Delhi Court May 2008 Judgments

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Mohinder Lal Haryani

Court: Delhi

Reported in: [2008]307ITR348(Delhi)

1. The Revenue is aggrieved by an order dated February 24, 2006, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'B' Delhi in IT (SS) 362 (Delhi) of 2004 and IT (SS) 153 (Delhi) of 2005 relevant for the block period April 1, 1995 to February 26, 2002.2. A search and seizure operation was carried out in respect of Deepsons group of cases which included the assessee. The premises of the assessee were searched on February 26, 2002, and the Income-tax Department recovered a voucher which showed certain payments having been made by the assessee to M/s. Mulberry Silk Affairs. Some jewellery was also found in the premises.3. In so far as the document is concerned, the assessee denied knowledge of the document and in addition submitted that the firm M/s. Mulberry Silk Affairs had closed down several years ago. An affidavit was also submitted in this regard. As regards the jewellery, the assessee explained that he is from an affluent family and that apart Mrs. Asha Devi, the wife of th...

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nirabjit Kaur W/O. Late Sh. Devendar S ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2010ACJ121

V.B. Gupta, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act,1988 (for short as the 'Act') filed by National Insurance Ltd. against the order dated 13.09.05, passed by Ms. Ravinder Kaur, Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short as 'Tribunal'), Delhi.2. Facts in brief necessary for disposal of the present appeal are that on 25.12.03 at about 8.30p.m., the deceased, Sh. Devender Singh along with his wife was returning back to his home from the Gurudwara situated at Rajouri Garden. When they were crossing the Ring Road near the aforesaid Gurudwara, all of a sudden the offending vehicle tempo No. DL-IL-B-5759, driven rashly and negligently by its driver, came and hit the deceased. As a result, the deceased fell down on the pavement and sustained grievous injuries all over his body. After hitting, the driver of the said offending vehicle sped away towards Raja Garden along with the offending vehicle and Devender Singh was rushed to Kukreja Hospital in a precarious ...

The Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shri Ram Pistons and Rings Ltd.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: (2008)220CTR(Del)404

Madan B. Lokur, J.1. On 30th April, 2008 we had noticed that the question referred for our opinion as formulated in paragraph 15.1 of the Statement of Case has been wrongly framed. There is no dispute about this in so far as both learned Counsel for the parties are concerned. Consequently, on a reading of the facts mentioned in paragraph 15 of the Statement of Case we frame the following question of law:Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in disallowing sales incentive claimed by the assessed under the incentive scheme which had expired on 30th April, 1981 but which continued till 30th June, 1981 as having no relevance for the Assessment Year 1983-84?2. The question arises in the following circumstances: The assessed maintains its accounts on a mercantile basis. It had floated a scheme, which was valid until 30th April, 1981 and in terms of which the assessed was liable to pay to its dealers in cash an incentive for the sales made. The scheme was initially up t...

Nishraj Traders (P.) Ltd. Vs. Madhu Viniyog (P.) Ltd.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: (2008)4CompLJ173(Del); [2008]86SCL116(Delhi)

ORDERS.N. Aggarwal, J.1. M/s. Nishraj Traders (P.) Ltd.' (hereinafter to be referred as 'the transferor-company') and 'M/s Madhu Viniyog (P.) Ltd.' (hereinafter to be referred as 'the transferee-company') have jointly filed this petition under Sections 391(2) and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 seeking sanction of the proposed scheme of amalgamation for amalgamation of the transferor-company with the transferee-company.2. The proposed scheme of amalgamation has been filed along with the present petition and the same has been perused by this Court.3. The transferor-company was incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 as a Private Limited Company vide Certificate of Incorporation No. 21-64771 dated 29-8-1994 issued by the Registrar of Companies, West Bengal at Kolkata. The registered office of the company was shifted from the State of West Bengal to the NCT of Delhi as approved by the Company Law Board, Eastern Region Bench, Kolkata vide its order dated 28-11-2007. The transferor-compan...

In Re: Radima Exports (P.) Ltd.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: [2009]148CompCas473(Delhi); [2008]86SCL151(Delhi)

S.N. Aggarwal, J.1. The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 560(6) of the Companies Act, 1956 seeking directions to the respondent (Registrar of Companies) to restore its name to the register of the companies. Briefly stated the facts of the case are as follow:Petitioner No. 1 is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. Petitioner No. 2 is stated to be one of its directors. Petitioner No. 1 company was incorporated on 18-11 -1992 and was got registered with the Registrar of Companies, NCT of Delhi and Haryana vide registration certificate No. 55-51015. Petitioner No. 1 company was incorporated with the main object of importing, exporting, selling, buying etc. of handicrafts, handloom materials, jewellary of all kinds etc. The authorized share-capital of petitioner No. 1 company was Rs. 1 lakh divided into 10,000 equity shares of Rs. 10 each. The issued, subscribed and paid up capital of petitioner No. 1 company was Rs. 2,000 divided into 200 equity shares of...

In Re: Sunehari Financial Services (P.) Ltd.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: [2009]89SCL235(Delhi)

ORDERS.N. Aggarwal, J.1. 'M/s. Sunehari Financial Services Pvt. Ltd.' (hereinafter to be referred as the 'transferor-company') and 'M/s. Sunehari Exports Ltd.' (hereinafter to be referred as the 'transferee-company') have jointly filed this petition under Sections 391(2) and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 seeking sanction of the proposed scheme of amalgamation for amalgamation of the transferor-company with the transferee-company.2. The proposed scheme of amalgamation has been filed along with the present petition and the same has been perused by this Court.3. The transferor company was incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 as a Public Limited Company vide Certificate of Incorporation No. 55-61985, dated 6-10-1984 issued by the Registrar of Companies, Delhi and Haryana at New Delhi. Later on the transferor-company was converted into a Private Limited Company and its name was changed to 'Sunehari Financial Services Pvt. Ltd.' vide fresh certificate of incorporation dated 12-1-2004 ...

Daud A. Dawood Vs. Director, Enforcement Directorate

Court: Appellate Tribunal for foreign Exchange New Delhi

O.P. Nahar, Chairperson. - In these appeals, an application for review is separately filed seeking recall of order dated 11-12-2007 passed by this Tribunal whereby these three appeals are dismissed for non-compliance of the pre-deposit order dated 8-3-2004 of this Tribunal which is further maintained when challenged before Honble High Court of Rajasthan. 2-3 We heard Shri Ajay Majithia, Advocate, on behalf of the appellants/applicants and Shri A.C. Singh, DLA, on behalf of Enforcement Directorate. Shri Ajay Majithia, Advocate, has argued that for doing complete justice to the applicants it is but necessary for this Tribunal to recall the dismissal order and to rehear the application for dispensation of pre-deposit because appellants are suffering from total financial disability and are unable to make any pre-deposit of penalty. 4. These applicants have filed application for review under section 28(2)(f) Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, seeking recall of the dismissal order and al...

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Raj Bala W/O Shri Nanak Chand,

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2009ACJ2116

V.B. Gupta, J.1. The present appeal has been filed by National Insurance Ltd. against the Interim Award passed under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short as the 'Act') dated 12.03.08, by Dr. T.R. Naval, Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short as 'Tribunal'), Karkardooma, Shahdara, Delhi.2. Brief facts are that on 11.02.07, the deceased Sh. Umesh Kumar was going on his cycle, when he reached at National Highway No. 24, near Toll Tax, Gazipur, Delhi, the offending Truck bearing No. RJ-14-2G-7677 hit the deceased from the back side resulting in his death. The accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the truck driver.3. Appellant in its written statement admitted that offending vehicle was insured with it vide insurance policy which was valid for the period 26.04.06 to 25.04.07.4. Vide impugned order, the Ld. Tribunal has granted interim compensation of Rs. 50,000/- along with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of the petition i.e. 21...

Narendra Kumar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2008(103)DRJ294

Vikramajit Sen, J.WP(Crl.)509/19961. The Prayers in this writ petition are for the quashing of the Detention Order dated 19.12.1974 passed under Section 3(1) of Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (for short COFEPOSA Act); for quashing of the Order dated 29.5.1978 under Section 19(1) of Smugglers & Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976 (for short SAFEMA); and for restraining the respondent from acquiring/dispossessing petitioner's properties, namely, house property municipal No. 1115/X-5, Dhab Khatika, RB Saindas Road, Amritsar and factory premises bearing No. 31, Khasra No. 745, Jawahar Nagar, Batala Road, Amritsar along with some machinery installed therein and for passing any other appropriate order that may be equitable and just. Notably, the Petitioner has not filed a copy of the impugned Order dated 29.5.1978 allegedly passed under Section 19(1) of SAFEMA. 2. It needs to be clarified at the threshold that De...

Delhi Development Authority Through Its Vice-chairman Vs. Prof. Ram Pr ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2008(103)DRJ57

Madan B. Lokur, J.1. The Delhi Development Authority (for short DDA) is aggrieved by a judgment and order dated 17th August, 2007 passed by a learned Single Judge in WP(C) No. 8464/2006.2. The broad facts of the case are that the respondent his mother and wife purchased a property bearing No.7, Community Centre, East of Kailash, New Delhi in an open auction held by the DDA on 10th August, 1969. Possession of the property was then given to the purchasers and a lease deed was also executed in their favor by the DDA.3. After the demise of the Respondent?s mother and wife, the property devolved upon the Respondent and other legal heirs.4. On 17th February, 2004 the Respondent and other legal heirs requested the DDA to mutate the property in their favor. In response, the DDA sent a letter dated 20th May, 2004 raising a demand for misuse charges to the extent of Rs. 1.78 crores for the period from 30th July, 1983 to 5th February, 2003. It was stated by the DDA that in the event misuse charge...