Delhi Court July 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.
impsat (P) Ltd. Vs. Ito
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-28-2004
Reported in: (2004)91ITD354(Delhi)
1. In this appeal by the assessee, two questions arise for consideration: (1) whether a company whose name has been struck off from the register under Section 560 of the Companies Act, 1956 and was thus dissolved, be assessed to tax after dissolution? and (2) whether the amount of Rs. 1,65,29,255 is assessable Under Section 56(1) of the Income Tax Act as a casual and non-recurring receipt? 2. The assessee is a private limited company incorporated to implement the V. Sat project in India, in collaboration with Corporation Impsa S.A. of Argentina. In the financial years ended 31-3-1996 and 31-3-1997, it received share application monies from the Argentinian company in the amounts of Rs. 18,73,500 and Rs. 1,46,55,755 respectively. In the assessments made to income-tax upon the appellant for the assessment years 1996-97 and 1997-98 these amounts were accepted as having been genuinely received by it as share applicant monies pending allotment. On 24th October 2000, the Argentinian company ...
Megh Raj JaIn Vs. the Presiding Officer, Labour Court and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-28-2004
Reported in: 113(2004)DLT50; 2004(76)DRJ307
Mukundakam Sharma, J.1. The facts leading to filing of the W.P.(C) No. 529/1987and W.P.(C) 2954/2000 are inter-connected and the parties to the aforesaid two writ petitions are same. The issues arising out of the said writ petitions, thereforee, being the similar and common they were taken up for consideration on the same day and, thereforee, both the writ petitions are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. However, before discussing the issues which arise for my consideration, it would be appropriate to deal with the factual matrix leading to filing of both the aforesaid writ petitions.W.P. (C) 529/19872. The aforesaid writ petition was registered on the basis of the writ petition filed by the petitioner challenging the legality and validity of the order passed by the learned Labour Court in its order dated 30th May, 1986. The said case was registered in the Labour Court on the basis of an application filed by the petitioner under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Dispu...
S.S. Lal Vs. Vishnu Mitter Govil
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-28-2004
Reported in: 112(2004)DLT877; 2004(76)DRJ116; (2004)138PLR31
Vijender Jain, J.1. Learned Counsel for the appellant has impugned the order passed by the learned Single Judge on March 23,2004 disallowing the application of the appellant by which the appellant took the plea that the probate petition was barred by limitation.2. It was argued by the learned Counsel for the appellant that in view of Kerala State Electricity Board v. T.P. Kunhaliumma, : [1977]1SCR996 , where the Supreme Court held as under :'The conclusion we reach is that Article 137 of the 1963 Limitation Act will apply to any petition or application filed under any Act to a civil Court. With respect, we differ from the view taken by the two Judge Bench of this Court in Athani Municipal Council case : (1969)IILLJ651SC (supra) and hold that Article 137 of the 1963 Limitation Act is not confined to applications contemplated by or under the Code of Civil Procedure. The petition in the present case was to the District Judge as a Court. The petition was one contemplated by the Telegraph A...
Sudarshan Telecom Vs. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-28-2004
Reported in: 113(2004)DLT858; 2004(76)DRJ661
Mukul Mudgal, J.1. This is an petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996(hereinafter referred to as the `Act') for appointment of an independent arbitrator and discloses the indifference of the public sector undertakings on their belated response to the request for appointment of an arbitrator and the consequences thereof. 2. The parties to this petition entered into a tender/contract for purchase of 12 Fibre(12F) and 24Fibre(24F) Optical Fibre Cables by the respondents. The petitioner is the supplier and the purchaser/respondent is the Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited. Clause 20.1 of the Agreement between the parties providing for settlement of disputes by way of arbitration reads as follows:-'Clause 20.1-In the event of any question, dispute or difference arising under this agreement or in connection therewith (except as to the matters, the decision to which is specifically provided under this agreement), the same shall be referred to the sole arbitration ...
Ram Mohan and Sons and ors. Vs. Cc
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-27-2004
Reported in: (2005)(100)ECC135
1. The issue raised in all these appeals is common. Accordingly they were taken up for hearing together and are disposed of under this common order.2. The appellants declared the goods in imported consignments as "completely pre-mutilated and fumigated old woollen rags "pre-mutilated and fumigated old woollen rags" "completely pre-mutilated synthetic rags" pre-mutilated rags etc. When the consignments were examined, it was observed that they consisted of old and used garments of various types/sizes/nature. The items were jackets/wind cheaters, coats, trousers, tops, shirts, baby garments etc. There was also variation found with regard to weight. Proceedings were, therefore initiated proposing confiscation of the goods for misdeclaration of description and value. These proceedings ended in the passing of the impugned order. The Adjudicating authorities confiscated the goods and allowed their redemption on payment of fine and penalty. Values were also enhanced for the purposes of assess...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Daksh Steels Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-27-2004
Reported in: (2004)(97)ECC439
1. Heard both sides. Revenue filed this appeal against adjudication order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Kanpur.2. The appellants (sic, respondents ) are engaged in the manufacture of M.S. Ingots of non-alloy steel and are working under the compounded levy scheme as per the Provisions of Section 3A of Central Excise Act.In the impugned order the Commissioner of Central Excise allowed the abatement of claim for the period 28.5.98 to 8.5.99.3. The contention of the Revenue is that as per the Provisions for abatement the manufacturer has to intimate the Revenue Authorities regarding the date of closure of the factory either prior to the closure or on the date of closure alongwith stock position and electricity meter reading.4. The respondents intimated the closure on 28.5.1998 and close the factory on the same date. Therefore, they are not entitled for abatement for 28.5.1998. The other contention of Revenue is that assessee had not intimated regarding stock position of th...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Avadh Alloys Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-27-2004
Reported in: (2004)(173)ELT34TriDel
1. In this appeal which has been filed by the Revenue against the impugned order-in-appeal, the issue relates to the date from which the interest on the service tax amount is payable by the respondents.2. The learned JDR has contended that since the amendment in the service lax for validating the provisions of Sub-clauses (xii) and (xvii) of Clause (d) of Sub-rule (1) of Rule 2 of the Service Tax Rules was given retrospective effect by the Legislature as is evident from Section 117 of the Finance Act, 2000. Interest on the service tax amount became payable by the respondents from the date on which the service tax became payable by the respondents. But in my view, this contention of the learned JDR cannot be accepted in view of Clause (ii) of Section 117 of the Finance Act which clearly enacts that any service tax refunded in pursuance of any judgment, decree or order of any court striking down Sub-clauses (xii) and (xvii) of Clause (d) of Sub-rule (1) of Rule 2 of Service Tax Rules, 1...
Shivani Piles Vs. Asstt. Cit
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-27-2004
Reported in: (2005)1SOT92(Delhi)
Both these appeals by the assessee are directed against the order of CIT (A)-IV, New Delhi dated 22-2-1999 for assessment years 1995-96 and 1996-97 on the following common grounds : "1. That the assessment order is replete with prejudicial observations which are other unfounded or the same are not susceptible of giving rise to adverse conclusions. 2. That the learned Asstt. CIT erred in not allowing full remunerations to the partners as per Para 8 of the Deed of Partnership subject to limit prescribed under section 40(b) of the Income Tax Act." We have heard learned representatives of both the parties and gone through the observation of authorities below. The facts as taken from the record are that the assessing officer noted that assessee has debited Rs. 24,429 towards interest paid to partner and paid Rs. 18,677 towards remuneration to the partners in the assessment year 1995-96 in the profit and loss account attached with the return of income.Similarly, the assessing officer noted ...
Mangali Enterprises Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-27-2004
Reported in: [2005]123CompCas341(Delhi); 2004(76)DRJ71; [2006]65SCL1(Delhi)
Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J. 1. Rule. 2. Learned counsel for the respondent accepts notice of rule. 3. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the petition is take up for final disposal. 4. M/s Mangali Ceramics Limited was a limited company which had a certificate of importer/exporter dated 12.5.2000 issued from file No. 05/04/130/00748 /AM93 dated 04.06.1992 and was assigned IEC No. 0592005372. The petitioner along with the requisite documents filed an application dated 19.6.2004 for allotment of the said code to the petitioner. This was naturally done with the consent of M/s Mangali Ceramics Limited. 5. The petitioner did not receive any response and sent a reminder dated 5.8.2003 followed by reminders dated 25.8.2003 and 10.9.2003. It may be mentioned that in the letter dated 25.8.2003, the petitioner had mentioned that they have come to know that application of the petitioner was not processed on some misapprehension of a wrongful claim of DEPB. The letter categorically stat...
Shri Harvinder Pal Singh Vs. Dashmesh Public School and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-27-2004
Reported in: 113(2004)DLT66; 2004(76)DRJ69
Manmohan Sarin, J.1. Rule. With the consent of the parties, writ petition is taken up for disposal. 2. Petitioner by this writ petition assails the order dated 6.12.2001 (wrongly typed as 18.10.2001), passed by the Delhi School Tribunal. Petitioner further seeks a direction to the respondent to reinstate him with benefits such as arrears of salary with interest, seniority, continuity in service etc. 3. Petitioner's case is that he had joined the Dashmesh Public School as a Trained Graduate Teacher (TGT) on 26.7.1991 in the pay scale of Rs. 1400-2600/-. No appointment letter was issued, despite request, on the plea that it would be issued only after the approval of the Directorate of Education. It is the petitioner's case that instead of the salary, as per scale, he was paid Rs.1,000/- per month on the plea that every teacher must contribute to the building fund etc. The salary used to be given by bearar cheque, which was withdrawn by the respondents themselves and thereupon petitioner ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »