Delhi Court August 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.
Aparna Ashram Vs. Director of Income Tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-07-2002
Reported in: [2002]124TAXMAN436(Delhi)
ORDERD.K. Jain, J.Rule D.B.2. Since a very short point is involved, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, we take up the matter for final disposal.3. Order dated 21-3-2001, passed by the Director of Income-tax (Exemption), New Delhi, under section 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), pertaining to the assessment year 1997-98, is under challenge in this writ petition.4. Briefy stated, the background facts are :The petitioner, a registered society, did not file its return of income for the assessment year 1997-98 on the plea that its total income was below the taxable limit. A notice under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was issued to the petitioner, requiring it to file return for the said assessment year. Though according to the petitioner the requisite information was furnished in response to various notices but the assessing officer felt otherwise. Accordingly, taking into consideratio...
Triveni Engineering and Industries Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2002
Reported in: (2002)(146)ELT79TriDel
1. These are two appeals against the order dated 21-2-2002 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Meerut. Shri Rajesh Chhibber, learned Advocate has appeared on behalf of the appellants and he has drawn my attention to the Order-in-Original which states as under: "Please refer to your letter References No. 4305, dated 9-8-94 on the captioned subject. In this context it is to inform you that Commissioner, Customs and Central Excise Commissionerate, Meerut has rejected your aforesaid request for condonation of storage loss of 1082.90 qtls. of molasses stored in steel tank Nos. 1 and 2 for the season 2000-2001. You are therefore, requested to deposit the duty involved immediately." He, therefore, submitted that the order passed by the Commissioner has been conveyed to the appellants by the Deputy Commissioner and no opportunity of hearing was given to the appellants. Therefore, this is a dear cut case of violation of the principles of natural justice and he, therefore, submitted t...
Grasim Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2002
Reported in: (2003)(159)ELT209TriDel
1.This is an appeal filed against the order-in-original dated 7-1-2002 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, New Delhi.2. We have heard the learned Counsel for the appellants as well as the learned SDR on the issues involved in this appeal. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of yarn and man-made fabrics which they transport by their own vehicle to the godown of the transporters. From there, it is sent to the buyers. The invoice indicates forwarding charges representing freight up to the transporters godown and separately freight and insurance up to the buyers premises. The period involved is both prior to 1-7-2000 as well as after 1-7-2000 when the valuation provisions underwent amendment. For both the periods, the Commissioner has added the forwarding charges up to the transporter' godown and insurance charges up to the buyer's premises to the value on the ground that the sale has taken place at the buyers premises.However, he has not made any such additions toward...
Shri Ram Refrigeration India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Sur-tax, Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2002
Reported in: 100(2002)DLT414
S.B. Sinha. C.J.1. This reference under Section 18 of the Companies (Profits) Sur-tax Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act') read with Section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'IT. Act') has been made by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'B', New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') to this Court for its opinion on the following questions:-'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that Rs. 4,55,000/- being the cost of shares from which the assessed did not derive any income during the relevant accounting period was to be excluded for determining the assessed's capital for purposes of sur-tax under Rule 2 of the Second Schedule of the Companies (Profits) Sur-tax Act, 1964?'2. The factual matrix leading to the aforementioned dispute is as follows :-The assessed held shares in certain companies worth Rs. 4,55,000/-. During the assessment year 1982-83, the assessed...
Sasken Communication Technologies Limited Vs. Prime Telesystems Limite ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2002
Reported in: 99(2002)DLT640; [2003]41SCL292(Delhi)
R.C. Chopra, J. 1. This petition under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' only) has been filed with a prayer to appoint an Arbitrator on behalf of respondent No. 1 to enter reference and adjudicate upon the matter. No dispute is stated to be existing with respondents No. 3 and 4 and as such no relief is claimed against them but a right is reserved to institute arbitration proceedings against them also upon their failure to honour their obligations under the Subscription cum Share-holders Agreement dated 28.2.2001. 2. According to the petitioner the applicant Company Along with M/s Citicorp Finance (India) and Intel Capital Corporation (hereinafter referred to as Investors No. 1 and 2 respectively) had entered into a Subscription-cum-Shareholders Agreement dated 28.2.2001 with respondent No. 1 and its promoters respondents 2, 3 and 4. In terms of this agreement the applicant and investors consented to invest in the equity sh...
State Bank of India Vs. the United Commercial Bank Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Delhi284
R.C. Jain, J.1. State Bank of India has filed this appeal against the judgment and decree dated 7th July, 1976, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Delhi, thereby dismissing the suit filed by the bank for the recovery of Rs.40,550/- against the United Commercial Bank Ltd. and nine others.2. Case of the plaintiff/appellant Bank is that the Land Acquisition Collector, Delhi was maintaining a current account with its Tis Hazari branch since 1959. They had issued a cheque book to the Land Acquisition Collector. On 29th December, 1964, defendant No. 1 presented a cheque bearing No. OC/16-383576 dated 12.12.1964 in the sum of Rs. 40,550/-, apparently drawn by the Land Acquisition Collector, Delhi in favor of a certain Ram Avtar son of Ram Chander for clearing and the plaintiff made the payment of the said amount to the defendant No. 1 Bank. However, on or about January 18, 1965 the plaintiff received a communication from the Land Acquisition Collector, Delhi, that the cheque lea...
The Management of Mother Dairy, Patparganj, Delhi Vs. Shri P.K. Kausha ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2002
Reported in: 2002(64)DRJ451; [2003(96)FLR767]; (2003)ILLJ239Del
Vijender Jain, J.1. This writ petition challenges the order of the labour court which, inter alia, held that domestic enquiry held by the petitioner against the respondent No. 1-workman was neither fair nor proper, same was not in accordance with principles of natural justice and the said enquiry was set aside. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner-Management filed the present writ petition.2. Mr. Nayar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, has vehemently contended that the labour court erred in nor appreciating that the exhibits I to VI, which were filed before the enquiry officer were neither relied upon by the enquiry officer nor were taken into consideration by the enquiry officer. Page-69 of the paper book deals with exhibits which were taken on record by the enquiry officer, which are the statements of S/Shri Gandhi addressed to A.M.(P)-Exhibit-I, K.S. Chauhan addressed to A.M.(P) dated 10.2.1978-Exhibit-II, K S Chauhan addressed to Transport Officer dated 10.2.197...
Mohd. Shakir Vs. Lt. Governor and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Delhi42
Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J. 1. The petition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus against the decision of the respondents in revoking the license of the petitioner in terms of the order dated 12.7.2002. The license was granted to the petitioner on 6.11.2001 under Section 415 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957(hereinafter referred to as the said Act ) .2. Initially a decision was taken to revoke the license on 11.3.2002 and the same was challenged by the petitioner by filing writ petition No. 1986/2002. The decision of the respondent was held not be in accordance with law since no opportunity of hearing had been granted to the petitioners.3. As per the terms and conditions of the license the petitioner made an application for renewal of the license. The relevant clause is clause 10 of the terms and conditions which is as under:-'10. The licensee is informed that if he wants to renew the license, he will have to deposit license fee within one month from the close of current lice...
Board of Director of the Mechanical Deptt. Primary Coop. Bank Ltd. Nor ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2002
Reported in: 2002(64)DRJ723
J.D. Kapoor, J.1. Petitioner is one of the delegates of R-2 bank which is a Multi Cooperative Society within the meaning of Section 3(k) of the Act, hereinafter, referred to as the Act.2. Factionalism in the management of the Bank has chequered history which has reduced it to almost non-functional. Election of Board of R-2 was held on 18.1.1993. After completing its term of 3 years on 17.1.1996 the outgoing Board failed to conduct fresh elections within the stipulated time. As a consequence the Central Registrar appointed a Board of Administrator for the purpose of running the works of the society and holding the election of the Board.3. In May 1997 one Mr. B.K. Trivedi, Vice President of the superseded board had announced the programme for holding fresh elections. This ensued feud amongst the members of the Board and the Society on the plea that MR. Trivedi had no authority. The Board of Administrators filed writ petition before the Allahabad High Court for restraining holding of the ...
Sh. Ram Singh S/O Sh. Basi Ram Vs. Sh. P.K. JaIn and ors., Presiding O ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)SLJ116(Delhi)
Vijender Jain, J. 1. The petitioner, aggrieved by the award of the Industrial Tribunal, has filed this writ petition. The Industrial Tribunal in view of the award dated 25.1.90 on a reference from the appropriate Government held that the term of reference was capable of only a negative answer. It was further held that the Industrial Tribunal could not create a new term of reference and is bound to limit the adjudication to the term of reference. It was held in the award that in view of provision of Contract Labour Regulation and Abolition Act, 1970, the decision of the Labour Commissioner in terms of the said Act and pursuant to the authority of Supreme Court in Canon India Ltd. 1974, LIC 707, shall be final and in view of : (1971)IILLJ567SC , reference under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 cannot be made in respect of contract labour after enforcement of Contract Labour Regulation and Abolition Act, 1970.2. Unfortunately, workmen did not challenge the award but chose t...
- ‹ Prev
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- Next ›
- Last »