Delhi Court July 2006 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.
Dy. Cit, Non Resident Circle, New Delhi Vs. Metapath Software Internat ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-28-2006
Reported in: [2006]9SOT305(NULL)
ORDERN.V. Vasudevan, J.M.IT Appeal No. 1797 (Delhi) of 2001 is an appeal by the Revenue against the order dated 13-2-2001 of the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-XXIV, New Delhi, relating to assessment years 1997-98. The assessed has filed a cross objection against the very same order of the Commissioner (Appeals). First we shall take up for consideration the appeal by the revenue, namely, IT Appeal No. 1797 (Delhi) of 2001.2. The assessed is a company incorporated under the laws of United Kingdom ('UK') and is a leading provider of software solutions to wireless communication providers. A notice under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Non Resident Circle, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as learned Assessing Officer) to the assessed on 3-11-1999. Pursuant to the notice, the assessed filed a letter (dated 17-11-1999) submitting that it did not constitute a Permanent Establishment ('...
Safari International and anr. Vs. Subhash Gupta and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-28-2006
Reported in: 2006(33)PTC616(Del)
Anil Kumar, J.1. The petitioner has impugned the order of Intellectual Property Appellate Board dated 9th March, 2006 dismissing the application of petitioner for rectification of respondent No. 1's trade 'mark 'Safari' under Sections 46, 47(4) and 56 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 on the ground that the registration of the trade mark 'Safari' was obtained by respondent No. 1 without any bona fide intention and mark was obtained by playing fraud on the Registrar of Trade Marks as well as on the honest members of trade and business.2. The respondent No. 1 had invented the word 'Safari' and used trade mark for his tricycles, bicycles and baby cycles under this sole proprietorship concern, M/s. Shagun Udyog, since 1974. In 1979, he filed an application for the registration of the mark 'Safari' in class 12 which was registered under No. 348920 in class 12 in July 1988 and the certificate was issued to respondent No. 1. During the pendency of the application for registration a...
Dewsoft Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-27-2006
Reported in: (2007)6STT175
2. The service tax demand is on the ground that the appellant is rendering "on-line information and data base access or retrieval service". While the total service tax demand is about Rs. 3 crores, there is a penalty of twice the amount. Out of this, the appellant has already deposited an amount of Rs. 1.11 crores.3. The contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that the demand is not sustainable on merits. It is being pointed out that the appellant is providing on-line education service and not data base access service. It is being pointed out that subjects taught range from computer language, programming and providing computer service like website creation.4. It is also being pointed out that amount already deposited is sufficient to meet the tax demand on the entire amount collected by the appellant.5. The learned SDR would point out that going by the appellant's objective, the service provided by them goes beyond pure education.6. The perusal of the materials presente...
Malpani Finance Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-27-2006
Reported in: (2007)7STT204
2. The applicant filed this application for waiver of pre-deposit of service tax of Rs. 63,800/- and penalties.3. The contention of the applicant is that the service tax is demanded by considering the applicant as providing service of business auxiliary. The contention is that with effect from 10-9-2004, they are covered under this service. Prior to this date, the demand is not sustainable. The contention is that they are entered into an agreement with the ICICI bank to promote retail finance activities of the bank.The contention is that prior to 10-9-2004, they were not covered under the scope of business auxiliary service.4. The contention of the Revenue is that as per definition, the business auxiliary service means promoting and marketing the services provided by the client. The contention is that as the applicant is introducing the customers to ICICI bank for their retail finance and, therefore, are covered under the business of auxiliary service.5. In the present case, the appli...
Venus Stampings (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-27-2006
Reported in: (2008)10STR542
1. These appeals are directed against the order in appeal-dated 31-5-2004 and 24-6-2004, which upheld the orders disallowing the Modvat, credit to the appellants. Since the issues involved in both the cases are identical, the appeals are taken up together and disposed of by a common order.2. The relevant facts that arise for consideration are that the appellants availed Modvat/Cenvat credit on the invoices issued by registered dealer M/s. EBG India Pvt. Ltd., Faridabad. The revenue authorities issued a show cause notice to the appellants directing them to show cause as to why the credit should not be denied to them on the ground that the said registered dealer had taken over a running firm Raymond Ltd. along with the depot at Faridabad and the M/s. EBG India were not permitted by the authorities for transfer of credit lying unutilized in the RG 23D registers. Appellants contested the show cause notice on the ground that the have received and consumed the inputs and the duty paying doc...
