Delhi Court September 2001 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.
Tara Rani Kakkar Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-03-2001
Reported in: 2001(60)DRJ404
K.S. Gupta, J.1. Petitioner is the mother of the mother-in-law of Sarika, deceased. Case under Sections 498-A/304B/34 IPC was registered on the basis of statement of Jitender Singh Dani, father of the said deceased. Sh. Wadhwa points out that petitioner has been staying separately from her daughter in House No. 218, Raja Garden, New Delhi. In support of this statement he invites my attention to the photostat copy of ration card (at pages 23 and 24) placed on file. Sh. Kapoor states that only allegation made against the petitioner in FIR and statements of PWs is that she has been teasing deceased-. Sarika. On these facts, petitioner, who is stated to be aged about 72 years, is admitted to anticipatory bail. In the event of her arrest she be released on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety in like amount to the satisfaction of S.H.O./I.O concerned, dusty....
Smt. Sheela Gupta Vs. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-03-2001
Reported in: [2002]253ITR551(Delhi)
R.S. Sodhi, J. 1. Criminal Writ No. 560 of 1991 has been filed with a prayer for quashing of criminal complaints bearing Numbers 2667 to 2772 of 1998 and proceedings filed on March 29, 1988, as also the summoning order dated July 4, 1988.2. It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner before me that the substratum of the complaint was that the income of Century Plastics had escaped assessment in the hands of Shiv Charan Gupta, who has, thereforee, committed an offence under Sections 276C and 277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It is also the case put by the Department that the petitioner herein Smt. Sheela Gupta had abetted the filing of a false return/verification and, thereforee, had abetted Shiv Charan Gupta in the offence. Consequently, she was sought to be prosecuted under Sections 278 and 277 of the Income-tax Act. The assessment orders were taken up in appeal where the first appellate authority upheld the assessment, vide orders dated February 10, 1987, January 29, 19...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hindustan Insecticides Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-03-2001
Reported in: [2002]253ITR520(Delhi)
Arijit Pasayat, C. J.1. Accepting the Revenue's prayer for reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'), the following question has been referred for the opinion of this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'C', Delhi (in short 'the Tribunal') :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the sum of Rs. 2,18,484 paid by the assessed as 'know-how and license fee' forms part of the cost of the new plant and machinery and as such is entitled to depreciation in the assessment year 1976-77?'2. The dispute relates to the assessment year 1976-77.3. The factual background in a nutshell is as follows :The assessed-company manufactured insecticides. During the assessment year in question for which the accounting period ended on March 31, 1976, a claim was made for Rs. 2,18,484 spent on account of license fee, prior to the assessment year 1972-73, as capital expenditure. Consequentl...
Sidharath Vashisht @ Manu Sharma Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-03-2001
Reported in: 2002IAD(Delhi)137; 2002CriLJ341; 95(2002)DLT652; 2001(60)DRJ783
R.C. Chopra, J. 1. The petitioner, who is facing trail for offence under Sections302/201/120-B of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC') andSection 27 of the Arms Act in the case, commonly known as 'Jessica Lal MurderCase' prays for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafterreferred to as the 'Code' only). 2. The prosecution case, briefly stated, is that on the intervening night of 29th and 30th April, 1999, a party was going on at Tamarind Cafe, Qutub Colonade, Mehrauli, New Delhi, which was owned by one Mrs. Bina Ramani. The petitioner Amit Jhingan reached that Cafe at about 11.00p.m. Jessica Lal-deceased, a model, was working at the Cafe as a Bar maid. Towards the midnight when the party had almost come to an end, the petitioner started insisting for some more drinks. He first had a tiff with P.W. Malini Ramani, daughter of the owner of the Cafe, and thereafter asked Jessica Lal deceased to give him some more drinks. On her refusal, he al...
Smt. Sheela Gupta Vs. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-03-2001
Reported in: [2001]119TAXMAN708(Delhi)
Sodhi, J. Criminal Writ No. 560 of 1991 has been filed with a prayer for quashing of criminal complaints bearing number 2667 to 2772 of 1998 and proceedings filed on 29-3-1988 as also the summoning order dated 4-7-1988.2. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner before me that the substratum of the complaint was that the income of Century Plastics had escaped the assessment in the hands of Shiv Charan Gupta, who has, thereforee, committed an offence under sections 276C and 277 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It is also the case put by the department that the petitioner herein Smt. Sheela Gupta had abetted in filing a false return/verification and, thereforee, had abetted Shiv Charan Gupta in the offence. Consequently, she was sought to be prosecuted under section 277 and 278. The assessment orders were taken up in appeal where the first appellate authority upheld the assessment vide orders dated 10-2-1987, 29-1-1987 and 15-1-1993. Being aggrieved with the aforesaid o...
Cit Vs. Metal Forgings (P) Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-03-2001
Reported in: [2001]119TAXMAN707(Delhi)
At the instance of the revenue, following question has been referred for opinion of this court under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act. 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') by the Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'D' :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in not directing the Income Tax Officer to out the deduction under section 80J of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in accordance with said section as amended by section 17 of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1980 ?'The dispute relates to the assessment year 1974-75 and while dealing with the question of deduction in terms of section 80J of the Act, the Tribunal referred to its earlier decision in the assessed's own case for the assessment year 1973-74 and granted the relief.2. In CIT v. Metal Forging (P) Ltd. (IT Reference No. 211 of 1983), one of the questions related to application of section 80J. Following the view expressed by the Apex Court in Lohia Machines Ltd. v. Union of lndia : [1985]152IT...
Cit Vs. Ganga Sagar Suri
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-03-2001
Reported in: (2001)170CTR(Del)627
Arijit Pasayat, C.J.These two references are disposed of by a common order.Following questions have been referred for opinion of this court under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Delhi Bench B, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) :'(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that by entry dated 1-1-1972, in the ledger of the firm reading to be treated as HUF from 1-1-1972 the assessed had given a gift of his capital and share in Sagar & Co. to his own HUF (ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances the Tribunal was correct in holding that the said gift was validly accepted (iii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the provisions of section 64(2) of the Income Tax Act were not applicable to the assesses case ?'Dispute relates to the assessment years 1973-74 an...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Next ›