Delhi Court January 2012 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. Rio Tinto Technical Services
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-04-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + INCOME TAX APPEAL NOS. 486/2011, 491/2011 and 492/2011 Reserved on : 21st October, 2011. % Date of Decision : 4th January, 2012. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX .... Appellant Through Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Advocate. VERSUS RIO TINTO TECHNICAL SERVICES .....Respondent Through Mr. Salil Kapoor, Mr. Ankit Gupta, Mr. Sanat Kapoor and Mr. Vikas Jain, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR SANJIV KHANNA, J.: Revenue has preferred these appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act, for short) and vide order dated 8 th August, 2011 the following substantial questions of law were framed:- (1) Whether learned ITAT erred in holding that the assessee's activities are not FTS within the definition of FTS stated in Articles 12 of the Double Definition of FTS stated in Articles 12 of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement? (2) Whether learned ITAT erred in holding that Articles 7 of the Indo-Australia DTA...
Pradeep Goyal and ors Vs. State and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-04-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 3304/2010 and Crl.M.A. 16463/2010 (stay) % Reserved on: 18th November, 2011 Decided on: 4th January, 2012 PRADEEP GOYAL and ORS ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Shashindra Tripathi, Adv. versus STATE and ANR. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Manoj Ohri, APP for State with SI Umesh Rana, PS Saraswati Vihar. Mr. Gaurav Bhushan, Mr. Y.P. Sharma, Mr.Amit Vashisth, Advs. for R-2. AND + CRL.M.C. 3349/2010 and Crl.M.A. 16610/2010 (stay) KRISHANA DEVI and ORS ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Shashindra Tripathi, Adv. versus STATE and ANR. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Manoj Ohri, APP for State with SI Umesh Rana, PS Saraswati Vihar. Mr. Gaurav Bhushan, Mr. Y.P. Sharma, Mr.Amit Vashisth, Advs. for R-2. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA.1. FIR No. 455/2003 under Section 498A/406/34 IPC was registered against the Petitioners in the present two petitions on the complaint of Crl.M.C.Nos. 3304/2010 and 3349/2010 Page 1 of 6 Respondent No.2 Ms. Manisha...
Cit Vs. Raj Kumar Mahajan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-04-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 683/2011 % Date of Decision : January 04, 2012. CIT ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjeev Rajpal, Adv. versus RAJ KUMAR MAHAJAN ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Ajay vohra, Ms. Kavita Jha and Mr. Somnath Shukla, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR.1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?.2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ?.3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? SANJIV KHANNA,J: (ORAL) The present appeal filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) impugns order dated 21 st June, 2010 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal) which relates to the assessment year 2001-02..2. For the said assessment year, scrutiny notice under Section 143(2) was issued and during the course of the regular assessment proceedings a questionnaire dated 6th August, 2002 was written to the assessee. ITA 683/2011 Page 1 of 6 Q...
ishtkar @ Intjar Vs. State Govt. of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-04-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Crl. A. No. 606/2011 and Crl.M.B. 833/2011 % Reserved on: 1st December, 2011 Decided on: 4th January, 2012 ISHTKAR @ INTJAR ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Rajender Yadav, Adv. versus STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Manoj Ohri, APP for State with SI Sunny Kumar PS Adarsh Naggar. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA.1. By the present appeal the Appellant lays a challenge to the impugned judgment and order on sentence dated 16th March, 2011 passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge convicting him for offences under Sections 395/397 IPC and sentencing him to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for seven years and fine for a sum of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further three months S.I..2. Learned counsel for the Appellant contends that the complainant did not produce any evidence to show that he was in possession of jewellery and cash. There are material contradictions in the testimony of the ...
Haryana Wrestling Association Vs. Wrestling Federation of India and
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-04-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on: 12.12.2011 % Judgment delivered on: 04.01.2012 + W.P.(C.) No. 4860/2011 and C.M. No. 19583/2011 (for intervention) HARYANA WRESTLING ASSOCIATION AND ANR ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Narender Hooda, Advocate . versus WRESTLING FEDERATION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Pradeep Dewan, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Anupam Dhingra, Advocate, for the respondent No.1/WFI. Mr. Devrat Sharma and Mr. M.P.Singh, Advocates, for the respondent No.2/UOI. Mr. Navin Chawla, Mr. Bharat Arora and Ms. Nidhi Mohan Parashar, Advocates, for the respondent No.4. Mr. Ravi Prakash Gupta, Advocate, for the applicant in C.M. No. 19583/2011. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI W.P.(C.) No. 4860/2011 Page 1 of 33 JUDGMENT VIPIN SANGHI, J. C.M. No. 19583/2011 (for intervention) This application has been preferred by Sh. K.S. Minhas to intervene in the present writ petition. He claims to be the Life President of WFI. He has already in...
Degremont Limited Vs. Yamuna Gases and Chemicals Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-04-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI F-12 (Reportable) + OMP No. 91/2005 DEGREMONT LIMITED ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Anil K. Kher, Senior Advocate with Mr. D.R. Bhatia, Mr. Ankur Bansal and Mr. Siddhartha Jain, Advocates. versus YAMUNA GASES and CHEMICALS LIMITED and ORS ..... Respondents Through Mr. Yakesh Anand with Mr. Nimit Mathur and Mr. Prateek Kumar, Advocates. And F-13+ OMP No. 228/2005 YAMUNA GASES and CHEMICALS LIMITED ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Yakesh Anand with Mr. Nimit Mathur and Mr. Prateek Kumar, Advocates. Versus ONDEO DEGREMONT LIMITED ..... Respondent Through Mr. Anil K. Kher, Senior Advocate with Mr. D.R. Bhatia, Mr. Ankur Bansal and Mr. Siddhartha Jain, Advocates. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER % 4.01.2012 IA No. 18185/2011 (for restoration) in OMP No. 91/2005.1. For the reasons stated therein, this application is allowed. The petition is restored to its file..2. The application is disposed of. OMP Nos.91. and 228 of 2005 Page 1 of 20 OMP No. 91/2005 a...
M/S. Dwarika Projects Pvt. Ltd Vs. M/S. Bhandari Engineers and
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-04-2012
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on: 04.01.2012 + FAO(OS) NO.2/2012 M/S. DWARIKA PROJECTS PVT. LTD. (formerly known as Raj and Associates Construction Division) ..... Appellant versus M/S. BHANDARI ENGINEERS and BUILDERS PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant : Mr. Sandeep Sharma For the Respondent : None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J (ORAL) CM No.120/2012 (Exemption ) Allowed subject to just exceptions. FAO(OS) NO.2/2012.1. This is a classic case where the advocate appearing for the appellant for reasons best known to him, has been unable to inform us, as to the relationship that the appellant i.e., M/s. Dwarika Projects Private Limited has with M/s. Raj and Associates Construction Division. The reason why we raised this query would become clear as we proceed further with the FAO(OS) 2/2012 Page 1 of 11 narrative. Suffice it to say, in the capt...
Human Care Medical Charitable Vs. Delhi Development Authority
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-04-2012
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 4th January, 2012 + W.P.(C) No. 9816/2009 HUMAN CARE MEDICAL CHARITABLE TRUST ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Anurag Jain, Adv. Versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Shobhana Takiar, Adv. CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW JUDGEMENT RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J..1. The petition impugns the letter dated 02.06.2009 of the respondent DDA to the petitioner cancelling the allotment (earlier made in favour of the petitioner) of land ad-measuring 9950 sq. mtrs. at Sector-6, Pappan Kalan, Dwarka, Delhi, for the reason of violation by the petitioner of the terms and conditions of allotment..2. Notice of the petition was issued and vide order dated 06.07.2009 which has continued to be in force, the operation of the letter / order dated 02.06.2009 stayed. Pleadings have been completed. On further application, being CM No.5738/2010 of the petitioner, vide order dated 25.05....
Mohammad Rizwanul Haque Vs. Central Wakf Council and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-04-2012
$~18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 4th January, 2012 + W.P.(C) 2444/2010, CM 18389/2011 and CM 19487/2011 MOHAMMAD RIZWANUL HAQUE ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. V.K. Rao, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Irshad Hanif, Advocate. versus CENTRAL WAKF COUNCIL AND ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. A.S. Chandhiok, ASG with Mr. Jatan Singh, Mr. Ritesh Kumar and Mr. Piyush Sanghi, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN V.K. JAIN, J. (ORAL).1. The petitioner, who is presently working as Secretary of Central Wakf Council, was initially appointed to the present position on deputation with effect from 3rd July, 1997 and was absorbed as Secretary with effect from 21st August 2000. The petitioner was also appointed as Administrator of Punjab Wakf Board, in addition to his charge as Secretary, Central Wakf WP(C) 2444/2010 Page 1 of 19 Council. The petitioner handed over charge of Punjab Wakf Board to his successor on 1st October, 2002..2. Vide show cause notice dated 12th ...
Ganga Prasad Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation Indraprasth Depot Ip Esta ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-04-2012
M.L. Chauhan: 1. The applicant has filed this OA, thereby praying for the following reliefs:- “i) Quash the Office order no.99 dt. 01.10.1963 being violative of Article 14 and 21 of Constitution of India. ii) Set-aside the orders dt. 16.11.2010 and 04.01.2011 passed by the respondent and directing the respondent to allow the petitioner to continue his service as a regular employee till the age of 60 years like other employees of the Corporation. In the alternative:- iii) Direct the respondent to assign some other duties in the Corporation to the applicant on the same pay scale till the attainment of the age of 60 years. OR iv) To compensate the applicant by paying full salary and other emoluments in lieu of his remaining service of 5 years. v) Any other or further order that may be deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed by the Hon’ble Tribunal in favour of the applicant and against the respondent in the interest of justice and e...
- ‹ Prev
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 33
- 34
- 35
- Next ›
- Last »