Delhi Court August 2008 Judgments

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Realest Builders and Services Ltd.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: [2009]308ITR246(Delhi); [2009]178TAXMAN163(Delhi)

Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.1. This appeal filed by the Revenue pertains to the assessment year 2001-02 and arises out of the order dated June 22, 2006, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to 'the Tribunal') in I.T.A. No. 1516/Delhi/2004. The Revenue's appeal before the Tribunal involved the question whether the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) had erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 32,90,820 made by the Assessing Officer after disallowing the deduction claimed in respect of bad debts to the said extent written off by the assessee in the year in question.2. The facts are that the assessee had given a sum of Rs. 50 lakhs to Sahani Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. The interest accrued on such an advance was assessed to tax as business income in the assessment years 1997-98 to 1999-2000. The debtor-company suffered a heavy loss due to a fire which broke out in its factory premises in March, 2000. The financial position of the debtor-company deteriorated to s...

G.P. Sewalia Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through the

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. G.P. Sewalia, the applicant herein, while functioning as Chairman and Managing Director (CMD) of Delhi Scheduled Castes Financial and Development Corporation Limited (DSCFDCL), during the year 1992 ordered investment of Rs. 11 crores, Rs. 1.50 crores and Rs. 3.75 crores respectively with the Syndicate Bank under Portfolio Management Scheme (PMS). He received a memorandum dated 23.8.1999 (Annexure A-2) proposing to hold departmental enquiry against him under Rule 8 of the All India Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1969. Annexed with the memorandum aforesaid as Annexures-I and II were the article of charge and the statement of imputation of misconduct against him.2. Briefly put, the applicant was departmentally tried on the allegations that he was not authorised to invest the surplus funds of DSCFDCL in scheme like PMS without guaranteeing a pre-determined return, and inasmuch as, he had made a fluctuating investment for long term (one year) for a yield of 16.25% per annum, ...

East West Rescue Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dr. Narender Singh

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2008(3)ARBLR623(Delhi); 153(2008)DLT195; 2008(106)DRJ689

Hima Kohli, J.1. The present petition is filed by the petitioner under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short the Act) praying inter alia for appointing the respondent No. 1 as the guardian ad-litem for minor respondents No. 2 & 3 in the arbitral proceedings, pending before the learned Arbitrator, Justice R.L. Khurana (Retd.). Before dealing with the submissions of the respective parties, it would be appropriate to advert to the relevant facts of the present case.2. It is the case of the petitioner that it renders medical services in various parts of India and abroad. It has its registered office at Delhi, carries on its business at Delhi and makes all appointments of its medical and non-medical staff at Delhi. The terms and conditions of service governing the medical and non-medical staff are enclosed with the petition. Clauses 5 and 6 of the service conditions which are relevant for the purposes of the present petition are reproduced as under:5. In case of ...

Sh. Rajesh Kumar Aggarwal Vs. Sh. Pavneet Singh

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 153(2008)DLT121

Shiv Narayan Dhingra, J.1. By this petition, the petitioner has challenged an order of learned ADJ dated 25th September, 2007 allowing an appeal against order dated 23rd February, 2007 of the learned Civil Judge2. The brief facts relevant for disposing of this petition are that an ex parte decree was passed by the learned Civil Judge in respect of possession of property No. F-40/47, Model Town, Delhi on 6th March, 1990. While execution of this decree was pending, an application was filed on 25th January, 1994 under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC by one Sukhbir Singh, Advocate claiming to be General Power of Attorney of Satnam Kaur, JD. This application was dismissed by the learned Civil Judge vide his order dated 20th March, 2004 Against this order, the Attorney preferred an appeal and along with the appeal an application under Order 18 Rule 17 CPC was filed to produce certain additional documents. The application under Order 18 Rule 17 CPC was allowed by learned ADJ vide his order dated 2nd Dece...

State Vs. Lal Bahadur and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2008(106)DRJ328

S.L. Bhayana, J.1. The present appeal has been preferred by the State against the judgment dated 31.10.1990, in Sessions Case No. 12/1988, by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitted the respondents herein giving benefit of doubt and holding the prosecution to have failed to prove its case beyond all shadows of doubt. Respondents were acquitted from charges under Sections 147/149/449/436/302/395/396 IPC in respect of FIR No. 421/1984, PS Delhi Cantt. by the learned Sessions Judge, noticing, inter alia, delay in lodging FIR, non-mention of names of respondents-Virender and Ram Lal in the FIR as well as in the complaint. Further the factum of witnesses being interested witnesses coupled with delay in recording of statements of PW-4, PW-6 and PW-7 of 27 days. The State preferred the present appeal and leave to appeal was granted by this Court on 15.01.1992.2. This case is a sequel to the riots, which followed the assassination of late Prime Minister-Indira Gandhi on 31.10.198...

Shri Vijay Kumar Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 153(2008)DLT342

Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.1. Rule DB.2. At the request of the learned Counsels for the parties, the petition is taken up for final disposal.3. The petitioner was appointed as a Constable (GD) in ITBP on 2.4.1990. The Enforcement Directorate of ITBP issued a Memorandum dated 12.4.1991 in terms whereof the period spent on completion of course was to be treated as a period on duty. The object of the same is explained in the following terms:Dated: 12.04.91 MemoSub: Regarding arrangement of seats for training of Paramedical employees in courses like diploma in pharmacy, Lab-technicians and radiographer.We are in constant touch with various Institution of the country for past several years for the purpose of excellent training of our paramedical employees. In some of the institutions we have been allotted seats permanently; but, it has been observed that the eligibility conditions of these institutions do not suit our paramedical employees as a result of which we could not properly make use of t...

Cmdr. S.P. Puri Vs. Alankit Assignments Ltd.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2008(3)ARBLR465(Delhi); 2008(105)DRJ635

Sanjiv Khanna, J.1. The Objector, Cmdr. S.P. Puri (retd.) has filed objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, for short) challenging the Award dated 13th July, 2005 passed by the Arbitral Tribunal, consisting of three Arbitrators appointed by the National Stock Exchange of India Ltd.2. By the impugned Award, the Arbitral Tribunal has rejected claims of the Objector and allowed counter claim of respondent-M/s. Alankit Assignments Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'respondent or AAL', for short) of Rs. 32,72,631/- less Rs. 15,00,000/- deposited by the Objector as margin money.3. At the very outset I may point out that the learned Counsel for the respondent-AAL has admitted that there is a mistake/error in calculations made by the learned Arbitrators. Out of the total amount of Rs. 32,72,631/-, the respondent-AAL had realised Rs. 43,663.46 on 26th August, 2004 from sale of shares of Bhagyanagar Metals Ltd. and Rs. 24,675/...

Hb Leasing and Finance Co. Ltd. Vs. Mahavir Spinning Mills Ltd.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: IV(2008)BC398; 153(2008)DLT293; 2008(106)DRJ566

Hima Kohli, J. 1. The present suit has been instituted by the plaintiff against the defendant claiming a decree for possession in respect of a machinery known as 'Hydraulic Bricketting Press', in possession of the defendant and for a decree of recovery of Rs. 23,04,199/- against the defendant along with interest @ 18% per annum. Apart from the above, relief has also been sought by the plaintiff against the defendant for grant of a decree for recovery of mesne profits for use and occupation of the machine @ Rs. 700/- per month for the period w.e.f. 1.5.1992, till the date of putting the plaintiff in actual physical possession of the machine.2. At the very outset, counsel for the plaintiff submits that the plaintiff does not wish to press for the relief in respect of possession of the machine or recovery of mesne profits as prayed for in prayers (b) & (c) of the plaint. He submits that the present suit be confined to the reliefs sought for a decree of recovery with interest as prayed for...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Smt. Nilofer I. Singh

Court: Delhi

Reported in: [2009]309ITR233(Delhi); [2009]176TAXMAN252(Delhi)

Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.1. The revenue has filed this appeal against the order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal on 23-2-2007 in respect of the assessment year 1998-99. The learned counsel for the appellant proposed several questions but essentially two issues were canvassed before this Court. The first issue was with regard to the Tribunal deleting the addition of Rs. 34,72,000 on account of capital gains made by the Assessing Officer on the basis of the Valuation Officers' reports. The second issue was with regard to the Tribunal deleting the disallowance of Rs. 1,74,55,243 made by the Assessing Officer on account of bad debts claimed by the assessee.2. Insofar as the first issue is concerned, the facts are that the assessee sold two properties and disclosed capital gains of Rs. 21,17,357. One of the properties was a residential flat at Tilak Nagar, Dharti Co-operative Society, Chembur, Bombay and the other was a building bearing No. 227A, Sant Nagar, East of Kailash, New Del...

Shree Krishna Woolen Mills (P) Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2008(3)ARBLR477(Delhi); 2008(106)DRJ340

Hima Kohli, J.1. The present application is directed against the award dated 29.12.1984 passed by the learned Arbitrator in a dispute between the Union of India/objector and M/s Shree Krishna Woolen Mills (Pvt.) Ltd./contractor whereunder while the claims of the Union of India were dismissed, the claim of the contractor for balance 5% payment of the stores supplied to Union of India amounting to Rs. 73,554/- was allowed. 2. In a nutshell, the relevant facts of the case are that the DGS&D;/Union of India awarded a contract on 9.11.1971 to the petitioner/contractor for supply of 50,000 blankets. The specifications for delivery were stipulated in the tender and the contractor was required to complete the delivery by 31.12.1971. The petitioner/contractor completed supplies of 37,000 blankets till 31.12.1971. Vide letter dated 1.1.1972, the Union of India/objector extended the time granted to the petitioner/contractor and increased the quantity from 50,000 blankets to 1,00,000 blankets to b...