Delhi Court August 2010 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.
Director of Income Tax Vs Pradan Property Holding Trust.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-16-2010
1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?3. Whether judgment should be reported in Digest?J U D G M E N T1.The issue in this appeal relates to the grant of registration to the respondent-assessee under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act). For this purpose, indubitably, the competent authority has to see that the applicant satisfies the conditions stated in Section 12AA of the Act namely it is created for and is doing charitable activities. In such circumstances, once the registration is given, such type of assessee is exempted from payment of tax on the income derived from the property held for charitable or religious purposes as well as the income which such Trust receives by way of contributions.2. There is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, known as the Professional Societies for Development Action (PRADAN), which society is again a charitable society. This PRADAN...
Jamalu and ors. Vs State of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-16-2010
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers No may be allowed to see the judgment?2. To be referred to Reporter or not? No3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes ORDER.1.This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 19th December, 2007 whereby the appellants have been convicted by the Trial Court under Section 308 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment vide order dated 22nd December, 2007 for five years. Benefit of Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) has been given to the accused.2. Prosecution story as unfolded is that on 19th May, 2004 complainant Constable Nand Kishore was returning home from his duty at about 10:15 pm on his scooter bearing registration no. DL5-S-J-3399 and when he reached Shastri Park Red Light he noticed a truck, bearing no. HR-38-J-3936, coming from the opposite direction in high speed. The truck was being driven by accused Jamalu. Complainant stopped his scoo...
Rajesh Rana Vs State and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-16-2010
1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.2. To be referred to the reporter or not? Yes.3. Whether judgment should be reported in Digest? Yes.1. This revision petition has been preferred by the petitioner against the judgment 17th July, 2010, of the Appellate Court, whereby the conviction of the Appellant under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act was upheld and the sentence of the Appellant awarding him Simple Imprisonment for six months and compensation of Rs. 80,000/-, in default, to further undergo SI for two months was also upheld.2. In the grounds of Revision, the Petitioner has alleged that the Trial Court and the Appellate Court, both, failed to appreciate the defence evidence resulting into miscarriage of justice and both the Courts failed to appreciate that the cheques were not issued by the Petitioner against any liability and both the Courts below failed to appreciate factual matrix and the order passed by the Trial Court and the Appel...
Dr.K.C.Bajaj and ors. Vs Uoi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-16-2010
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?2. To be referred to Reporter or not?3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?ORDER.1. This batch of writ petitions (15 in numbers) have been filed by doctors, who retired from services prior to 01.01.1996 and who are 272 in numbers; majority of them having worked with Railways, few in the Directorate of Health Services, Delhi, one as Professor of Maulana Azad Medical College and the other one as Director General, Employees State Insurance Corporation. The writ petition arises out of a judgment delivered by the Full Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) in OA No. 1927/2006 along with 14 other connected OAs dated 12.09.2008 whereby the Full Bench dismissed the O.A.s seeking inclusion of Non Practicing Allowance (for short NPA) as part of minimum pay as on 01.01.1996 for calculation of pension payable to them in terms of ...
Hari Om Gupta Vs State of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-16-2010
ORDER1. The petitioner herein is a senior Journalist and he is an Executive Member of Delhi Journalists Association. He has filed the present petition for direction to Delhi Police to provide security cover to the petitioner and his family members and to take action against the respondent No. 5, Mr. Narender Sharma.2. Though notice has not been issued, Delhi Police has filed status report.3. It is stated in the status report that respondent No. 5, Mr. Narender Sharma's daughter Garima aged about seven years was found dead in a park on 9th May, 2003 and FIR No. 164/2003 under Section 302 IPC Police Station Keshavpuram was registered. The said case is still pending investigation with Anti Homicide Section, Crime Branch, Delhi. Mr. Narender Sharma had suspected Mr. Kapil Gupta, son of the petitioner. It is stated in the status report that Mr. Kapil Gupta was interrogated. It is also stated that High Court vide order dated 3rd July, 2009 allowed the writ petition filed by Mr. Kapil Gupta a...
Daya Nand Tyagi Vs State of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-16-2010
1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?2. To be referred to the reporter or not?3. Whether judgment should be reported in Digest?1. By present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C, the petitioner has assailed an order dated 22nd August 2007 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge in revision petition, upholding framing of charge.2. The contention of petitioner's counsel is that no case for cheating was made out against the petitioner on facts and in view of the fact that the alleged land, stated to be of Gram Sabha, had again been reverted back to him under the orders of Revenue Assistant dated 25th April, 2008.3. A case under Section 420 IPC was registered against the petitioner on the complaint of complainant that the petitioner had, on the basis of forged sale deeds of the land, claimed himself to be the lawful owner of the land, induced the complainant as well as some other persons to part with money for purchase of the plots of land. It was allege...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/S J.K. Synthetics Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-16-2010
1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgment?2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?3. Whether the Judgment should be reported in the Digest? ORDER.1. The question is as to whether the assessee should have been allowed depreciation @ 15% on plants used in manufacturing of cement and packaging of cement etc. or @ 10% as done by the Assessing Officer. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal allowed the depreciation @ 15% as was done in the previous years as well. This is clear from the following:- "Here we find that this issue was considered by the Tribunal in the assessee's own case in earlier year. The CIT (Appeals) has allowed depreciation at the rate of 15% on the plant and machinery of the assessee on the basis of the decision of the Tribunal for the assessment years 1975-76 to 1983-84, in I.T.A. Nos. 715 (del) of 85 and 795 (Del) of 87. Respectfully following the decision of the Tribunal, we are of the opinion that no interference is called for".2. Mr. Mo...
Dy. Director of Education and anr. Vs Veena Sharma
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-16-2010
1. Whether reporters of the local papers be allowed to see the judgment? Yes2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? YesORDER.1.Questioning the defensibility of the order dated 25th March, 2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No. 10274/2009, the present appeal has been preferred under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent.2. The factual expose' lies in a narrow compass. The respondent-petitioner was appointed as Upper Division Clerk on 17.12.2007 by the Air Force Children Education Society, the respondent No.2 herein. While she was on probation, an order dated 19.3.2009 came to be passed dispensing with her services as the same were no longer required by the society. Being dissatisfied with the said order, the respondent invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashment of the order dated 19.3.2009 and further for issuance of a writ ...
Cit Vs M/S Vikas Polymers
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-16-2010
1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?3. Whether judgment should be reported in Digest?ORDER.1. By this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"), the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal ("the Tribunal") has referred the following question of law at the instance of the revenue: "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was correct both on facts and in law for holding that the provisions of Section 263 of the I.T. Act have not been rightly invoked in this case for the assessment year 1982-83?"2. This reference relates to the Assessment Year 1982-83. Assessment for the aforesaid year was completed by the ITO on 19.09.1984 on a total income of Rs.90,031/- as against the returned income of Rs.69,500/-. On going through the assessment records of the assessee, the Commissioner of Income-tax served a notice on the assessee dated 17.03.1987, stating therein that while co...
Cit Vs M/S Ansal Prop.and Indus.Overseas Projects.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-16-2010
1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?3. Whether judgment should be reported in Digest? J U D G M E N T (ORAL)16.08.2010: A.K.SIKRI, J.1. Following questions are referred by the Tribunal for our opinion:-"2. In upholding the order of the CIT (A) allowing assessee's claim of depreciation @ 100% on steel plates and scaffolding by ignoring the material fact that Steel plates and scaffolding can not be termed as Plant & Machinery and also that each plate and scaffolding are not an independently a simple complete unit?3. In upholding the order of CIT(A) allowing assessee claim of investment allowance by ignoring ITR No. 241/1992 Page 1 of 4 the material facts that assessee is engaged in building construction activities and is not an industrial undertaking as defined under the Act?"2. In so far as second question is concerned, it is conceded by Mr.Satyen Sethi, learned counsel appearing for the assessee that this ques...
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- Next ›
- Last »