Mr. P. Jayantilal Shah (Deceased Through Lrs) and anr. Vs. Mr. Ramakan ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-27-2006
Reported in: 131(2006)DLT388; 2006(91)DRJ761
Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.1. The Revision petition is directed against the order passed by the Additional Rent Controller dated 6.12.1999 declining leave to defend the eviction proceedings filed by the respondent/landlord under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act).2. The landlord claimed in the eviction petition that the property in question was originally owned by M/s. M.L. Sanoriya & Sons, HUF consisting of Shri M.L. Sanoriya and his only son Shri Sajjan Sanoriya. Shri Sajjan Sanoria in turn had three sons, Ramakant Sanoriya, the petitioner in the eviction petition, Shri Suresh Kumar Sanoriya and Shri Hemant Sanoriya. All these persons are stated to be residing in various portions of property bearing No. 2/44, Roop Nagar, Delhi. The petitioner, tenant herein is stated to be in occupation of the back side of the first floor labelled as flat No. 2. The premises was stated to be let out for residential purposes and it is stated that,...
Capt. Raj Kumar Singhal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-27-2006
Reported in: 2006(92)DRJ383
G.S. Sistani, J.1. The petitioner has in the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India prayed for quashing of the order of discharge from service dated 20.4.1990 passed against the petitioner being arbitrary, illegal and unjustified and directing the reinstatement of the petitioner into service with all consequential benefits including seniority in service. The case of the petitioner, as set out in the petition is that he was recruited into the Indian Air Force on 6.1.1982 as airman in driver's trade. The petitioner was thereafter promoted to the rank of corporal on 5.1.1986. 2. On 14.8.1984 the respondents had issued a policy letter for compulsory discharge of persons, who were habitual offenders, on the ground that their services were no longer required. It is submitted that the petitioner was issued a show cause notice dated 4.10.1989 and on the basis of the said show cause notice the petitioner was compulsorily retired prematurely and discharge certificate dated 21.10...
Smt. Jasbir Kaur Vs. State (Govt. of Nct Delhi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-27-2006
Reported in: 134(2006)DLT325; 2006(91)DRJ739
S.N. Aggarwal, J.1. The petitioner was married to Sardar Satinder Singh according to Sikh rites on 28.11.2004. After marriage, there was a matrimonial discord between the couple on account of which the petitioner left her matrimonial home and filed a complaint of harassment and misappropriation of her dowry and istri dhan articles by her husband and other members of her in-laws family. Learned Counsel for the petitioner says that the petitioner did not leave her matrimonial home of her own and according to him she was turned out of from her matrimonial home after giving beatings to her on 25.3.2005.2. The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that despite her complaint the police did not register a case under Section 406/498A/34 IPC against her husband and other members of her in-laws family. 3. In response to the notice of this writ petition, a status report has been filed by the respondents which reveals that a case under Section 406/498A/34 IPC has already been regist...
Lady IrwIn College Society and anr. Vs. Sushila Devi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-27-2006
Reported in: 133(2006)DLT175; [2006(111)FLR816]
Manju Goel, J.1. The petitioners in these writ petitions challenge the Award of the Presiding Officer, Labour Court No. II, Delhi in I.D.No. 250/2002 on the reference with the terms:Whether the services of Smt. Sushila Devi w/o Sh. Brajesh Rana and Smt. Saroj W/o Sh. Mahender Singh, have been terminated illegally and, or unjustifiably by the management, and if so, to what sum of money as monetary relief along with consequential benefits in terms of existing laws/Government notification and to what other relief they entitled and what directions are necessary in this respect.2. The Award says that Mrs. Sushila Devi was working as a Teacher w.e.f. 23.10.1990 and that from 1.1.2001 she was not being paid her salary despite notice given by her Mrs. Saroj, the other 'workman' before the Labour Court was appointed as a Helper Teacher with the respondent. She was also claiming her salary w.e.f. 1.1.2001. The Award says that the management was proceeded ex parte as no one appeared on behalf of ...
Umed Singh (Deceased) Through Lrs. Vs. M.G.F. Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-27-2006
Reported in: 2009(93)DRJ44; (2007)145PLR9
A.K. Sikri, J.1. Sh. Umed Singh had got a vehicle bearing No. HR-13-0187 on hire purchase basis through the respondent Motor and General Finance Limited in April, 1991. Total cost of the said vehicle was Rs. 2,05,000/-. He availed a finance of Rs. 1,25,000/-. This amount was to be repaid to the respondent in 23 equal installments of Rs. 7,300/- and these installments were inclusive of interest and other incidental charges. The petitioner made payment of 18 installments up to March, 1993. Unfortunately at that time the vehicle met with an accident which occurred on 21st March, 1993. Since the earning of the petitioner Umed Singh was dependent on this vehicle, due to this accident his business came to standstill and his earning got a severe beating. He, thereforee, could not pay remaining five installments. The respondent re-possessed the vehicle, obtained claim from the insurance company and also sold the vehicle.2. As Umed Singh, died, his legal representatives have filed this petition...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »