Delhi Court March 1989 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.
Omni India Limited and Others Vs. Balbir Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-1989
Reported in: [1989]66CompCas903(Delhi)
G.C. Jain, J.1. This appeal under section 483 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act'), is directed against the order of the learned company judge dated May 6, 1988. 2. S/Sh. Balbir Singh and Pramod Kumar Churamani, respondents herein, filed a petition (Company Petition No. 27 of 1988) under sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956, against the appellants complaining of mismanagement and oppression at their hands. They sought (a) removal of appellants Nos. 2 to 8 from the board of directors and appointment of an administrator to run the affairs of the company with or without the help of the present respondents for a period of two years; (b) an order directing an investigation into the affairs of appellant No. 1 company and directing the Central Government to appoint Inspector(s) for investigation since incorporation and giving further directions to fix civil liability; for making untrue statements in the prospectus and for causing loss to the company ...
Rajeshwar Parshad and Others Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ot ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-1989
Reported in: AIR1991Delhi71
ORDERD. P. Wadhwa, J. 1. In this petition the petitioners, in effect, seek direction to the first respondent Municipal Corporation of Delhi (for short 'the MCD to extend, u/ S. 341 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act 1957 (for short 'the Act), the period of their building plan sanctioned earlier in a certain group housing scheme. The second respondent was at the relevant time Commissioner of the first respondent and had refused extension of the period. He has been imp leaded as a party as his act of refusal is termed as male fide.2. During the pendency of this petition, respondents Nos. 3 to 15 were imp leaded as parties by order dated 21-9-198 1. Respondent housing scheme was recommended subject to No. 3 is the association of respondents Nos. 4 the following conditions to 15. The petitioners, as owners of the group housing scheme, had earlier sold various buildings, numbering 18, to respondents Nos. 4 to 15 and others, who later formed themselves into an association under the name ...
Commissioner of Income-tax, (Central-ii) Vs. Electric Construction and ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-1989
Reported in: [1990]185ITR147(Delhi)
Leila Seth, J.1. By this application under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter called 'the Act'), the Commissioner of Income-tax prays that we direct the Tribunal to draw up a statement of case and refer the following question of law for the opinion of this court. 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in allowing the expenses of Rs. 15,000 representing the tour expenses of Sh. P D Gupta and also deduction under section 35B thereon by ignoring the material fact that the expenditure was not connected with the business activity of the assessed-company ?' 2. The relevant assessment year is 1974-75. The Income-tax Officer did not allow the sum of Rs. 15,000 as expenditure as he held that details had not been furnished. This is despite the fact that a voucher signed by Mr. P. D. Gupta was filed before the assessed authorities and the assessed had submitted that the said sum of Rs. 15,000 had been...
Gaurav Paper Mills Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-13-1989
Reported in: (1989)(22)LC581Tri(Delhi)
1. The applicants have filed the instant application purporting to be under Rule 23 of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for permission to produce the following documents by way of additional evidence - (3) Xerox copy of a letter No. GPM/Admn/142 dated 27-5-83 from the Petitioners to the Superintendent of Central Excise Range II Circle Chandrapur. (4) Xerox copy of letter No. GPMS/4 (a) 1983/84 dated 27-8-1984 from the Petitioners to the Superintendent Central Excise Range-I Chandrapur. (5) Copy of letter No. C. No. Bramhapuri/84/2343 dated 14.11.1984 from the Superintendent Central Excise Range-I Chandrapur to the Petitioners. (6) Xerox copy of letter No. GPMS (a) 2520/84 dated 23-11-1984 from the Petitioners to the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Chandrapur. (7) Xerox copy of letter No. GPMS/44/912/85 dated 2-7-1987 from the Petitioners to the Chemical Examiner, Central Excise, Central Laboratory Bombay (Camp G.P.M. Hardoli). (8) ...
Y.W.C.A. of India Vs. Inspecting Assistant
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-13-1989
Reported in: (1989)29ITD620(Delhi)
1. In this appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 1984-85 against the order of the Commissioner (A), broadly two questions arise, both of them converging on the ground of exemption from levy of tax under Section 11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.2. The first point was as to whether the requirements of Section 12A(5) were satisfied in this case. It is an undisputed fact that the assessee was a charitable institution and was being granted exemption from levy of tax in the previous years. But this year the said exemption was declined on the ground that the requirements of Section 12A were not satisfied. While Section 11 of the Income-tax Act granted exemption on income derived from property held for charitable or religious purposes subject to certain conditions laid down therein, yet that exemption was not absolute and it was made subject to the further conditions imposed under Section 12A of the Income-tax Act. The conditions prescribed under Section 12A are, to quote from it...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. J.K. Synthetics Ltd. (No. 2)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-13-1989
Reported in: [1990]181ITR537(Delhi)
B.N. Kirpal, J.1. In this petition under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, the petitioner seeks a direction to the effect that the Tribunal should be asked to refer the following questions of law to this court : (i) Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in Law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 85,722 on account of interest pertaining to period prior to commencement of production in respect of acrylic, cement, SSF and nylon type cord plants on the basis of their own order for the assessment year 1971-72 when the order for the assessment year 1971-72 has not been accepted by the Department (ii) (a) Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law and on facts in holding that the machinery installed by the assessed in the premises of JKCM admittedly used by the said company for the manufacture of their products, viz., nylon and cotton fabrics, was used by the assessed for its own business to the extent of 50% (b) Whether the finding of the In...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. J.K. Synthetics Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-13-1989
Reported in: [1991]187ITR650(Delhi)
Kirpal, J.1. In this petition under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, the Commissioner of Income-tax is seeking reference of the following questions to this court : '(i) Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law and no facts in holding that there is no finding that the machinery installed in the premises of JKCM was not used for the purpose of the business and profession and thereby directing the Income-tax Officer to allow full insurance charges on such machinery, when in fact the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal itself, on similar facts in earlier years, has upheld such a disallowance at 50% of the total disallowance in assessment year 1975-76 (ii) Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law and on facts in reducing the disallowance to 25% of the expenditure of Rs. 43. 545 incurred under the head 'Kamla Retreat expenses', when in fact the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal itself, on similar facts in earlier years, has upheld the disallowance at 50% of...
Yog Raj Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-13-1989
Reported in: 38(1989)DLT249
P.K. Babri, J. (1) These three appeals which arise from the judgment dated September 21, 1988, of an Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi. convicting the appellants for various offences and subsequent order dated September 23, 1988, imposing sentences, are being disposed of by this common Judgment. (2) Appellants have been convicted of offences punishable under Sections 392 & 397 read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') and Section 411 read with Section 34, Ipc, while appellant-Rohtas Singh and appellant-Yograj have been further convicted for offence punishable under Section 27 of the Arms Act and they been directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1, 000.00 cash and in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment six months for the offence punishable under Section 392 read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code and for seven years' rigorous imprisonment for offence punishable under Section 397 Indian Penal Code and one year's r...
Ashoka Stone Crushing Industries Vs. Income-tax Officer.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-13-1989
Reported in: [1989]30ITD465(Delhi)
ORDERPer V. P. Elhence, Judicial Member - The assessed is aggrieved of the order dated 5-3-1986 of the learned Appellate Asstt. Commissioner for the assessment year 1981-82.2. The only question involved in this appeal is whether the assessed was entitled to claim depreciation in respect of a truck. The facts, which are not in dispute are as follows. The assessed firm purchased a truck chassis on 12-2-1981 for Rs. 1,84,261 where after insurance was paid was paid on 29-2-1981. It was made into an half truck through Shri Ali Sher s/o Abdul Majid who completed that job by 14-3-1981, i.e., within the accounting period relevant to the assessment year in question. The fitness certificate was however issued in April 1981, taxes were paid on 28-4-1981 and registration No. HRG 9506 was allotted to it by the concerned Transport Authority of Haryana only in May 1981 i.e., after the close of the accounting period relevant to the assessment year in question. However, even then the assessed claimed d...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. J.K. Synthetics Ltd. (No. 1)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-12-1989
Reported in: [1990]181ITR505(Delhi)
B.N. Kirpal, J.1. The Commissioner of Income-tax, in this petition under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is seeking an order of this court for directing the Tribunal to state the case and refer the following six questions to this court : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in allowing development rebate at higher rate on machinery for manufacture of Nylon-6 yarn under section 33(1)(b)(B)(1) of the Income-tax Act (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in confirming the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and allowing 50% of depreciation on the machinery installed at the premises of J. K. S. M. and P. P. Ltd. (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in directing the Income-tax Officer to compute the deficiency relating to the asse...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »