Delhi Court May 2004 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.
Abro Industries Inc. Vs. K.V. International and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-27-2004
Reported in: 111(2004)DLT826; 2004(75)DRJ361; 2004(29)PTC243(Del)
Mukundakam Sharma, J. 1. The decree-holder has filed the present execution petition praying for execution of the decree for a sum of Rs. 35 lakhs together with interest thereon at the rate of 18% per annum from November 9, 2002 up to the date of payment and also the cost of taking out the execution. 2. The decree-holder/plaintiff No.1 filed a suit in this court against the judgment debtors/defendants seeking for a decree restraining passing of the goods of the defendants as that of the plaintiff and also for restraining infringement of copyright and also for a decree of rendition of accounts and for payment of damages. The subject-matter of the suit included misuse of the decree-holder's mark `ABRO' by the judgment debtors by use of the marks `ABRO' and `ABRO'. During the pendency of the aforesaid suit in this court the parties arrived at a settlement out of court. The terms and conditions of settlement between the parties were recorded in a settlement deed executed between the parties...
Surender Saini Vs. D.D.A.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-27-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Delhi402; 111(2004)DLT791; 2004(75)DRJ13
Vikramajit Sen, J.1. The Petitioners have prayed for the quashing of the impugned notices, inter alias that bearing Reference No. 32 (1177) 87/PV/NP/16020 dated 5.1.2004, in respect of immovable properties at Paschim Vihar, New Delhi and for restraining the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) from contemplating any action on the basis of these notices, presumably of their eviction.2. Succinctly stated, the precursor of the events which have led to the filing of these petitions is the Order passed by my Learned Brother Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J. on 16.10.2003 whereby the DDA and the MCD had been directed to inspect the area in question, i.e., Paschim Vihar, New Delhi, and take action in accordance with law both in respect of unathorised constructionand misuser. These Authorities had been enjoined to complete the action within three months and to file a Compliance Report within fifteen days thereafter. An inspection of the area was carried out and Show Cause notices were issued to the owners a...
Dr. R.K. Sharma Vs. University of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-27-2004
Reported in: 112(2004)DLT88; 2004(75)DRJ17; 2005(1)SLJ302(Delhi)
Pradeep Nandrajog, J.1. Petitioner seeks to impugn letters dated 15.5.2003 and 13.6.2003 addressed to Shyamlal College (hereinafter referred to as the 'College') by the University of Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the 'University').2. Letter dated 15.5.2003 directs the college as under:- 'Shri Ravindra Kumar Gupta,Chairman, Governing Body, Shyam Lal College,c/o M/s. S.Chand & Co.7361, Ram Nagar,New Delhi- 110 055.Dear Sir,Please refer to your letter dated 16th April, 2003 addressed to the Vice-Chancellor, University of Delhi, Delhi sending therewith resolution of the Governing Body, Shyam Lal College, regarding appointment of the Principal of Shyam Lal College. In this connection, I am directed to inform you that the recommendation of the Governing Body of Shyam Lal College for the appointment of Dr. R.K. Sharma as Principal has not been approved by the competent authority. The college is directed to re-advertise the post of Principal immediately.'3. Letter dated 13.6.2003 directs t...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Vishwa Bharti Trading Corporation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-27-2004
Reported in: 2004(75)DRJ446; [2005]139STC154(Delhi)
B.C. Patel, C.J.1. At the instance of the Sales Tax Department, the Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question for consideration of this Court: 'Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that Malmeena laminated sheets were not covered by Entry No. 34 of the First Schedule, appended to Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975.' 2. The assessed is a dealer engaged in sale of laminated sheets. The Assessing Officer, on appreciation of evidence, arrived at a conclusion that the dealer was dealing in laminated sheets and, thereforee, the item was covered by Entry No. 34 of the First Schedule to the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975 which reads as under:'All types of glazed and virtue tiles, mosaic tiles, laminated sheets like Sun-mica Formica etc.'3. The Assistant Commissioner hearing the appeal upheld the finding recorded by the Sales Tax Officer assessing the dealer. The Appellate Tribunal in different appeals for different assessment years accepted the appeal and modified the order stating that...
Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Incom ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-27-2004
Reported in: (2004)190CTR(Del)553; [2005]278ITR312(Delhi)
B.C. Patel, C.J. 1. At the instance of the assessed as well as the Revenue, the Tribunal for asst. yrs. 1974-75 and 1975-76, has referred three questions which are as under :Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and on a true interpretation of Section 44 of the IT Act, 1961 r/w Rule 5 of the First Schedule to the said Act, the Tribunal was right in confirming the addition of the following amounts to the balance of profits disclosed by the annual accounts of the assessed-insurance company : (i) Tax deducted at source : Rs. 76,74,713(ii) Provision for taxation : Rs. 6,57,00,000--------------------Rs. 7,33,74,713-------------------- (This question is referred at the instance of the assessed for the asst. yr. 1974-75).2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that reserve for bad and doubtful debts cannot be added to the balance of profit disclosed in the annual accounts of the assessed-insurance company ...
