Delhi Court August 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 2 of about 306 results (0.010 seconds)Department of Customs Vs. Joginder Pal Jain
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL. A. No.577 of 2008 Reserved on:5. h August 2014 Decision on:28. h August 2014 DEPARTMENT OF CUSTOMS ..... Appellant Through: None for Appellant. Mr. H.S. Phoolka, Senior Advocate with Mr. Harsh Jaidka, Mr. Suryadeep Singh and Ms. Shilpa Dewan, Advocates for Mr. Naresh Grover. versus JOGINDER PAL JAIN ..... Respondent Through: Mr. S.S. Gandhi, Senior Advocate with Mr. Akshay Anand and Mr. K.R. Dogra, Advocates along with Respondent in person. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUDGMENT2808.2014 1. The Department of Customs has in this appeal challenged an order dated 29th September 2006 passed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM) in Case No.444/2004 acquitting the Respondent Joginder Pal Jain of the offence under Sections 132 and 135(1)(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 (Act). The complaint 2. The Complainant in this case was Mr. K.K. Dhasmana (PW-2) who at the relevant time was working as Air Customs Officer, IGI Airport, Termin...
Tag this Judgment!Deccan Digital Networks Private Limited and anr. Vs. Income Tax Office ...
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:28. 08.2014 W.P.(C) 1226/2014 & CM25582014 DECCAN DIGITAL NETWORKS PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. ..Petitioners versus INCOME TAX OFFICER & ORS. ..Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioners : Mr Arvind Datar, Sr. Advocate with Mr Tarun Gulati, Mr Kishore Kunal and Ms Amrita Chatterjee. For the Respondents : Mr Balbir Singh and Mr Abhishek Singh Baghel for R-1 to R-4. Mr Vivek Goyal and Mr R.P.Singh for R-5. CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. This writ petition challenges the impugned notice dated 13.06.2013 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act). A prayer is also sought for quashing the order dated 19.12.2013, which has been passed by the Assessing Officer rejecting the objections, which the petitioner had raised against the issuance of the notice dated 13.06.2013 an...
Tag this Judgment!ishwar Dayal Kansal Vs. Nirmal Nayyar
Court: Delhi
$~ 10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: August 28, 2014 + CS(OS) 2255/2010 ISHWAR DAYAL KANSAL Through: In person. ..... Plaintiff versus NIRMAL NAYYAR ..... Defendant Through: Mr.Abhimanyu Mahajan and Mr.Milan Deep Singh, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J (Oral) I.A. 9929/2014 1. This is an application filed by the plaintiff seeking recall of the order dated 18.3.2014 by which right of the plaintiff to lead evidence was closed.2. Plaintiff, who appears in person, submits that he was informed by his counsel that his file had been misplaced and in view thereof, he could not prepare and file the evidence.3. In the application seeking recall, it has been averred in paragraph 2 that issues were framed on 16.7.2012 and plaintiff was directed to file evidence within four weeks and the case was adjourned to 27.8.2012 for fixing the dates of cross-examination. On 27.8.2012, counsel for the plaintiff sought further time for filing affidavi...
Tag this Judgment!Hitesh Babbar Vs. Punjab National Bank
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 4733/2013 Reserved on: Date of decision: IN THE MATTER OF: HITESH BABBAR2407.2014 28.08.2014 ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sameer Jain and Mr. Siddharth Jain, Advocates versus PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Arora, Advocate CORAM HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HIMA KOHLI, J.1. The petitioner seeks directions to the respondent/Punjab National Bank (hereinafter referred to as the Bank) for his appointment to the post of Manager (Credit).2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass. On 1.8.2012, the respondent/Bank had issued an advertisement inviting online applications for ten posts, including that of Manager (Credit). As per the aforesaid advertisement, the applicants were to register online between 1.8.2012 to 17.8.2012. The tentative date of the written examination was fixed as 14.10.2012 and the written test was to be followed by a personal interview. The educational qualification prescribed for the post...
Tag this Judgment!Ritesh Vs. Surat Singh
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on:28. h August, 2014 + CS(OS)1558/2013 .. Plaintiff RITESH Through: Mr. V.P. Rana, Advocate versus SURAT SINGH .. Defendant Through: None. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL G.P. MITTAL. J.(ORAL) 1. This suit for specific performance and permanent injunction has been filed by the Plaintiff against the Defendant. Vide an Agreement for Sale(Ex.PW-1/1) dated 30.05.2013, the Plaintiff agreed to purchase the land measuring 2 bighas and 7 biswas comprising Khasra nos.29//5(2-7) situated in the revenue estate of Village Kanjhawala, Delhi-110081 for a consideration of ` 21 lakhs. An amount of ` 10 lakhs was paid to the Defendant as earnest money (Ex.PW1/2) and the balance consideration of ` 11 lakhs was to be paid within 30 days, i.e., till 29.06.2013 at the time of execution of the Sale Deed subject to obtaining of NOC by the Defendant. It is the case of the Plaintiff that on 25.06.2013, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to obtain t...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi Ii Vs. M/S Kohinoor Impex P. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA No.179/2001 Reserved on:25. h July, 2014 Date of Decision:28th August, 2014 % Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi II ....Appellant Through Mr. Balbir Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Abhishek Singh Baghel, Adv Versus M/s Kohinoor Impex P. Ltd. Through None Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J.This appeal by the Revenue which relates to assessment year 1986-87, was admitted for hearing vide order dated 8th January, 2002 on the following substantial questions of law:(A) Whether the ITAT was correct in law in allowing the deduction in respect of amount of Rs.19,94,704/- paid to the non-resident foreign company without having deducted tax at source u/s. 195 of Income Tax Act?. (B) Whether the ITAT has correctly interpreted the provision of 40(a)(i), Sec. 95 (sic195) and 9(1)(v) of the Act?. (C) Whether the ITAT as correct in law in holding that the amount of Rs.19,94,704/- d...
Tag this Judgment!Atma Ram Vs. the State of Delhi
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:20. h August 2014 Decision on:28. h August 2014 CRL.A. 135 of 2008 SHAKUNTLA CHAUHAN ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Suman Chauhan, Advocate. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP. WITH CRL.A. 152 of 2008 ATMA RAM ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Vishal Raj Sehjpal, Advocate. versus THE STATE OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUDGMENT2808.2014 1. These two appeals are directed against the impugned judgment dated 24th January 2008 passed by the Special Judge in Complaint Case No.39/2000, convicting the appellants for the offences under Sections 7 and 13 (1) (d) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act) as well as the order on sentence dated 25th January 2008, sentencing each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment (RI) for a period of two years along with fine of Rs.2500/- each and in default to undergo simple imprisonment (SI) for one mo...
Tag this Judgment!Shakuntla Chauhan Vs. State
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:20. h August 2014 Decision on:28. h August 2014 CRL.A. 135 of 2008 SHAKUNTLA CHAUHAN ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Suman Chauhan, Advocate. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP. WITH CRL.A. 152 of 2008 ATMA RAM ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Vishal Raj Sehjpal, Advocate. versus THE STATE OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUDGMENT2808.2014 1. These two appeals are directed against the impugned judgment dated 24th January 2008 passed by the Special Judge in Complaint Case No.39/2000, convicting the appellants for the offences under Sections 7 and 13 (1) (d) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act) as well as the order on sentence dated 25th January 2008, sentencing each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment (RI) for a period of two years along with fine of Rs.2500/- each and in default to undergo simple imprisonment (SI) for one mo...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Noor Jahan and ors. Vs. Shri Harbir Singh and ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % CM(M) No.1298/2013 Reserved on:5. h August, 2014 Pronounced on:27. h August, 2014 SMT. NOOR JAHAN AND ORS. Through: ......Petitioners Mr. R.L. Kohli, Advocate. VERSUS SHRI HARBIR SINGH AND ORS. Through: ...... Respondents Mr. R.D. Sharma, Advocate with Mr. Rajat Sharma, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J1 The challenge by means of this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is to the impugned order of the executing court dated 27.11.2013 by which the executing court has refused the prayer of the petitioners/judgment debtors to dismiss the execution petition of the respondents/decree holders. The petitioners, who are the judgment debtors in the court below, pleaded that the subject/present execution petition does not lie because an earlier execution petition was dismissed as satisfied.2. The original judgment and decree which was passed in favour of ...
Tag this Judgment!Lalit Kumar Modi Vs. Union of India and ors
Court: Delhi
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:27. 08.2014 LPA1342013 and CM Nos. 3837-38/2013 LALIT KUMAR MODI ... Appellant versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant For the Respondents : Mr Parag P. Tripathi, Senior Advocate with Mr Anoop Bose, Mr Rishi Agrawal, Mr Swadeep Hora, Ms Menaka, Mr Abhishek Singh, Mr Rohit Gupta, Mr Umang Gupta, Ms Bansuri Swaraj, Mr Kunal Bahri and Mr Vivek : Mr Rajeeve Mehra, ASG with Mr Jatan Singh, Mr Soayib Qureshi, Mr Naginder Benipal and Mr Ashish Virmani CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J1 The appellant is aggrieved by the judgement dated 16.01.2013 delivered by a learned single Judge of this court in W.P.(C) 376/2012 whereby the said writ petition was dismissed. In the said writ petition, the appellant/ petitioner had inter alia sought a writ of Certiorari for quashing and / or setting aside the order date...
Tag this Judgment!