Delhi Court November 1992 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 Judicial Services Association (Regd.) and anr. Vs. Delhi Adminis ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-18-1992
Reported in: 49(1993)DLT360; 1992(24)DRJ590; 1993LabIC612; (1993)IILLJ384Del; 1993RLR67; 1993(2)SLJ44(Delhi)
D.P. Wadhwa, J.(1) Rule D.B.(2) Members of the Delhi Judicial: Services Association, the petitioner No. 1, belong to Delhi Judicial Service which is a Class I Service. At the time when this petitioner was filed it was stated that the strength of the judicial officers belonging to Delhi Judicial Service was over 150. The second petitioner Mr. S.K. Tandon is the Secretary of the first petitioner. The petitioners seek a writ, order or direction to the respondents for grant of initial outfit allowance to the members of the first petitioner. They also pray that direction be issued to the respondents to grant initial outfit allowance of Rs. 5,500.00 renewable every five years and also grant reasonable kit maintenance allowance to them. The Delhi Administration, the Union of India through Secretaries in the Ministries of Home Affairs and Law and Justice and Finance (Department of Expenditure) and the Delhi High Court are the respondents in the petition.(3) The petitioners have referred to par...
R and P Exports Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-17-1992
Reported in: (1993)44ITD308(Delhi)
1. This appeal is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) raising for our consideration two specific issues. At the outset, the learned counsel stated that he was under instructions not to press ground Nos. 2 and 3 pertaining to the taxability of the amount received as CCS due to the retrospective amendment in the law. These two grounds are accordingly rejected.2. The only other issue which survives for our consideration is the one pertaining to the claim of the assessee for deductions under Sections 80HH and 80-1 although in the grounds of appeal the last one is stated as 80J.3. The assessee in this case is a registered firm engaged primarily in the export of brass art-wares and other Indian Handicrafts. The Assessing Officer rejected the claims for deduction under Sections 80HH and 80-1 which were made by means of a revised return on the ground that the assessee-firm was not a small-scale industrial undertaking and nor was it a manufacturer. On ...
Mrs. Sudha Sharma Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-17-1992
Reported in: (1993)44ITD351(Delhi)
1. Appellant is an individual engaged in the manufacture and export of garments. For assessment year 1988-89 for which the previous year ended on 31-3-1988, assessee filed a return on 19-10-1989 disclosing income at Rs. 18,234. Deduction under Section 80HHC had been claimed at Rs. 1,11,580 which was denied by the Assessing Officer only on the ground that a certificate from an Accountant as defined in Explanation to Sub-section (2) of Section 288 certifying that the deduction had been correctly claimed on the basis of amount of net foreign exchange realisation etc. had not been filed along with the return of income.CIT (Appeals) also confirmed the disallowance by relying upon Sub-section (4) to Section 80HHC by virtue of which assessee is required to furnish the certificate along with the return. Assessee's claim is that the certificate had not been filed along with the return due to an oversight but the same had been furnished during the course of assessment proceedings on 8-3-1991 al...
M/S. Naraindas R. Israni Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-13-1992
Reported in: AIR1993Delhi78; 49(1993)DLT107; 1993(25)DRJ1
ORDER1. This is a petition under S. 14 of the Arbitration Act for making the award dated 10-5-90 given by H. N. Chandwani, Arbitrator, respondent No. 2, a rule of the Court.2. Brief facts which gave rise to the present petition are as under : that petitioner is a 'A' Class contractor. He carries on his business of construction under the name and style of M/s. Narain Dass R. Israni (hereinafter referred to as petitioner for the sake of brevity). The Union of India, respondent No. 1, awarded a contract to the petitioner for construction of Farmers' Hostel, IARI, Pusa Road, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as Respondent No. 1 for the sake of convenience) vide an agreement No.T/EE/CB 8/77-78. Later on disputes and differences arose in between the petitioner and respon were referred to Shri H. N. Chandwani, respondent No. 2 for adjudication (hereinafter referred to as respondent No. 2). The respondent No. 2 made and published his award on 10-5-90. The said award was filed before the Court...
Kanwal Nath Mehra Vs. Ram Lal Sindhwani
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-13-1992
Reported in: 49(1993)DLT10; 1993(25)DRJ14; 1993RLR83
Santosh Duggal, J.(1) This second appeal is directed against the order passed by the Rent Control Tribunal on 12.4.1991, where by the appeal filed by the appellant against the order passed by the Addl. Rent Controller on 1.2.1991 dismissing his objection under section 21 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (for short 'the Act'), was also dismissed. (2) The tenancy pursuant to section 21 of the Act commenced from 13.10.1978 for a limited period of three years, expiring on 12.1O.1981. Landlord's attempts to get the vacant possession of the property after expiry of limited period have been thwarted by the tenant so far by filing objections, which have been dismissed by the Judgments on concurrent findings of the two courts below. (3) On this second appeal being taken up for final hearing, Shri C.L.Nayyar, appearing for the respondent has raised objection for dismissal of the appeal for the reason that it did not comply with the requirements of filing of certified copies in consonance with...
N.K. Modi Vs. Fair Air Engineers Pvt. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-13-1992
Reported in: 1993(25)DRJ282
V. Balakrishna Eradi, J. (1) The complainant in case No. C-98 of 1990 on the file of the State Commission, Delhi is the appellant before us. He bad filed the complaint petition against the respondent herein seeking the recovery of Rs. 3,75,000.00 as compensation from the latter for alleged deficiency on his part in carrying out the work of installation of a centrally air-conditioning plant in the residential house of the appellant at New Delhi. On receipt of notice of the complaint, the respondent filed an application before the State Commission under Section 34 of the Arbitration act stating that the agreement of contract between the parties contained an arbitration clause -and hence the proceedings before the State Commission should be stayed under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. This plea was resisted by the complainant by contending that Section 34 of the Arbitration Act had no application to proceedings under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter called the 'Act').(2) ...
Hori Lal Vs. Sharwan Kumar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-13-1992
Reported in: AIR1993Delhi85; 49(1993)DLT126; 1993(25)DRJ65
C.L. Chaudhry, J.(1) By this order l propose to decide an application filed on behalf of the appellant under Order.47, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking review of the Judgment dated 26th August, 1991 passed by me in R.S.A. 176/1977. The facts giving rise to the appeal were that house No.A-A/57, Old Rajinder Nagar,New Delhi was allotted to Nihal Chand in 1949. Nihal Chand sold the house to Sharwan Kumar by sale he deed dated 11th January, 1968. respondent Sharwan Kumar filed a suit for mandatory injunction against Hori lal, the predecessor in interest of the appellant on the allegations that after the purctiase of the house from his father Nihal Chand,he allowed his brother Hori Lal to remain in a room and portion of Verandah in front as a licensee. His license having been revoked by notice dated 14th October, 1969, he was called upon to clear off the portion of the house but he failed to do so. Hori lal contested be suit and pleaded that the properly was purchased by Joint ...
Indian Bank Vs. Ashoka Builders and Promoters and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-12-1992
Reported in: I(1993)BC138; 1992(24)DRJ652; 1992RLR557
S.C. Jain, J.(1) The facts giving rise to this application are that the defendants were sanctioned a secured overdraft loan of Rs 1.5crores on the basis of a request made by M/S Ashoka Builders and Promoters, hereinafter called defendant No. 1, as contained in their letter written to the Indian Bank, Chandni Chowk Branch Delhi, for depositing the same as security with Dalmia Developers & Promoters Ltd for development of 1/4th share of Edward Keventers' land in Chanakaya Puri and for construction of multi storeyed building thereon. Admittedly Rs 2 crores are lying with Dalmia Developers & Promoters Ltd and Edward Keventers (Successors) Pvt. Ltd. as security on behalf of the defendants in pursuance to the Memorandum of Understanding duly executed between the defendants and Dalmia Developers & Promoters Ltd. (2) Some disputes arose between the defendants and Dalmia Developers & Promoters Ltd regarding the agreement duly arrived at between them as a result of which the plaintiff bank filed...
J.K. Synthetics Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-12-1992
Reported in: (1993)109CTR(Del)171; 50(1993)DLT14; [1993]200ITR584(Delhi)
J.K. Mehra, J.(1) The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner feeling aggrieved by an intimation issued under Section 143(l)(a) of the Income-tax Act whereby the department has raised a demand of additional tax of Rs. 55,33,2401- purporting to be payable under Section143(1A).(2) The assessed had returned a net loss of Rs. 86,13,36,452.00 whereas after adjustments which have been carried out by the department under Section 143(1)(a), the total loss stood reduced to Rs. 81,01,30,511.00. By some inexplicable logic the department has proceeded to levy the additional tax livable under Section 143(IA)(a) Sub-clause (1). For convenience Section 143(IA) of the Income-tax Act is reproduced hereunder :- 'SECTION 143(1A)(a): Where, in the case of any person, the total income, as a result of the adjustments made under the first proviso to Clause (a) of Sub-section (1), exceeds the total income declared in the return by any amount, the Assessing Officer shall,-(i) further increase th...
Smt. Madhu JaIn Vs. Income Tax Officer.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-12-1992
Reported in: (1993)45TTJ(Del)209
ORDERA. KALYANASUNDHARAM, A.M. :The assessed an individual has filed the application for stay of demand of Rs. 13,76,343 representing tax and interest.2. Shri R. Santhanam, appearing for the assessed, submitted that the assessed had purchased certain rights in regard to the land acquisition in 1971. The land was acquired by the U.P. State Govt. on 18th of June, 1971. The assessed having stepped into the shoes of the owner by purchasing of his rights of claim, had raised the issue of enhancement in the compensation. The U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad Tribunal, Agra, vide its order dt. 5th June, 1987, had awarded the assessed enhancement in regard to the market value of this land which was acquired compensation for trees, solarium on the market value of the land, interest under S. 28 of the land acquisition Act, interest under S. 4(3) of the Land Acquisition Act, interest under S. 34 of the Land Acquisition Act and also damages under S. 40A of the Land Acquisition Act. The assessed had pu...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »