Delhi Court March 2001 Judgments

Shri Bawa Abhai Singh Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2001IVAD(Delhi)556; (2001)168CTR(Del)521; 92(2001)DLT35; [2002]253ITR83(Delhi)

ORDERArijit Pasayat, CJ.1. Challenge in this writ petition is to the notice dated 30.3.1999 issued under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and served on the assessed on 14.1999 and to the notices issued under section 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act dated 24.1.2001.Incidentally, challenge is also made to the order passed by the District Valuation Officer (in short, DVO) dated 19.2.1999 under section 55A of the Act read with Section 16F of the Wealth Tax Act ( in short the WT Act). It is to be noted that earlier the petitioner had filed a writ petition ( No. 1021/2000) questioning the notice issued on the purported ground that what 'constitute reasons to believe' for initiation of the proceedings was not communicated. By order dated 10.2.2000 direction was given to the respondent to furnish a copy of the reasons recorded under section 148 of the Act. After the same have been furnished the present writ petition has been filed questioning legality of the action taken.2. Factual positio...

Satya Prakash Aggarwal and anr. Vs. M/S. Oriential Building and Furnis ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2001IVAD(Delhi)195; 91(2001)DLT265

ORDERJ.D.Kapoor, J. is No. 12057/20001. Though this application under Order 1 Rule 10(2) read with Selection 151 CPC has been moved by defendant no.1 seeking deletion of defendants 2 and 3 from the array of the parties, the fact remains that the plaintiff has filed this suit on the ground that one Sardar Mohan Singh was inducted as a tenant in the premises way back in the year 1941 for the purpose of carrying on his sole proprietary business of sale of furniture and furnishings under the name and style of M/s. Oriental Building & Furnishing Company Limited and his tenancy was terminated during his life time and on his death defendant nos. 2 and 3 being his legal heirs came in possession of the suit premises and subsequently they converted the proprietary business into a private limited company.2. Defendants have been imp leaded on account of their being in unauthorised occupation or possession of the premises with further allegations that they have unauthorisedly sublet, assigned or pa...

Marketing Services Vs. M/S. Indian Farmers Fertilizers Corpn. Ltd.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2001IVAD(Delhi)201; 92(2001)DLT411; 2002(1)RAJ393

ORDERJ.D. Kapoor, J.is No. 12324/19991. The plaintiff has filed this suit under Order 37 CPC for recovery of Rs.69,51,000/- as agency commission. The defendant, upon service of summons entered into an appearance within the period of ten days as prescribed by Rule 3 Order 37 CPC.2. Pursuant to the service of summons for judgment the defendant has filed an application under Order 37 Rule 3 CPC seeking leave to contest. In the leave application defendant has challenged the maintainability of the suit by referring to clauses 27.4 and 27.5 of the Contract that provide for settlement of the disputes through arbitration. Clause 27.4 reads as under :-'All disputes which cannot be settled by mutual negotiations. the matter shall be referred to and determined by arbitration as per Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 or Rules or Conciliation of International Chamber of Commerce, venue for which shall be New Delhi, India. Clause 27.5 provides : Any dispute or difference between the parties in connection ...

Union of India and Others Vs. Ex Constable Mohinder Singh (Deceased No ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 91(2001)DLT291

ORDERMahmood Ali Khan, J.1. This Letters Patent appeal is directed against an order of the learned Single Judge dated 24.9.1998 whereby, he has quashed the Summary Security Court proceedings and the order of dismissal of Constable Mohinder Singh from service and has ordered his reinstatement in the service with all consequential benefits.2. The relevant facts essential for deciding this appeal are set out as follows. Mr. Mohinder Singh, (who died and is now represented by his wife and two minor children and will be referred to hereinafter as respondent) was enrolled in the Border Security Force (BSF) as a Constable in April 1988 and became subject to the Border Security Force Act (hereinafter the Act). and Border Security Force Rules (hereinafter the Rules). In October 1993 he was posted in 'B' Coy of 92 Battalion BSF which was under the command of Shri Shiv Kumar Garg, Asstt. Commandant and was detailed for election duty. Some other companies of other battalions were also detailed for...

Bedi Ram Vs. Union of India and Another

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 93(2001)DLT150; 2001(60)DRJ169

ORDERDevinder Gupta, J. 1. These appeals have been preferred under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') seeking determination of the amount of compensation payable to the claimants whose lands situate in village Kondli, Delhi were acquired through two separate notifications issued under Section 4(1) of the Act on 8.2.1973 and 19.8.1976.2. Under the general notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Act, on 13.11.1959 considerable land situate at village Kondli, Delhi was acquired for public purpose, namely, Planned Development of Delhi. Land was also acquired for Planned Development of Delhi in the adjoining villages, Dallupura, Mandaoli Fazalpur, Karkardoma, Khureji-Khas, Khichripur, Ghazipur etc. In RFA No. 128/82 (Om Prakash v. Union of India) decided on 11.4.1991 by this Court for village Kondli the claimants whose land were acquired through notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act on 13.11.1959 were held en...

M/S. Progressive Constructions Ltd. Vs. M/S. Sharma Associates and Con ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: AIR2001Delhi494; 2002(62)DRJ589

ORDERDevinder Gupta, J.1. The appellant has challenged the order passed on 19.2.2001 by which learned Single Judge allowed adjournment to the appellant to cite a few decisions subject to payment of Rs. 20, 000/- as costs. The impugned order reads as under:-'After completing his arguments, learned counsel for respondent No. 1 wants to cite some judgments. He requests for an adjournment for this purpose. On this request, adjourned to 23rd April, 2001 subject to payment of Rs. 20,000/- as costs for unnecessarily taking up everyone's time.' 2. Respondent No. 1 has filed a petition under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 seeking direction against the appellant to file arbitration agreement in Court and consequently for referring the disputes for adjudication through arbitration as per terms of the agreement.3. The petition was instituted on 30.4.1996. The appellant by its reply dated 11.8.1997 opposed the prayer for appointment of an arbitrator. Respondent No. 2, who is only a perform...

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Lakshmi Precision Screws Ltd.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: (2001)71TTJ(Del)333

ORDERR.M. Mehta, V.P. The following grounds are raised in the revenues appeal directed against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals).'On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in law in(i) directing the assessing officer to allow depreciation on adjusted value of the machinery as a result of fluctuation in exchange rate.(ii) directing the assessing officer to compute the benefits under section 80HHC without deducting unabsorbed investment allowance and also that the assessing officer was not correct in applying the Explanationn to section 80HHC for computation of profit or business thereby reducing the profit under section 80HHC.(iii) directing the assessing officer to charge interest under section 234B only up to date of determination of income under section 143(1)(a).'2. We have heard both the parties at length in respect of the grounds raised and coming straightaway to ground No. 1, it is an accepted position between the...

M.M.T.C. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2001(130)ELT33(Del)

ORDER1. Heard. Sole prayer of the petitioner in this petition is that till 29-3-2001 when the petitioner's application for stay pending consideration of the Customs, Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal is taken up, no coercive action should be taken. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that till now there is no order of stay and thereforee, there is no bar on the departmental authorities resorting to recovery proceedings. It is also submitted that the petitioner has not made out a case for grant of stay during pendency of the reference application. It appears that Tribunal's order is dated 7-12-2000. On 13-2-2001, notice has been issued to the respondent in the reference application. The only question which remains to be seen is whether there should be stay of recovery during pendency of the reference application. In view of the decision of the Apex Court in CIT v. Bansi Dhar and Sons : [1986]157ITR665(SC) , application for stay, if any, has to be considered by Tribunal...

C.C.E., Chandigarh Vs. M/S. Oswal Paper and Allied

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. The respondents are the manufactures of uncoated paper and paper board used for writing and printing falling under Chapter Heading 48 of Schedule to CE Tariff Act, 1985. The Commissioner (Appeals), Chandigarh vide his Order dt. 10.5.99 has allowed them the modvat credit totally amounting Rs. 33,276.40 on the capital goods reversing the order passed by the original authority. the particulars of the goods are as allows:1. EMDOs HDPE It is used in carrying of calcium hydrochlorideto the pulp mill for bleaching the pulp.2. Plascon V-Ball Valve It is used in Alum limes to control the supply. It is a3. Electric Motor for It is electric motor for paper machine drive.paper plant4. Breaker Beater It is used for heating the complete with rags and jute caddies. Without washing drum this equipment, strength cannot be given to the paper5. WCI Pulp Value with These are used in each and spindle every equipment to regulate the supply to maintain the6. Demble make glove These are used for seal cont...

M/S. Phoenix Industries Ltd. Vs. Cc, New Delhi

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(132)ELT731TriDel

1. In this appeal filed by M/s. Phoenix Industries Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'PIL'), the matter relates to the classification of imported material for which PIL sought to claim the benefit of exemption under Notification No.25/95 Cus dated 16.3.95 (as amended).Against Sl.No.2 of the Table annexed to that Notification dated 16.3.95, raw hides and skins (fresh, salted, dried, pickled or limed), whether or not split, including sheep skins ni wool, falling under Chapter 41 of the Customs Tariff, enjoyed nil rate of customs duty. The imported material was described in the import documents as 'raw skin of lamb with hair'. The classification was sought under sub-heading No.4102.10 of the Customs Tariff. Pending test of the imported material, the consignment was cleared provisionally. Subsequently after the test report from the Footwear Design and Development Institute (FDDI), a show cause notice was issued on 2.5.96 on the ground that the imported material was the tanned/dressed fur s...