Delhi Court October 1990 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.
Delhi Electric Supply Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-1990
Reported in: (1991)36ITD301(Delhi)
1. This is an appeal by the Delhi Electric Supply Undertaking (In short DESU) arising out of an order passed by the ITO, Coy. Circle IX, New Delhi under Section 155(2) directing it to deduct tax under Section 195 @ 40% of the amount proposed to be remitted by it to an American company M/s United Engineers & Constructors International Inc., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. We have heard the learned counsel for the assessee and the learned Departmental Representative.2. The facts are that the assessee entered into an agreement with the said American company for uprating the generation of electricity at its Indraprastha Power Station, New Delhi. Under this agreement the assessee had to pay a sum of 64,500 U.S.$. In order to remit the said amount to the American company the assessee on 23-7-1983 moved an application before the concerned ITO for the issue of a No Objection Certificate contending that no tax was payable in respect of the said payments. The ITO after hearing the assessee...
Punjab and Sind Bank Vs. S.K. Tulshan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-1990
Reported in: ILR1991Delhi293
P.K. Bhari, J.1. In these two suits brought under Order 37, Civil Procedure Code, by the plaintiff-bank, the defendant in each suit has moved an application for leave to defend the suit. As common questions of fact and law have been argued in both these matters, they are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. In Suit No. 596 of 1986, the plaintiff-bank has prayed for recovery of Rs. 36,17,530 on the averments that the defendant has obtained overdraft facility against his current account which was opened on October 16, 1973, at the plaintiff's branch at 'H' Block, Connaught Circus, and in November, 1973, he was granted the said overdraft facility to the extent of Rs. 5 lakhs against security of shares of various companies and in consideration of the same, the defendant executed a demand promissory note and various other documents enumerated in para 5 of the plaint. On December 31, 1976, the amount due in the said account was to the tune of Rs. 7,89,643.93, which was confirmed by ...
Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Hira Lal and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-1990
Reported in: ILR1991Delhi289; [1991]189ITR348(Delhi); 1991RLR16
Arun Kumar, J.1. This case has been on my daily board since October 25, 1990. None has appeared on behalf of the respondent so far. 2. The point involved in the present case is purely legal. The respondents herein filed a suit against the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (hereinafter referred as 'the Corporation') for a perpetual injunction praying that the Corporation be restrained from Realizing house tax by way of attachment, auction etc, except under due process of law. The said suit was contested by the Corporation by filing a written statement. On pleadings of the parties, the trial court framed the following issues : 1. whether, the plaintiffs have got locus standi to file the present suit 2. If issue No. 1 is proved, whether a valid notice under section 125 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act was served upon the plaintiffs, if not so, its effect 3. Whether the suit is barred by sections 477 and 478 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act 4. whether the suit is barred by sect...
Delhi Dayal Bagh, Commissioner of Income Tax, House Building Society L ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-1990
Reported in: ILR1991Delhi281; 1990RLR548
P.K. Bahri, J. (1) With the consent of all the counsel for the petition in both the suits, arguments have been heard in the aforesaid two applications in the respective suits as common questions of facts and law are involved in both the matters, so both the applications are being disposed of by this common judgment. A copy of the judgment shall be placed in the other (2) Suit No. 2398187 has been instituted by Delhi Dayalbagh Cooperative House Building Society Limited and Dayalbagh Delhi Dayalbagh Commissioner of Income Tax House Building Society Ltd. & another .283 Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & others & Nitin Wadhwan '(through his father and next friend Shri Sushil WadhTwan) vs. Delhi Dayal Bagh Commissioner of Income Tax House Building Society Ltd. & another) Soami Nagar Residents Society (Delhi) seeking the relief of declaration to the effect that open space marked 'J' in the playfield Along with the suit vested in and is in possession of Plaintiff No. 1 who is entitled to its...
A. Rai and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-26-1990
Reported in: 1991(20)DRJ59
J.P. Sharma, J. (1) The applicants filed the application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 assailing the order of their termination dated 29-9-1988 with effect from 1-10-1988. The applicants claimed the relief for quashing the impugned order dated 29-9-1988, for being treated in continuous service with the respondents; for entitlement to be regularised in appointment having put in more than 240/ 206 days of work. in a calendar year, with occasional artificial breaks given by the respondents.(2) APPLICANTS' case is that they were given employment as casual labour by the Air Headquarters, New Delhi through the Employment Exchange. The Specimen appointment letter of Hira Lal Applicant No. 2 dated 1 1-7-1987 (Annexure-11; is fried to show that the initial appointment was to last for 89 days which could be curtailed ; giving no right to the applicants to claim any lien on the posts. The engagement of the applicants however, continued with artificial breaks of some d...
Bishamber Nath and ors. Vs. Urmila and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-26-1990
Reported in: 43(1991)DLT50; 1991(20)DRJ149
Sunanda Bhandare, J.(1) Shop 'no. 1044 Sita Ram Bazar,Delhi owned by Shri Bhola Nath was let out to one Shri Ram Lal at a monthly rent of Rs. 9.00 . The said Shri Ram Lal died in the year 1964 and on 21-11-64 his widow, Smt. Anar Devi, Ms son Mahinder Kumar, daughters Kanti Devi, Shakuntala Devi, Laxmi Kant, son-in-law and two minor sons of Smt. Shakuntala Devi, namely Shri Pawan and Sbri Pappu made part payments of the rent and become tenants. On 6 10-1965 the widow Smt. Anar Devi died. On 2-8-1968 Shri Bholla Dutt terminated the tenancy by way of a notice dated 2-8-1968 and on 15-11-1968 served a notice of demand for arrears of rent on the tenants. On 13-2-1969 Shri Bhola Nath made a will creating a private Trust in favor of the present appellants. (2) Since the shop in question is in the walled city of Delhi it was necessary to obtain permission under Section 19 of the Slum Areas (Improvement & Clearance) Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) before filing an eviction petition. T...
Rakesh Dua and anr. Vs. N.K.M. Industries Pvt. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-26-1990
Reported in: [1991]71CompCas710(Delhi)
S.N. Sapra, J. 1. The respondent has filed the present application under rule 9 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, thereby seeking directions to State Bank of India to accept the proposals of Mr. Mehtani to start the company and also to accept the collateral and primary securities, as offered by the applicant. 2. Briefly, the facts are that Shri Rakesh Dua and Shri Sanjay Dua, petitioners, have filed Company Petition No. 113 of 1987, under Section 43p of the Companies Act, 1956, for winding up of N.K.M. Industries Pvt. Ltd., hereinafter called 'the company', on the ground that, since its inception, the company failed to commence its business and it was also just and equitable to do so, because, the company did not make any profits. 3. The company was incorporated on September 25, 1981, with the objects of carrying on the business of manufacturing and processing woollen and other textile fabrics and also of manufacture, sell and export various forms of paper and pulp. 4. According to...
Lml Limited Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-1990
Reported in: (1992)(40)LC418Tri(Delhi)
1. Shri Santhanam, General Manager (Legal) of the appellants submitted that at para 16 of the Tribunal's order, the Tribunal has stated the period covered by the Show Cause Notice dated 19.5.1986 was 31.1.1985 to 30.9.1985 which is a factual error and it should be correctly 31.1.1985 to 13.9.1985 as the demand in respect of waste raised in show cause notice of 19.5.1986 was for that period only, and urged that this error should be rectified in the Tribunal's order.2. It was, further, submitted that the Tribunal's findings on the various demands follows the amounts listed in annexure IV to the show cause notice in which items 6 and 7 arc those relating to demands consequent upon discrepancies in the Central Excise records detected when compared with the appellants' balance-sheets. While referring to this aspect, in para 9 and giving a finding thereon in para 20 of its order, the Tribunal has referred to only s1. No. 6 of annexure IV to show cause notice and has omitted to mention s1. N...
Rainbow Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-1990
Reported in: (1991)LC762Tri(Delhi)
1. The appellants manufacture various types of Synthetic Organic Dyestuff falling under Item 14D of C.E.T. They filed two refund claims - (i) on 5-4-1982 for Rs. 1,22,433.87 in respect of duty paid from 12-9-1981 to 25-3-1982 and to take back credit in RG 23 Part II for Rs. 39,413.63 and (ii) on 27-4-1982 for Rs. 2,22,286.09 and to take back credit in RG 23 for Rs. 1,69,267.26 for the period 2-4-1981 to 29-8-1981. The ground for the refund claim was in terms of Notification 80/80 which is designed to give relief to small scale units and the exemption is linked to value of clearances during a financial year. The appellants said in their refund claim that the aggregate value of clearances of their product during the preceding financial year, namely, 1980-81 was less than Rs. 15 lakh, and that therefore, in terms of Notification 80/80 they were entitled to clear goods upto the value of Rs. 7.5 lakh without payment of duty during the financial year 1981-82 to which the refund claims perta...
S. Sarabjit Singh Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-1990
Reported in: (1991)36ITD311(Delhi)
1. These three appeals by the assessee relate to assessment years 1977-78,1978-79 and 1983-84 and are disposed of by a combined order, for the sake of convenience.2. The first ground, challenging the initiation of proceedings under Section 148 was not pressed at the time of hearing and is accordingly treated as dismissed.3. The second ground challenges the clubbing of share income of minor sons Gurmeet Singh and Jagmeet Singh in the hands of the assessee under Section 64(1)(iii) of the Income-tax Act.4. Brief facts of the case are that the aforesaid two minor sons of the assessee were admitted to the benefits of certain partnership firms as per the following details:--------------------------------------------------------------------SI. No. Name of the partnership The date on which the firm minors were admitted------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) (2) (3)------------------------------------------------------------------- 5. Chahal Cold Storage 1-10-19...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »