Delhi Court December 2002 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.
Sh. Kesho Lal Kapoor and ors. Vs. Sh. Vinod Kapur and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2002
Reported in: 2003(66)DRJ123
J.D. Kapoor, J. 1. Admittedly applicants are the legal heirs of deceased whose properties are being sought to be partioned by way of instant suit. However, this application has been moved after preliminary decree has been passed on the representation that parties alone are legal heirs of deceased owner knowing it well that applicants are also legal heirs. Concealment of this fact by both the parties has a significant effect over the validity of the preliminary decree as well as its executability.2. This application is being resisted vehemently by Mr. Dutt, learned counsel for defendant on the premises that once preliminary decree is passed it cannot be interferred with vis-a-vis rights determined by the said decree and that preliminary decree in so far as it decided the rights and shares of the parties is final unless set aside in appeal and cannot be re-agitated or re-opened by way of application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC and has placed reliance upon Venkata Reddy and Ors. v. Pethi Re...
Cit-v Vs. Lagan Kala Upvan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2002
Reported in: (2003)179CTR(Del)243; 101(2002)DLT495; 2003(66)DRJ372; [2003]259ITR489(Delhi)
D.K. Jain, J.CM No. 79/021. Allowed subject to just exceptions.ITA No. 181/022. An order dated 3 January 2002, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench-E, New Delhi in ITA No. 5443/Del/96 in respect, of the assessment year 1993-94 is under challenge in this appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act).3. Briefly stated, the material facts are as follows:4. During the course of assessment proceedings of the respondent Society, hereinafter referred to as the assessed, for the aforenoted assessment year, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessed had given interest free loans to: (i) its Secretary and Principal of the School namely, Shri G.C. Lagan in assessment year 1987-88, 1991-92 and 1992-93; (ii) its Vice Principal namely, Shri Bharat Bhushan and (iii) one Bal Vikas Public School, in which the said Shri G.C. Lagan was also one of the trustees. Besides, the assessed had also paid rent for the use of building, belonging t...
Sameer Aggarwal Vs. Punjab National Bank and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2002
Reported in: 102(2003)DLT702; 2003(67)DRJ198; (2003)IILLJ85Del; 2003(1)SLJ202(Delhi)
Anil Dev Singh, J. 1. This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the Order of the learned Single Judge in CWP No. 1826. of 1998 dated 20.04.1998. By that Order, the learned Single Judge rejected the prayer of the appellant herein, for being reinstated in the service of the second respondent M/s. PNB Asset Management Co. Ltd.2. The facts giving rise to the present appeal are as follows:-3. On 06.01.1996, the appellant was appointed by the second respondent as Management Trainee on probation for a period of one year. The appellant joined the service of the second respondent in the aforesaid capacity on 01.05.1996 and completed his period of probation on 01.05.1997. On 04.07.1997, the appellant was offered a job by M/s. J.M. Capital Management Ltd. and was asked to join by 10.11.1997. M/s. J.M. Capital Management Ltd. also required the appellant to produce discharge certificate from the second respondent.4. Pursuant to the offer mae by M/s J.M. Capital Management Ltd., the appellant b...
Sea Hawk Cargo Carriers P. Ltd. Vs. Int. Airport Authority of India an ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ARBLR73(Delhi); 103(2003)DLT225
S. Mukherjee, J.1. The main petition has been filed under Section 14 and 17 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 praying for the award dated 10.4.1996 to befiled in the Court, and for decree to be passed in terms of the said award by making the same Rules of the Court.2. The respondent (Airport Authority of India) has preferred objections under Section 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act 1940, being is No. 11711/96. Reply was filed to the said objections on 5.5.1997, and rejoinder was also filed by the respondent/objector. The record of the Arbitrator has been received in this Court.3. There is a connected petition being OMP No. 154/1997 whereby directions of this Court have been sought for extension of time,for making and publishing the award under Section 28 of the ArbitrationAct, 1940. This petition OMP No. 154/1997 has been filed after the award. Reply dated 9.8.1997 has been filed by the Airport Authority of India. Separate orders have been passed on the file of OMP No. 154/1997.4. In relati...
Anil BhasIn Vs. Vijay Kumar BhasIn and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2002
Reported in: II(2003)BC247
S. Mukherjee, J. 1. An interesting question has arisen regarding the interplay of the provisions of the Sections 2(a), 3(2) and 4(3) of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 by which Sections 81 and 82 in Chapter IX of the Indian Trusts Act, 1982, were deleted in the year 1988, while side-by-side with the enacting of the Benami Act. 2. This application (LA. No. 8243/2001) has been preferred by the plaintiff under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking leave to amend the plaint, by incorporating inter-alia, the following prayers : 1. Plaintiff wishes to add sub-para to the existing para 3, which is as under: 'Plaintiff respectfully submits that Smt. Raj Rani Bhasin had purchased certain immovable properties either in her name or in other's name including the defendant No. 3. The properties purchased by her in other's names were held in trust as trustee. The same were held in fiduciary capacity and for the sole benefit of Smt. Raj Rani Bhasin. The same also de...
Cit Vs. Lagan Kala Upvan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2002
Reported in: [2003]126TAXMAN205(Delhi)
D.K. Jain, J.CM No. 79/2002Allowed subject to just exceptions.ITA No.18/102An order dated 3-1-2002, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench-E, New Delhi in ITA No. 5443/Del./96 in respect of the assessment year 1993-94 is under challenge in this appeal by the revenue under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act).Briefly stated, the material facts are as followsDuring the course of assessment proceedings of the respondent Society, hereinafter referred to as the assessed, for the aforenoted assessment year, the assessing officer noticed that the assessed had given interest free loans to : (i) its Secretary and Principal of the School namely, Shri G.C. Lagan in assessment years 1987-88, 1991-92 and 1992-93; (ii) its Vice Principal namely, Shri Bharat Bhushan and (iii) one Bal Vikas Public School, in which the said Shri G.C. Lagan was also one of the trustees. Besides, the assessed had also paid rent for the use of building, belonging to one of the tru...
Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-2002
Reported in: (2003)(85)ECC833
1. M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. have filed the present Appeal against the Order-in-Appeal No. 420/2001, dated 23-11-2001 under which the Commissioner (Appeals) has confirmed the rejection of refund claim filed by them.2. Shri R. Santhanam, learned Advocate, submitted that the Appellants manufacture petroleum products including benzene and Toluene; that during the period February, 1993 to June, 1993, they, on account of error, calculated assessable value on the basis of prices inclusive of duty which resulted in payment of excess duty; that they filed refund claim for Rs. 21,07,795/- on 16-11-93; that the Assistant Commissioner under Adjudication Order No. R/149/95, dated 9-1-96 rejected their refund claim without issuing any show cause notice and without proper verification of the documents submitted by them; that the Commissioner (Appeals), under Order dated 20-1-98, remanded the matter for de novo adjudication to the Assistant Commissioner after verifying the principles of natur...
Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Hcl Infosystems Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-2002
Reported in: (2003)(159)ELT374TriDel
1. The issue involved in this Appeal filed by Revenue is whether Modvat credit was available to the respondents M/s. HCL Infosystems Ltd. on the strength of invoice which were not in accordance with the law.2. Shri Rajeev Tondon, ld. Senior Departmental Representative submitted that the Modvat credit of the duty paid on the inputs can be availed of only if the inputs are received under the cover of duty paying documents; that the respondents had taken credit on the basis of invoices which did not contain entire information as required or were defective; that the Commissioner (Appeals) has listed such 15 short comings in the impugned Order; that some of the short comings are duplicate copy of invoice was of yellow colour instead of pink colour as required under Rule 57GG, the date and time of removal of goods not mentioned, duty per unit of goods not mentioned, rate of duty not mentioned, vehicle registration no not written in the invoice, invoices are written without using carbon pape...
Agha Khan Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-2002
Reported in: (2003)(159)ELT376TriDel
1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant against the order-in-original 28-2-2002 vide which the Commissioner of Customs had ordered the confiscation of the goods (Textile fabric) and imposed penalty of Rs. 2.5 lakhs on the appellant.2. The facts leading to the filing of the present appeal may briefly be stated as under - The officers of Customs (Preventive) intercepted one Jabbar Singh, an employee of Shree Venkateswara Cargo, New Delhi, who was waiting outside the exit gate of the goods delivery yard on the Ajmeri Gate side of the New Delhi Railway Station along with some packages. On enquiry, he told the officers that the said packages had arrived from Chennai by Grant Trunk Express on 26-11-2000 and contained some textile material. He however, could not produce any document pertaining to those goods. Those packages were opened and found to contain Textile Fabric with Korean marking valued at Rs. 18,18,200/-. The goods were seized as Shri Jabbar Singh could not produce any doc...
Alok Ferro Alloys Ltd. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-2002
Reported in: (2003)(86)ECC169
1. M/s. Alok Ferro Alloys Ltd. has filed this appeal being aggrieved with the Adjudication Order No. 350/Commr/2002 dated 11.4.2002 by which the Commissioner, Central Excise has disallowed the Modvat Credit, demanded differential duty and has imposed separate penalties under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act and Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.2. Shri K.K. Anand, learned Advocate, submitted that the Appellants manufacture Ferro Alloys; that they got their Central Excise Registration endorsed for the manufacture of Electric Arc Furnace and Fabricated Items of Steel; that for the said purposes they had purchased various inputs and taken the Modvat Credit of the duty amounting to Rs. 44,56,789 in their RG 23A-Part II during 1.10.1994 to 31.3.1995; that after completion, they paid the duty of excise amounting to Rs. 42-45 lakhs from RG 23-Part II on the two arc furnaces on 12.3.95 and took the same as Modvat Credit of capita) goods in their RG 23C-Part II; that the Commis...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 17
- 18
- 19
- Next ›
- Last »