Delhi Court November 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.
Javed Ahmed Khan @ Chhota Javed Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-22-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON:18. 05.2012 PRONOUNCED ON:22. 11.2012 + DEATH SENTENCE REF. 2/2010 STATE Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Pawan Sharma, Standing Counsel (Crl), for the State with Mr. Harsh Prabhakar, Advocate. Versus MOHD. NAUSHAD & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. K.K. Manan with Mr. Mustafa Arif, Advocates. Ms. Kamini Jaiswal with Mr. Abhimanue Shrestha, Advocates for A-5, 6 & 9. CRL.A. 948/2010, CRL. M. (BAIL) 1121/2010 JAVED AHMED KHAN @ CHHOTA JAVED ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Kamini Jaiswal with Mr. Abhimanue Shrestha, Advocate. versus THE STATE Through: Death Sent.2/10; Crl.A.948 to 951/10 ..... Respondent Mr. Pawan Sharma, Standing Counsel (Crl), for the State with Mr. Harsh Prabhakar, Advocate. Page 1 CRL.A. 949/2010 MOHD. NAUSHAD Through: ..... Appellant Mr. K.K. Manan with Mr. Mustafa Arif, Advocates. Versus THE STATE Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Pawan Sharma, Standing Counsel (Crl), for the State with Mr. Harsh Prabhakar, Advocate. CR...
Garg Dyeing and Processing Industries Vs. Asstt Commissioner of Income ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-22-2012
$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:22. d November, 2012 + ITA 319/2012 GARG DYEING & PROCESSING INDUSTRIES ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Rajiv Saxena with Mr. Rajat Joseph, Advs. versus ASSTT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, sr. standing counsel with Mr. Puneet Gupta, jr. standing counsel CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR R.V. EASWAR, J: (OPEN COURT) CM 8651/2012 In view of the averments made in the application the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Application is disposed of. ITA 319/2012 On 30.08.2012 the following substantial question of law was framed by this Court : Was the Tribunal correct in holding that the rent received by the appellant was assessable as income from other sources? 2. The assessee is an individual carrying on business in the name and style of Garg Dyeing and Processing Industries. In respect of the assessment year 2007-08, he filed a return of income on 31.10.20...
Saurav @ Khokan Vs. State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-22-2012
$~12 & 13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :22. d November, 2012 + CRL.A. 817/2012 MONTU @ BAHADUR ..... Appellant Through : Mr.S.K.Sethi, Advocate. versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through : Mr.Sanjay Lao, APP. Insp.Digvijay Singh, PS Ambedkar Nagar. + CRL.A. 1111/2012 SAURAV @ KHOKAN ..... Appellant Through : Ms.Rakhi Dubey, Amicus Curiae. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) Through : ..... Respondent Mr.Sanjay Lao, APP. Insp.Digvijay Singh, PS Ambedkar Nagar. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG SANJIV KHANNA, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. The appellants impugn their conviction under Section 302 and 394 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 (IPC for short). For the offence under Section 302 IPC, the appellants have been sentenced to life imprisonment and fine of `10,000/- each, in default of payment of fine, they are to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months. For the offence under Section 394 IPC, the appellants have ...
Commission Commercial Tax, Govt. of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Official Liquid ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-22-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Judgment:22.11.2012 CO.A(SB) 22/2008 COMMISSION COMMERCIAL TAX, GOVT. OF MADHYA PRADESH ..... Appellant Through Ms. Indrani Mukherjee, Adv. for IARC (assignee of SCB) versus OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR Through ..... Respondent Mr. Mayank Goel, Adv. for the Official Liquidator. Mr. Jaswinder Singh, Adv. for Central Bank of India. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.(Oral) 1 This appeal has been directed against the order of the Official Liquidator wherein the present appellant (Commercial Tax, Government of M.P- hereinafter referred to as the appellant) has been ranked as a preferential creditor. His submission is that in terms of the provisions of 33-C of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958 and Section 53 of the M.P. Commercial Tax Act, 1994, any amount of tax/penalty/interest payable by a dealer or other person under this Act shall be first charge on the property of the dealer or such person and as such h...
C.C.E. Ghaziabad Vs. M/S. Kay Pan Masala (P) Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Nov-22-2012
Archana Wadhwa: Being aggrieved with the order passed by the authorities below, Revenue has filed the present appeals. As all of them involved the identical question, they are being disposed of by a common order. 2. After hearing the learned DR, it is seen that original adjudicating authority as also Commissioner (Appeals) held in favour of the respondents. The issue revolves around fixation of annual capacity of production in terms of Pan Masala Rules, 2008. The capacity was fixed in respect of 59 machines. However, as some of the machines were sealed by the Revenue during the relevant period 9different numbers in different months), the lower authorities have held that Pan Masala Rules are for determining the capacity and fixation of duty liability in respect of operating machines which are functioning and not for the machines which are not working. Inasmuch as the machines which are sealed by the department, and proved to be sealed on physical checking, duty liability cannot be fixed...