Sita World Travels (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and anr ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-27-2004
Reported in: (2005)193CTR(Del)84; [2005]274ITR186(Delhi)
B.C. Patel, C.J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, inter alia, challenging the action of the respondent whereby in exercise of powers Under Section 147 of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), the AO reopened the assessment, and ultimately made the reassessment for years 1996-97 and 1997-98.2. The petitioner is a company which is engaged in the business of travel agency as a tour operator and is providing related services. The service rendered by the petitioner includes booking with hotels, airlines, railways and other transporters for tourists. For rendering such services, the petitioner receives commission from airlines.3. For the year ending on 31st March, 1996 as also 31st March, 1997, returns declaring income of Rs. 2,63,32,380 and Rs. 3,18,17,220 were filed on 29th Nov., 1996 and 28th Nov., 1997, respectively. In computation of the income for the aforesaid assessment years, claim was made Under Section 80HHD of the Act. For asst. yr. 1996-9...
Sita World Travel (India) Ltd. Vs. Cit
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-27-2004
Reported in: [2004]140TAXMAN381(Delhi)
B.C. Patel, CJ. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, inter alia, challenging the action of the respondent whereby in exercise of powers under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act'), the assessing officer reopened the assessment, and ultimately, made the reassessment for years 1996-97 and 1997-98.2. The petitioner is a company which is engaged in the business of travel agency as a tour operator and is providing related services. The service rendered by the petitioner includes booking with hotels, airlines, railways and other transporters for tourists. For rendering such services, the petitioner receives Commission from airlines.3. For the year ending on 31-3-1996 as also 31-3-1997, return declaring income of Rs. 2,63,32,380 and Rs. 3,18,17,220 were filed on 29-11-1996 and 28-11-1997 respectively. In computation of the income for the aforesaid assessment years, claim was made under section 80HHD of the Act. For Assessment year 1996-9...
Paharpur Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-26-2004
Reported in: (2004)(170)ELT169TriDel
1. The dispute is about eligibility of plastic pouches produced by the appellant for exemption under Notification No. 4/97. The exemption is subject to the following condition. "8. If no credit of the duty paid on the inputs used in the manufacture of such goods has been availed of by the manufacturer under Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944." 2. Under the impugned order, the exemption has been denied to the goods in question on the ground that its manufacture was not by M/s. Paharpur Industries Ltd., but was actually by M/s. HGF Laminates and that M/s.Paharpur Industries Ltd. is a dummy of M/s. HGF Laminates.3. The contention of the appellant is that the question as to who is the real manufacturer is wholly irrelevant for determining the dispute.During the hearing of the case today, learned Senior Counsel representing the appellants pointed out that the exemption has only one condition i.e. no Modvat credit should be availed of in respect of the duty paid on the inputs used i...
Portland Cement (i) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-26-2004
Reported in: (2004)(170)ELT590TriDel
1. These are four appeals filed by Portland Cement (India) Ltd. and others against Order-in-Original No. 3/Commr/LKO/99/ dated 25-6-1999.2. Shri R. Santhanam, learned Advocate, submitted that the Show Cause notice dated 17-9-1997 was issued by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Kanpur and was answerable to him only; that, however, the impugned order has been passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Lucknow without informing them as to how the matter has been adjudicated by the Commissioner, Lucknow; that further no personal hearing was granted to them by the Adjudicating Authority before passing the impugned order; that as such there has been gross violation of principle of natural justice and the order should be set aside.3. On the other hand, Shri Kumar Santosh, learned Senior Departmental Representative submitted that the show cause notice was issued on 17-9-1997 and was served upon the Appellants on 18-9-1997; that the Commissioner had fixed the matter for personal hearing o...
Friends Dyers and Processors Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-26-2004
Reported in: (2004)(170)ELT180TriDel
1. The appellant is a processor of textile fabrics. Such processors are liable to pay duty at compounded rates, based on the capacity of production of the machinery installed. The appellant was liable to pay duty at the compounded rate of Rs. 2.5 lakh per month. This amount was required to be paid at equal instalments of Rs. 1.25 lakh by the 20th of the relevant month arid 5th of the succeeding month in terms of Rule 96ZNC. On account of various financial difficulties, there was some delay on the part of the appellant in making the payments. The appellant made the payments and also paid interest of Rs. 15,536.80 @ 24% in respect of delay for the period May 2001 to February 2002. The lower authorities have imposed a penalty of Rs. 11,25,000/-for the delay.2. The submission of the appellant is that the penalty is discretionary and the lower authorities were not justified in imposing penalty equivalent to the duty amount, when the delays involved were only of a few days, ranging from 1 d...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »