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.
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Sheila Kaushish
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-12-1989
Reported in: [1989]180ITR362(Delhi)
B.N. Kirpal1. The question of law which is sought to be referred at the instance of the petitioner relates to the valuation of property at No. 15, Original Road, New Delhi. 2. The said property has been let out and the Wealth-tax Officer computed its value at Rs. 4,17,000 accepting the valuation of the respondent. The Commissioner of Wealth-tax revised the said order and came to the conclusion that the value of land could have been taken at Rs. 250 per sq. yard and, while giving certain directions, he set aside the order of the Wealth-tax Officer and directed him to recompute the value. An appeal was filed by the respondent before the Tribunal. The Tribunal came to the conclusion that there was no infirmity in the order passed by the Wealth-tax officer and the order was not prejudicial to the Revenue. It was also observed that apart from the fact that the property had been correctly valued by the respondent even otherwise, the valuation could have been on the basis of the standard rent...
income-tax Officer Vs. J. P. Kapur.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-12-1989
Reported in: [1989]30ITD512(Delhi)
ORDERPer J. Kathuria, AM. - The Revenues appeal for the assessment year 1981-82 (ITA No. 4614/86) came up for hearing before us on 5-7-89. We were informed that the other appeals of the Revenue for the assessment years 1982-83, 1983-84 and 1984-85 (ITA Nos. 506/87, 507/87 and 534/88) involving the same issue, were also pending before the Tribunal. All these appeals were, thereforee, heard together with the consent of both the parties. As the facts are common and the point at issue is identical and these appeals have been heard together these are disposed of by a consolidated order for the sake of convenience.2. The brief facts of the case may first be noted. The assessed is an employee of M/s. D. C. M. Chemical Works. The assessed was paid a reward of Rs. 25,000 by his employer for the year relevant to the assessment year 1980-81. For the years under appeal, the reward paid to the assessed was as follows :Assessment yearAmount of reward Rs.1981-8225,0001982-8330,0001983-841 lakh1984-85...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Smt. Pushpawati Goel
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-11-1989
Reported in: [1989]180ITR316(Delhi)
B.N. Kirpal, J.1. In this petition under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Commissioner of Income-tax is seeking a direction that the Tribunal should refer the following two questions of law arising from its order : 2. For the assessment year 1979-80 : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the provisions of sections 64(1)(vi) were not applicable to the case of the assessed 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that no part of the income derived by the trust was includible in the hands of the assessed under the provisions of section 64(1)(vi) ?' 3. For the assessment years 1982-83 and 1983-84 : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the provisions of section 64(1)(vi) were not applicable to the case ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Anand Iron and Steel Industries
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-11-1989
Reported in: (1989)80CTR(Del)89; [1982]137ITR620(Delhi)
Kirpal, J.1. This is a petition under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act with a prayer that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal should be directed to refer two question of law to this court. 2. In respect of the assessment year 1982-83, the Income-tax Officer assessed the respondent on a total income of Rs. 29,018. This order of the Income-tax Officer was subsequently revised by the Commissioner of Income-tax under section 263 of the Act. The Commissioner came to the conclusion that the Income-tax Officer had erroneously given a remission of interest of Rs. 1,20,373 and that the same was taxable under section 41(2) of the Income-tax Act. 3. It appears that the respondent along with two other concerns, namely Chetan Swarup Vinod Swarup and Chetan Gupta and Co., had overdraft facilities with the Oriental Bank of Commerce Approximately Rs. 15,40,000 was owed to the said bank and the respondent approached the said bank for full and final settlement by the respondent paying Rs. 12,00,000. T...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Chet Ram and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-11-1989
Reported in: [1989]180ITR256(Delhi)
Kirpal, J.1. In this petition under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the petitioner is seeking reference of two questions of law to this court. 2. For the view that we are taking, it is not necessary to refer to the facts in any great detail. The assessment year in question is 1969-70. For the earlier assessment year 1967-68, similar questions of law were sought to be raised and by judgment dated July 16, 1987, passed in ITC Nos. 158 of 1986 and 163 of 1986, (CIT v. Chet Ram and Sons [1988] 174 ITR 177 , two questions of law, which were similar to the questions sought to be raised in the present case, were directed to be referred to this court. 3. Following the said decision, we direct the Tribunal to state the case and refer the following two questions of law to this court : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessed family did not conceal the particulars of its income by confirming the order of the A...
Sita Ram Singhania Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-11-1989
Reported in: (1990)84CTR(Del)90; [1990]183ITR147(Delhi)
Kirpal, J.1. After hearing counsel for the parties and especially in view of the orders passed by this court on July 23, 1987, while disposing of Wealth-tax Case No. 112 of 1985 and Wealth-tax case No. 113 of 1985, we are of the opinion that a question of law does arise out of the order of the Tribunal and we direct the Tribunal to state the case and refer for the decision of this court the following question: 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessed's claim that the sum of Rs. 56,800 representing the balance standing to the credit of his compulsory deposit account as on the valuation date did not constitute a right to receive annuity and hence would not qualify for exclusion from liability to wealth-tax by not being regarded as an asset within the meaning of section 2(e)(2)(ii) of the Wealth-tax Act?' 2. The application is disposed of No. costs. ...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi-iii Vs. Northern India Iron and Stee ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-11-1989
Reported in: (1989)80CTR(Del)199
Kirpal, J.1. This is an application under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act filed by the Commissioner of Income-tax praying for a direction being issued to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to refer the following question of law to this court : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax, Appellate Tribunal was legally correct in deleting the addition of Rs. 5,01,246 by taking into consideration a letter from G. B. Industrial Works which was not produced before the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner (Assessment) ?' 2. Briefly stated, the facts are that the respondent has a sister concern called Northern Steel Co. (hereinafter referred to as the 'sister concern'). The respondent paid some rolling charges to the sister concern for the relevant year 1981-82. The Inspecting Assistant Commissioner applied the provisions of section 40A of the Act and came to the conclusion that the charges which were paid to the sister concern by the respondent were excessiv...
J. Joseph Vs. Government of India and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-10-1989
Reported in: [1989]66CompCas886(Delhi); ILR1987Delhi89
1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, seeking a writ of mandamus o;r any other appropriate writ, directing the release of the petitioner's passport No. B -311527, issued by the Embassy of India, Riyadh, on March 3, 1986. 2. The case of the respondents as made out in the counter-affidavit is that the said passport which was issued on March 3, 1986, by the Embassy of India, Riyadh, is case property. The prosecution was launched against the petitioner under section 56 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, on June 26, 1986, and the same is pending in the court of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi. 3. The petitioner says that he was called for investigation/examination by the authorities under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, who had directed him to appear before them along with the current passport and other documents. The passport was taken possession of by the investigating officer under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 19743, when ...
Arvind Construction Co. and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-10-1989
Reported in: 38(1989)DLT129
S.N. Sapra, J. (1) By the present application, being I.A. No. 5423/88. defendants have prayed to the Court to recall its order, passed on August 8 1988 and permit them to defend the suit on such terms, as may be appropriate and just. (2) Plaintiffs filed a suit against defendants for permanent injunction and recovery of excess freight. (3) Defendants were duly served. Vide order dated April 2,1986, defendants were proceeded ex parte. (4) Defendants filed an application, being I.A. No. 243 of 1987, under Order 9, Rule 7 read with Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code for setting aside the order dated April 2, 1986. (5) Vide order dated October 6, 1987, the ex parte proceedings were set aside, subject to defendants paying Rs. 500.00 as costs. (6) Thereafter, the matter was listed before the Deputy Registrar on various dates, but defendants failed to pay the costs of Rs. 500.00 to plaintiffs. (7) As no steps were taken by defendants f6r the payment of the costs, so vide order dated August 8...
Devendra Kumar JaIn and anr. Vs. State (Delhi Administration) and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-10-1989
Reported in: 38(1989)DLT213
Santosh Duggal, J. (1) This petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the petitioners- Devendra Kumar Jain and Anurag Kumar Jain, after being served with a notice under the provisions of Section 251 of the Cr. P. C., as accused persons for offences under section 427 read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code, in a complaint case instituted by Kapil Kumar, respondent No. 2 herein. The complaint was filed in (2) The accused entered plea of not guilty and also filed a written statement enclosing copies of certain court proceedings in a civil matter, where after the court adjourned the matter for complainant's evidence on 5th February, 1989. (3) In this petition it is contended that the order whereby one court framed notice under section 251 Criminal Procedure Code . and served the same upon the accused persons, suffers from the vice of lack of application of mind by the court, and thus liable to be quashed. Further that. the court has not paid due regar...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »