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.
B.N. Khanna Vs. Geeta Sagar and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-1992
Reported in: 48(1992)DLT696
P.N. Nag, J.(1) The petitioner is one of the founder members of the respondent No. 2, Diplomatic Enclave Extension, Co-operative House Building Society, Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the Society') and is about 80 years old. There has been a long drawn out litigation between the petitioner and respondent No. 2, for several years for allotment of plot, the details of which may not be necessary to be referred to here. Suffice it to say, that although according to the petitioner, he was entitled to a plot of 1200 sq. years, he was allotted only 800 sq. years plot by respondent No. 2, which also was not actually given to him. Ultimately, the matter was referred to the Arbitration under Section 61 of the Delhi Co-operative Societies Act and respondent No. I or his nominee was appointed as the sole arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the petitioner, and the respondent No. 2. (2) Originally, the claim of the petitioner was against plot No. A-27, which claim was withdrawn by ...
K.K. Gupta Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-1992
Reported in: 1993(1)Crimes420; 50(1993)DLT285
Mohd. Shamim, J. (1) The petitioners R. K. Gupta and Trilochan Singh have approached this Court through Criminal Writs Nos. 185/92 and 147/92 under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for quashment of the detention orders F. No. 673/38/92-Cus. VIII. dated 12-2-92 and F. No. 673/ 39/92-Cus. Viii, dated 12-2-1992 passed under Section 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as 'COFEPOSA') passed by the Joint Secretary, Government of India, against the petitioners. (2) The above two petitions are being taken up together as the common question of law and facts are likely to arise while disposing them of. (3) Brief facts which led to the presentation of the above two petitions are as under, that the officers of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, on receipt of a secret information were keeping a watch on a consignment of eight packages (consisting of two wooden boxes, one refrigerator and five card...
Oriental Leasing Co. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-1992
Reported in: (1996)55TTJ(Del)294
ORDERA. KALYANASUNDHARAM, A. M. :The appeal has been filed by the assessed, a leasing company, aggrieved by the non-allowing of claim of depreciation of Rs. 53,65,210 on commercial vehicles purchased by it. The grievance, as raised by the assessed, in the grounds of appeal in addition to the non-allowing of the depreciation, are that, the observation of the authorities that, the commercial vehicles were not put to use, that there was no valid certificate of registration, that the assessed had not adduced satisfactory evidence of the actual user of the commercial vehicles and finally in holding the lease agreement a non-genuine one.Appearing for the assessed, Sh. Vaish, Senior Advocate, submitted that, the undisputed facts in the instant case are that :(a) the assessed had purchased 54 DCM Toyota commercial vehicles;(b) paid the total consideration of Rs. 1,07,70,420;(c) the payment was encased by M/s DCM Toyota Ltd.;(d) temporary certificate of registration in favor of the assessed for...
Dinesh Bhardwaj Vs. Uoi and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-05-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ2624
ORDER1. The detention order was passed against the petitioner, Dinesh Bhardwaj dated 19th February, 1992 under section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter called as the 'COFEPOSA ACT'). The impugned order was passed with a view to preventing him from smuggling goods in future. Along with the order of detention, the grounds of detention were also supplied to the petitioner. 2. In brief the facts of the case are that on the basis of a specific information received on 14th November, 1991, the petitioner was intercepted by the Custom Officers in the Custom Departure Hall of Indira Gandhi International Air Port Terminal II, while the petitioner was leaving by Air France Flight. The petitioner had already checked baggage consisting of one maroon coloured play boy suitcase. This baggage was examined in the presence of two independent witnesses and was found to contain 110,000 US $ and pound 60,670. Besides this other used ...
Orissa Cement Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-05-1992
Reported in: (1993)109CTR(Del)215; 50(1993)DLT109; [1993]200ITR636(Delhi)
B.N. Kirpal, J.(1) In respect of the Assessment Year 1972-73 two questions of law have been referred at the instance of the assessed and three questions at the instance of the Revenue. The questions of law referred at the Instance of the assessed are as follows:'1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that interest paid under Section 220(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is not allowable expenditure under Sections 28 and 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961? 2.Whether the Tribunal is right in law in holding sur-tax levied under the Companies (Profits) Sur Tax Act, 1964 for the assessment year 1972-73 is not deductible in computing the total income of the assessed?The questions of law referred at the instance of the Department are as follows:1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was justified in law in directing the Income-tax Officer to work out and allow the assessed relief under Section 80J of the Inc...
Bishan Dayal Vaish Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-05-1992
Reported in: 1993(2)Crimes641; 1993(25)DRJ131
Mohd. Shamim, J. (1) The petitioner through the present writ petition filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India has approached this Court for quashment of the detention order bearing F.No. 673/29/92-Cus. Viii dated 29.1.92 passed by Shri Mahender Prasad, Joint Secretary, Government of India, against the petitioner. (2) Brief facts which led to the present petition are as under; that during the intervening night of 5th & 6th January, 1992 the officers of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence laid a raid at a godown situated at Rewari Road,village surana, Narnaul, District Mahendergarh (Haryana), which was in the occupation of the petitioner and his son Shri Vishwanath, as a corollary whereof silver weighing 5301.384 kgs. valued at Rs. 4,18,80,933.00 and Indian currency to the tune of Rs. 2,25,000.00 besides some incriminating documents, were recovered. The petitioner and his son Shri Vishwanath were arrested on 6.1.1992. They were forced to make a statement under Sec...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Meghdoot Sales
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-04-1992
Reported in: [1993]200ITR490(Delhi)
B.N. Kirpal, J.1. In respect of the assessment year 1972-73, the Income-tax Tribunal, pursuant to an order passed by this court under section 256(2), has stated the case and referred the following question to this court : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the provisions of section 40A(3) read with rule 6, were applicable to the circumstances of this case particularly in view of the circular of the Central Board of Direct Taxes, dated May 31, 1977, referred to in the order of the Tribunal ?' 2. The facts which are relevant for this reference are as follows : The assessed is a registered firm. The assessment year involved is 1972-73, for which the previous year of the assessed ended on March 31, 1972. During the material accounting periods, the assessed was dealing in products manufactured by M/s. Meghdoot Pistons (P.) Ltd. The accounts of the year of account revealed that the assessed had made payments to M/s. Meghdoot Pi...
Goodwill India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-04-1992
Reported in: [1993]200ITR609(Delhi)
B.N. Kirpal, J.1. In respect of the assessment years 1972-73 to 1974-75, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, under section 256(1) of the Act, has referred the following two questions to this court : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was legally right in holding that the claim of the petitioner-company for allowance of surtax in the computation of the assessment of the company not be claimed under the provisions of section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was legally justified in rejecting the claim of the petitioner-company for allowance of surtax liability in the computation of its assessable income ?' 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case, as found by the Tribunal, are as follows : The reference applications pertain to the assessment years 1972-73 to 1974-75. The facts briefly are that by application under section 154 dated...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. New Bank of India Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-1992
Reported in: (1993)109CTR(Del)288; [1993]201ITR878(Delhi)
B.N. Kirpal, J.1. In respect of the assessment year 1974-75, the Income-tax Tribunal has referred, under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following question of law to this court : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that expenditure incurred by the assessed on providing tea, cold drinks, etc., to the customers was not in the nature of entertainment expenditure and thereby upholding the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) order reducing the disallowance of Rs. 1,50,075 to Rs. 27,000 made by the Income-tax Officer ?' 2. The facts as found by the Tribunal are as follows : The assessed is a public limited company carrying on the business of banking. The assessment year involved is 1974-75, for which the assessed's accounting period was the calendar year 1973. In its books of account, the assessed debited a total amount of Rs. 2,45,700 by way of entertainment expenses. However, most of these expenses represen...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Central Distillery and Breweries Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-1992
Reported in: (1993)109CTR(Del)252; [1993]202ITR45(Delhi)
B.N. Kirpal, J.1 In respect of the assessment years 1976-77 and 1977-78, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has stated the case and referred the following two questions of law under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal is correct in law in confirming the deletion of Rs. 11,504 out of the sales promotion expenses treated by the Income-tax Officer as entertainment expenditure 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal is correct in law in confirming the deletion of Rs. 20,651 out of the sales promotion expenses treated by the Income-tax Officer as entertainment expenditure ?' 3. Briefly stated, the facts as found by the Tribunal are that the assessed is a manufacturer of spirits. It provides meals, coffee, tea, etc., in the factory premises to its customers. The total expenditure on this account which was claimed was Rs. 26,545 for the assessment year 1976...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »