Delhi Court November 2004 Judgments

Assistant Commissioner of Income Vs. Medicamen Biotech Ltd.

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in: (2006)99TTJ(Delhi)873

1. This is an appeal by the Revenue against the order dt. 1st Sept., 2000 of CIT(A)-II, New Delhi, relating to the asst. yr. 1997-98. The grounds of appeal of the Revenue read as follows : (i) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in treating the expenditure of Rs. 47,71,110 as revenue in nature and deleting the disallowance made by the AO who treated it as capital expenditure, when the assessee itself in books of account had treated it as deferred revenue expenditure. (ii) The appellant craves to be allowed to amend, delete or add any other grounds of appeals during the course of hearing of this appeal.2. The assessee is a company which is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of pharmaceuticals. The company also does some liaisoning work from which it derives income. During the previous year, the assessee had incurred a sum of Rs. 47,71,118 on marketing of its products. The details of expenditure incurred by the assessee are as fol...

Air Vice Marshal T.S. Chhatwal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2005(3)ESC1924

Vijender Jain, J.1. Rule D.B. 2. The detailed reasons have been given by us in quashing the policy of promotion pertaining to the promotion of AVM Harish Masand in WP (C) No. 1035/2004 filed by AVM Masand. As the question raised in both the petitions were almost similar, the reasonings rendered in AVM Masand's case holds good in this case as well. However, some other facts and distinguishing features which are not mentioned in the said judgment are deliberated in this judgment. This petition has been filed by the petitioner. Petitioner passed out from National defense Academy Khadakvasla with rare distinction of bagging two medals including one for being the best All-Round Air Force Cadet in 1965 and was commissioned as Pilot Officer in the Indian Air Force on 31.12.1967. He was promoted as Flying Officer on 31.12.1968 and during the Liberation War of Bangladesh, the petitioner flew maximum number of sorties beyond the enemy lines in the most hostile environment, the same his been well...

Sh. Sanjeev Kumar JaIn Vs. Sh. Raghubir Saran Charitable Trust and ors ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 117(2005)DLT600; (2005)141PLR38

Vikramajit Sen, J.1. By these orders I shall dispose of an application filed by the Plaintiff praying for issuance of an ad interim injunction in the suit for permanent, prohibitory and mandatory inunction. Briefly stated the Plaintiff was the tenant in respect of the Mezzanine Floor of 11-E, Connaught Circus, Connaught Place, New Delhi which tenancy had been created in 1970. In 1986 the Plaintiff entered into a lease in respect of the First Floor bearing municipal No.E-37 Connaught Circus, Connaught Place, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the `suit premises'). In this manner the Plaintiff became the tenant of both the floors. A suit for eviction in respect of the Mezzanine Floor was filed by the Defendant in the year 2000 which suit has already been decreed. The Plaintiff has been evicted from the premises through the Court Bailiff. This suit, thereforee, concerns the First Floor premises, and has been filed on 30th December, 2000 which is a fortnight after the aforementioned evi...

Air Vice Marshal Harish Masand Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 119(2005)DLT152

Vijender Jain, J. 1. Rule D.B. 2. We have two petitions on identical ground; the one which we are dealing and other by Air Vice Marshal T.S. Chhatwal [WP (C) No. 879/2004]. We are writing a separate judgment as both the petitions are argued separately. thereforee, the legal points which are common in both the petitions are not repeated in the judgment of AVM Chhatwal, same may be read as recorded here. The present writ petition has been filed by Air Vice Marshal Harish Masand, who joined the Air Force as Fighter Pilot in 1967. It was stated that he participated in Indo-Pak War and shot down a Pakistani Sabre Jet over Dhaka on 4th December, 1971. On account of his valour and gallantry, he was decorated with Vir Chakra. In 1974 the petitioner went for All Purpose Flying Instructor course and stood first in all the disciplines. According to the petitioner, the record set by the petitioner has not ye been touched by any officer in the entire Air Force till date. In 1975 the petitioner was ...

Sanjay Relan Vs. State Through Cbi

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2005CriLJ1287; 115(2004)DLT318

B.N. Chaturvedi, J.1. The petitioner is an accused in case RC 10(S)/2001-SIU.I/CBI/SIC.I/New Delhi under Sections 120-B, 380, 420, 467, 468, and 471 IPC. Apprehending his arrest in connection therewith, he has approached this Court for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. 2. The chargesheet unfolds that in the course of investigation of a case RC No. 4(B), 2000/SI.I/SIC.I/CBI where 100 manual double sector tickets of Indian Airlines Limited(IAL) were found missing/stolen from IGI Airport, New Delhi and fraudulent refunds had been claimed against the same, the Investigating Officer came across with another theft of ten double sector manual Indian Airlines tickets bearing No. 05822200475190 to 0582200475199 from Indian Airlines Office, Lucknow Airport, Lucknow. It was gathered that these ten stolen tickets were got re-routed/re-issued at various IAL Offices in and around Delhi and fraudulent refunds obtained from various IAL booking offices in Delhi against them. In the circumstan...

S.M. Gupta Vs. Oriental Bank of Commerce and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 115(2004)DLT257; [2003(96)FLR1121]; (2005)ILLJ1063Del

Manmohan Sarin, J.1. Petitioner by this writ petition seeks a writ of mandamus directing the respondent bank to release and pay, subsistence allowance for the period from 25.5.1995 to 9.12.2002. Petitioner pursuant to a departmental enquiry had been dismissed from service, vide order dated 25.5.1995. The said order of dismissal was set aside on 10.12.2002. Hence the claim for subsistence allowance for the period from 25.5.1995 to 9.12.2002. Petitioner additionally seeks release of part of the subsistence allowance for the earlier period from 1.11.1992 to 25.5.1995 which has been retained by the bank under lien for the alleged frauds perpetuated by the petitioner, as set out in letter dated 18.3.1997, Annexure P-10. Petitioner also seeks a direction for reimbursement of medical expenses. 2. Petitioner who had joined service with respondent bank as a Clerk, advanced in career and reached the position of Manager. He was posted at Branch office at Gurgaon. 3. A complaint was filed by respo...

Sharma and Associates Contractors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Progressive Constructi ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2004(3)ARBLR485(Delhi)

Vikramajit Sen, J.1. The question that has been raised is whether it was possible for the learned Arbitrator to base his Award on three principles-(a) incorporation, (b) implied theory, and (c) unjust enrichment and constructive trust. The Award has been challenged on the grounds that it is contrary to the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajasthan State Mines & Minerals Ltd. v. Eastern Engineering Enterprises and Anr., : AIR1999SC3627 ; Associated Engineering Co. v. Govt. of A.P., : [1991]2SCR924 ; Sikkim Subba Associates v. State of Sikkim, : [2001]3SCR261 ; New India Civil Erectors v. ONGC : [1997]2SCR86 ; V.G. George v. Indian Rare Earths Ltd. : [1999]2SCR531 ; Steel Authority of India v. J.C. Budharaja : AIR1999SC3275 ; Continental Construction v. State of M.P. : [1988]3SCR103 and Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. v. SAW Pipes Ltd. : [2003]3SCR691 . It is contended that the learned Arbitrator has erroneously introduced principles of equity and constructive trust in the...

National Seeds Corporation Vs. Ram Kumar

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

J.D. Kapoor, President: 1. Appellant is a Government Public Sector Undertaking and is engaged in the sales of seeds presumably of high quality and largely for the benefits of farmers. It has been directed to pay Rs. 35,000/- towards loss the respondent suffered who owns about 17 acres of agricultural land on account of poor quality of seeds supplied by the appellant vide order dated 2.5.2000 passed by the District Forum. Feeling aggrieved the appellant has preferred this appeal. 2. Admittedly the respondent purchased seeds from the appellant for muskmelon for a sum of Rs. 3,375/- on the assurance shelled out by the appellant through advertisement that seeds sold by them are of very high quality. However, when the respondent sowed the seeds these did not properly germinate and develop. He made complaint to the appellant in this regard and one officer of the appellant visited the field of the respondent and found the claim of the respondent true and genuine. 3. Respondent had sowed these...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Unipatch Rubber Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(181)ELT109TriDel

1. In this appeal the Revenue has made challenge to the impugned Order-in-Appeal of the Commissioner (Appeals) vide which he has set aside the confiscation and imposition of the redemption fine, in respect of the seized goods after reversing the order-in-original. He has also reduced the penalty to Rs. 2,000/- under Rule 226, on the respondents.2. The learned SDR has contended that, since the goods were not entered in the RG-1 Register by the respondents and were found lying in the factory premises at the time of visit of the Officers on 25-10-1997, these were liable to be confiscated. He has also placed reliance on the ratio of the law laid down in the case of (1) Blue Blends (India) Ltd. v. CCE, Ahmedabad, [2004 (163) E.L.T. 238] (2) LML Ltd. v. CCE, [1992 (61) E.L.T. 249 (All)] and (3) Supreme Vinyl Films Ltd. v. CCE, Indore, [2003 (155) E.L.T. 304 (T)].3. I have heard both sides and gone through the record. From the record, it is evident that the goods found excess were manufactur...

Ho Seong Park Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(180)ELT420TriDel

1. Both the above captioned appeals have been directed against the common impugned order-in-original vide which confiscation of the Indian currency, foreign currency, Nepalese goods and one car have been ordered besides imposition of personal penalties on both the appellants, as detailed therein.2. I have heard both sides and gone through the record. The facts are not much in dispute. The appellant No. 1 is a Swiss national. He happened to visit India in 17th May, 2003. He was intercepted while travelling in a car bearing No. UP65-H-8448 on Sonauli-Gorakhpur highway near Sampatia. On conducting his search Swiss Francs 36,415/- and US $ 44 were recovered. Indian currency of Rs. 1,27,900/-, Nepalese goods and one idol of Lord Ganesh were also recovered which were seized and the adjudicating authority has ordered the same to be confiscated.The authority has allowed the redemption of some of the currencies on payment of redemption fine and imposed personal penalty of Rs. 1 lakh on appella...