Hindustan Zinc Ltd. Vs. Cce, Jaipur I
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Nov-22-2012
Rakesh Kumar (Oral): The Appellant are manufacturer of zinc and its products chargeable to central excise duty. During the period of dispute, they availed cenvat credit of Rs.64,47,317/- in respect of rent-a-cab services availed for transportation of workers/employees from their factory to homes and back, credit of Rs.48,617/- in respect of rent-a-cab services for sending sick employees to hospital and besides this, cenvat credit of Rs.62,435/- in respect of rent-a-cab service for transporting children of employees/workers to school/tuition centres and back. 2. The Department being of the view that appellant are not eligible for cenvat credit in respect of rent-a-cab services availed for the above three purposes, issued a show cause notice dated 4.9.2009 for recovery of allegedly wrongly taken credit amounting to Rs.65,58,369/- during the period from July 2004 to January, 2009 along with interest and also for imposition of penalty on the appellant. This show cause notice was adjudicate...
Dharam Pal Gupta Vs. Union of India Through Secretary, Department of P ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Nov-22-2012
(ORAL) Shri G George Paracken: The applicants grievance in this Original Application is against the impugned revision order which has been passed under Rule 29 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 by the Director Postal Services. The brief background of the case is that the applicant was proceeded under Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 on the following charges:- ARTICLE I Whereas the said Sh. Dhara Pal Gupta when was working on the post of Saving Bank Count Assistant First during the period from 1.10.01 to 31.10.01 in the Muzaffarpur Head Office, Agent Archana Garg in Mahila Pradhan Kshetriya Bachat Yojna (MPKBY) had deposited schedules dated 13.10.2001 (First), 13.10.01 (Second), 23.10.01 and 25.10.01 total amount of Rs.38612/- (Thirty Eight Thousand Six Hundred and Twelve) and had submitted Pass Books entered in the said schedules but the same was not recorded in the concerned documents and govt. amount of Rs.19092.00 (Nineteen Thousand Ninety two only) was not included in the account. T...
National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Neeraj Patney and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-21-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:21. t November, 2012 + MAC.APP. 259/2010 NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. ...... Appellant Through: Mr. Pradeep Gaur, Adv. versus NEERAJ PATNEY & ORS. Through: + ..... Respondents Respondent No.3 in person. MAC.APP. 268/2010 NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. ...... Appellant Through: Mr. Pradeep Gaur, Adv. versus MAHESH CHANDER PATNEY & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Respondent No.3 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) CM APPL.7556/2010 (Additional Evidence) in MAC.APP. 259/2010 CM APPL.7641/2010 (Additional Evidence) in MAC.APP. 268/2010 1. The Appellant Insurance Company seeks permission to produce evidence to prove that the cheque issued by the Respondent (insured) was dishonoured on presentation and thus it had no liability to pay the compensation.2. Learned counsel for the Appellant urges that the plea with regard to dishonour of the cheque was taken in the written statement. Howev...
Cit Vs. Nestle India Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-21-2012
$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:21. t November, 2012 + ITA 644/2012 CIT Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Puneet Gupta, Jr. Standing Counsel. versus NESTLE INDIA LTD Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Ajay Vohra with Mr. Somnath Shukla, Advocates. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J: (OPEN COURT) The Revenue claims to be aggrieved by the impugned judgment of the Tribunal in ITA No.4477/Del/2010. The question of law urged on its behalf is: Whether the Tribunal fell into error in deleting `33.82 crores being 40% of the license royalty paid by the assessee to the owner of the brand and trademark i.e. Societe Des Products Nestle S.A. Switzerland? 2. The relevant facts are that for the concerned assessment year, the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) after a detailed analysis of the materials produced before him, concluded that no price adjustment was necessary. However, in the cour...
Citicorp Maruti Finance Limited Vs. ------------------
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-21-2012
15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Judgment:21.11.2012 COMPANY PETITION NO:398. of 2012 (ORDINARY ORIGINAL COMPANY JURISDICTION) In the matter ofCITICORP MARUTI FINANCE LIMITED, PETITIONER / TRANSFEROR COMPANY Through, ASP Advocates: Mr. Abhishek Seth, Mr. Rajeev Kumar and Mr. Rahul Raj, Advocates for the Petitioners. Mr. Pradhan, Deputy Registrar of Companies, for the Regional Director. Mr. Rajeev Bahl, Advocate for the Official Liquidator. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.(Oral) 1. This petition has been filed under Section 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 by Citicorp Maruti Finance Limited (hereinafter referred to as C.P. No398/2012. Petitioner / Transferor Company), in respect of a Page 1 of 10 Scheme of Amalgamation (Scheme for short) between the said Petitioner Company and Citicorp Finance (India) Limited (hereinafter referred to as Transferee Company). As per the scheme, the Petitioner Company is proposed to be merged in the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- Next ›
- Last »