including the appellant were convicted by the learned trial judge and the present appellant had been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years under Sections 392/397/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Similar sentence was recorded in the case of an other accomplice Ramesh while the third accomplice Rohtas was sentenced to four years rigorous imprisonment under Sections 392/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The court has also directed that the appellants will be entitled to set off for the period during which they were under detention. (3) The victim of the offence in the present caseisPW-l,Smt. Sushma. On 27th march, 1983, after coming out of her office she in the company of Kumar...
Sharwan Kumar Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-03-1987
Reported in: 32(1987)DLT32
Malik Sharief-ud-Din, J. (1) The learned Additional Sessions Judge by his order dated 10/01/1986 found the appellant along with one Sita Ramand Arjun guilty under Sections 392/394 of the Indian Penal Code and after convicting them of the offences sentenced each one of them with rigorous imprisonment for five years and to the payment of fine of Rs. 500.00. In default of payment of which they were to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months. All the three convicts have filed separate appeals. Criminal Appeal No. 20 of 1986 filed by Arjun was disposed of on 31/03/1986.(2) The prosecution case in brief is that on 20/05/1982, the appellant along with his co-accused Sita Ram and Arjun committed robbery by causing hurt voluntarily and in the process they are said to have caused injuries toPW-6, one Chhotey Lal.(3) They are further alleged to have deprived the complainant of his wristwatch, Rs. 12.00 in cash and the identity card which the complainant was holding as a Chowkidar. ...
Surinder Singh Vs. Delhi Development Authorities
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-03-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Delhi76; 31(1987)DLT402; 1987(12)DRJ318; 1987RLR308
B.N. Kirpal, J. (1) The Delhi Development Authority was set-up for providing for development of Delhi. Whether this object has been achieved or not is debatable but the facts disclosed by this case do show the development of chaos inefficiency and bureaucratic delays in the said Authority. Of course, the charges which are leveled against the officers of this Authority are much more serious but I need not make any comment on the same. The facts of this case will disclose the inefficient and callous attitude of the officers of the Authority with no regard either for the welfare of the citizens or for the interest of the Authority itself. (2) The facts in this case are not in dispute. The petitioner had migrated to Delhi 1947 as a refugee. He started his leyelihood. Like a number of other fefugees, by building a shop No. 91 at Naya 3azar, Delhi. He paid rent to Dbifai in Municipal Corporation regularly from 1948 till 1967. (3) With a view to re-settle the refugees dwelling on footpaths an...
Katar Singh Vs. Regional Director (Esic)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-03-1987
Reported in: I(1987)ACC508
S.B. Wad, J.1. This is an appeal arising out of an appellate order of the Employees Insurance Court dated 12-9-1985. The appeal arose out of the decision of the Medical Board in regard to the alleged disablement of Katar Singh. Katar Singh, who was working in Birla Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills, Delhi, suffered fracture of third lumbar vertebra on account of the fall of an electric motor on him. The Medical Board under Section 54-A assessed his disablement at 10%. He preferred an appeal to the Medical Appellate Tribunal and the Tribunal raised the disablement to 50%. The Appellate Tribunal held that the injury suffered by Katar Singh on various parts of his body have rendered him substantially incapacitated. The Tribunal further held that Katar Singh was just a crippled person and he deserved maximum compensation and benefit permissible to him under the rules.2. The counsel for the appellant submits that although the Tribunal has held that the disablement benefits should be only 50...
Toshiba Anand Lamps Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-02-1987
Reported in: (1989)(42)ELT116TriDel
1. When this matter was called today, none appeared for the appellants.Shri Inder Singh, JDR appeared for the respondent. Appellants, however, in their letter No. SAMiCUS: 1372 dated 21-1-1987, have requested that the issue may be decided on its merits. We have, therefore, asked Shri Inder Singh to argue the matter on behalf of the respondent. He has argued that the goods imported by the appellants are Heating Rods which were assessed by the Customs House under Heading 85.12 of the Customs Tariff Act, J 975. The appellants claimed re-assessment under Heading 85.11(1) of the CTA. He has further argued that this matter is covered by the Tribunal's orders No. 110/86-B2 dated 13-2-1986 (M/s. Auroville Electronics & Allied Industries Pvt. Ltd., Pondicherry) and No.1324/86-B2 dated 18-12-1986 (National Engineering Industries Ltd., Jaipur \. Collector of Customs, Bombay) in which it was held that heating rods imported in the first case and heating elements imported in the second case wer...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »