Delhi Court May 2011 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.
Arjun Kumar Giri Vs. Gnct of Delhi and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-11-2011
1. The petitioner claims to have been employed in the year 1996 as a Lab Assistant in the respondent no.3 Birla Vidya Niketan School. He claims to have worked in the respondent no.3 School till the year 1999, when according to him his services were terminated. The petitioner earlier preferred W.P.(C) No.3606/1999 in this Court impugning the said action of the respondent no.3 School. The petitioner continued to pursue the said remedy even after establishment of the Delhi School Tribunal. The writ petition was ultimately disposed of on 22 nd April, 2010 relegating the petitioner to the Tribunal. While doing so, it was expressly observed that the case made out by the petitioner entailed disputed questions of fact and which the Tribunal was better equipped to address. 2. The petitioner thereafter approached the Tribunal which has on 31st January, 2011 now dismissed the appeal of the petitioner against the purported order of the respondent no.3 School of termination of his employment. The T...
Dhimesh Kumar Vs. State of N.C.T. of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-11-2011
1. This Revision Petition under Section 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code is directed against a judgment and order dated 23.04.2008 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge. The petitioner is the deceaseds brother and complains to being aggrieved against the acquittal of Lakhbir Singh and Mehraj (hereafter called the respondents). 2. The prosecution alleged that on 16.07.1999, information was received from PCR van at Police Post Govind Puri that a lady had received knife injuries at 168, Tilak Khand, Giri Nagar. The subsequent information was that the lady was murdered. The police reached the spot when it was discovered that an injured (hereafter referred to as "deceased"), Madhu, had been taken to the AIIMS Hospital in the PCR. The deceaseds mother PW-1 Durga Devi deposed that she had started living with the deceased since she was ill and on that relevant date, her grand children had gone to School. Her son-in-law Lakhbir Singh had gone out on duty at 09:00 AM; she was alone with the...
The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Itc Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-11-2011
1. These four appeals are being disposed of by this common order as the questions of law arising in these appeals are common. ITAs No.475/2010, 476/2010 and 860/2010 relate to assessee/ITC Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the "assessee/ITC") for the assessment years 2005-06, 2004-05 and 2003-04 respectively. ITA No.445/2011 relates to assessee, C.J. International Hotels Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the "assessee/CJ") for the assessment year 2004-04. 2. The assessees are engaged in the business of owning, operating and managing hotels. Surveys were conducted under Section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") at the business premises of the assessees during which it was found that the assessees had been paying tips to its employees but not deducting taxes thereon. The Assessing Officers treated the amounts of tips under the head "Salary" in the hands of respective staff and held that the assessees were liable to deduct taxes at source from such paym...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ankitech Pvt Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-11-2011
1. In all these appeals, same questions of law touching the interpretation that is to be accorded to the provisions of Section 2(22)(e) of the amount received by the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act'), arise for consideration. Our purpose would be served by taking note of the questions of law framed in ITA No.462 of 2009, as concededly answer thereto shall cover the outcome of all these appeals. The substantial questions of law on which this appeal was admitted are as under: a) Whether ITAT was correct in law in deleting the addition of `6,32,72,265/- made by the Assessing Officer in the hands of assessee company under Section 2(22)(e) of the Act? b) Whether ITAT was correct in law in holding that the addition could not have been made by the Assessing Officer in the assessee company as it was not the shareholder of M/s Jackson? c) Whether ITAT has correctly interpreted the provisions of Section 2(22)(e) of the Act? d) Whether order passed by ITAT is perverse in law an...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Modi Xerox
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-11-2011
1. This appeal is under Section 260(A) of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") and directed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") dated 4th May, 2007. The assessee is a company which is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of Xerox machines related items. In the return filed for the assessment year 1997-98, the assessee had shown nil income whereas income under Section 115JA was shown at Rs.2,12,34,285/-. The assessment order was passed under Section 143(3) of the Act with the taxable income at Rs.29,61,56,079/-. While passing the assessment order, the Assessing Officer made several disallowance in respect of various claims raised as detailed in the assessment order. Amongst others, the assessee had claimed deduction on account of exemption under Section 10B of the Act and commission to the tune of 3.27% incurred on the sale of products under Section 37 of the Act. The Assessing officer disallo...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/S. Nalwa Investments Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-11-2011
1. The assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) in respect of Assessment Year 2003-04 was tinkered with by the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) in exercise of its powers under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as „the Act). The CIT was of the opinion that the AO had not done his job properly while making the assessment inasmuch as in respect of certain items, the AO did not bestow any consideration or applied his mind leading to escapement of income. He, thus, restored the matter back to the file of AO for deciding the said issue afresh. This order of the CIT passed under Section 263 of the Act was successfully challenged by the assessee before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal („the Tribunal for brevity), which has, by reason of impugned orders dated 26.03.2009, set aside the order of the CIT. It is this impugned order of the Tribunal, which is the subject matter of appeal No.270 of 2010 and has given rise to the following substantial ...
Mukesh Kumar Vs. Smt. Kamlesh Devi and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-11-2011
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 27th May, 2009 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Delhi. 2. The brief facts leading to the filing of the appeal are as follows. 3. The respondents No.1 to 4 filed a petition under Sections 166 and 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the appellant and the respondents No.5 to 7 for grant of compensation of ` 20 lakhs jointly and severally together with interest thereon. The said claim petition was filed as a result of a road accident which took place on 12.02.2005 at 2.30 p.m. when Shri Bishambar, the husband of the respondent No.1 and the father of the respondents No.2 to 4, was crossing the main road at Lal Bahadur Shastri Marg and was hit by a scooter bearing No.DL-7S-K-9664, being driven by the respondent No.5, who was coming from the side of Sudharshan Chowk rashly and negligently at a very high speed. A case bearing FIR No.54/05 was registered under Sections 279/304-A IPC against the respondent No.5, who ...
Vinod Chand Sud Vs. Suresh Kumar and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-11-2011
1. The petition has been filed impugning the recovery notice dated 20 th March, 2009 issued by the respondent no.2 Dy. Commissioner (West) Govt. of NCT of Delhi in execution of the Recovery Certificate issued by the respondent no.3 Labour Commissioner, Govt. of NCT of Delhi in implementation of the award dated 9th January, 2004 of the Industrial Adjudicator on a dispute raised by the respondent no.1 workman against the Management of M/s B.C. Sood, D-17, Rajouri Garden, Delhi. The award holds the services of the respondent no.1 workman to have been terminated illegally and unjustifiably by the Management of M/s B.C. Sood and directs the said Management of M/s B.C. Sood to reinstate the respondent no.1 workman with continuity of service and full back wages. 2. The respondent no.1 workman applied to the respondent no.3 Labour Commissioner for implementation of the award. It appears that since Shri B.C. Sood had died; the respondent no.1 workman sought implementation of the award against t...
Sanjeet Singh and ors. Vs. High Court of Delhi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-11-2011
1. Common grievance is raised by all these petitioners which arises out of the selection process undertaken by Delhi High Court for appointment to the Delhi Judicial Services (DJS) which was initiated with advertisement dated 26th October, 2009 and concluded with appointments made pursuant to the said selection procedure vide Notification dated 24.12.2010. There is no grievance about the selection process undertaken by the High Court or in respect of the persons qualified on the basis of marks secured in the written examination as well as interviews/viva-voce test. The grievance is all together different. Vide advertisement dated 26th October, 2009 vacancies of 60 seats for recruitment to DJS was notified. The petitioners asserted that they received the information under the Right to Information Act (RTI) that total vacancies existing at that time were numbering 113. According to these petitioners, all the vacancies should have been notified for recruitment and the action on the part o...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/S Nestle India Ltd and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-11-2011
1. The questions of law which arise for consideration in these appeals are common. These appeals concern with the same assessee though it pertain to different assessment years. The issue is with regard to deduction claimed by the assessee in respect of remuneration/royalty paid by it to other subsidiaries and the assessees holding companies. Only the amount of royalty paid in two years is different. To recapitulate briefly the circumstances under which the aforesaid payments of royalties are claimed, the assessee company is involved in the business of manufacturing and marketing of various food products and beverages. In the Income Tax Return filed for the assessment year 1997-98 it had declared total income of ` 17,99,29,538/-under Section 115 JA of the Income-Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as „the Act). The case was selected for scrutiny and in the assessment made by the Assessing Officer, several additions/disallowances were made. Here we are concerned with only one disallow...
- ‹ Prev
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- Next ›
- Last »