Delhi Court September 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 9 of about 257 results (0.023 seconds)Commissioner of Income Tax-iii Vs. M/S. Spice Distribution Ltd.
Court: Delhi
$-12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: September 19, 2014 + ITA No.597/2014 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III Through: ..... Appellant Ms.Suruchi Aggarwal, Sr.Standing Counsel versus M/S. SPICE DISTRIBUTION LTD. ..... Respondent Through: CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J.(Oral) 1. The present appeal by the revenue relates to the Assessment Year 2009-10 and impugns the order dated 21.02.2014. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal in short) has followed its own decision for the Assessment Year 2008-09, wherein, the following observations were made: "8. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. On a careful consideration of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and legal decision on the issue involved, we are of the view that there is no infirmity in the order of the CIT(A). A perusal of the assessment order shows that no basis for concluding that 25% o...
Tag this Judgment!Sanjeev Kumar @ Rajeev and ors Vs. State and anr
Court: Delhi
$~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 4268/2014 SANJEEV KUMAR @ RAJEEV & ORS ..... Petitioners Through Mr. Pradeep Singh, Advocate. versus STATE & ANR Through ..... Respondents Mr. P.K. Mishra, Additional Public Prosecutor. Mr. Rajveer Advocate with R2 in person. ASI Birender Singh. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA % SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J.(Oral) Crl.M.A. No.14740/2014 Exemption, as prayed for, is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. This application is disposed off. Crl.M.C. No.4268/2014 1. This petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of FIR No.377/2013 registered on 29.10.2013 at police station Palam Village under sections 406/498-A/34 IPC, on the ground that the matter has been settled between the parties.2. Issue notice. Mr P.K. Mishra, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, and Mr. Rajveer, Advocate for respondent No.2, enter appearance and accept notice. The second respondent and petitioners are also identified by the Inves...
Tag this Judgment!Mohd Firoz Vs. State and anr
Court: Delhi
$~29 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 4262/2014 MOHD FIROZ Through ..... Petitioner Mr. Ashwani Tyagi and Mr. Ratnesh Tiwari, Advocates. versus STATE & ANR Through ..... Respondents Ms.Nishi Jain, Additional Public Prosecutor. Sub Inspector Sabbir Ahmad. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA % SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J.(ORAL) 1. This petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of FIR No.129/2004 registered on 25.02.2004 at police station Sangam Vihar under sections 406/498-A/34 IPC; on the ground that the matter has been settled between the complainant and the petitioner.2. Issue notice. Ms. Nishi Jain, APP for the State, enters appearance and accepts notice. The second respondent is present in person. The second respondent and petitioner are also identified by the Investigating Officer Sub Inspector Shabbir Ahmed.3. The aforesaid FIR came to be lodged by the complainant on account of certain matrimonial and domestic disputes that arose between her a...
Tag this Judgment!Director of Income Tax (intl. Tax.)-ii Vs. Panalfa Autoelektrik Ltd.
Court: Delhi
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ITA No.292/2014 Reserved on :22. d July, 2014 Date of Decision :18. h September, 2014 % DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INTL. TAX.)-II ....Appellant Through Mr. Kamal Sawhney, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Jr. Standing Counsel. Versus PANALFA AUTOELEKTRIK LTD. Respondent Through Mr. Satyen Sethi, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J.The present appeal by the Revenue, which arises out of proceedings under Section 195/197 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act, for short), relating to assessment year 2010-11 on an application filed by Panalfa Autoelektrik Ltd. (assessee, for short), requires adjudication of the following substantial question of law:Whether the ITAT was right in holding that the commission paid to M/s. Agenta World Trading and Consulting Establishment for procuring export orders, is not fee for technical services under Section 9(i)(vii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961...
Tag this Judgment!M/S Influence Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Delhi
$~R-101 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:18. h September, 2014 + ITA2612002 M/S INFLUENCE ..... Appellant Through Mr. P.N. Monga, Advocate with Mr. Manu Monga, Advocate. versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX .... Respondent Through Mr. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Nitin Gulati, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL) This appeal by the assessee, which relates to assessment year 1993-94, was admitted for hearing vide order dated 7th October, 2002, on the following substantial question of law:Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in rejecting the claim of the assessee for higher deduction under Section 80-HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961, made during the course of assessment proceedings for the relevant assessment year?.2. The facts are in narrow compass and in view of the limited issue, which arises for consideration, we need not r...
Tag this Judgment!Nussli Switzerland Ltd. Vs. Organizing Committee Commonwealth Games, 2 ...
Court: Delhi
* % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on : September 02, 2014 Judgment Pronounced on : September 18, 2014 + FAO(OS) 121/2014 NUSSLI SWITZERLAND LTD ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.K.N.Bhatt, Sr.Advocate instructed by Mr.Prashant Kumar, Mr.Amit Singh, Mr.Rajan Singh and Mr.Anantha Narayana, Advocates versus ORGANIZING COMMITTEE COMMONWEALTH GAMES, 2010 ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr.Rajeeve Mehra, Sr.Advocate instructed by Mr.Neeraj Sharma, Ms.Anjali Agrawala, Ms.Archana Lakhotia, Ms.Pragya Nalwa, Ms.Marisha Shukla and Mr.Anand Raja, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. Nussli Switzerland Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Nussli) and the Organizing Committee Common Wealth Games, 2010 (hereinafter referred to as the Organizing Committee) had entered into a contract on June 02, 2010 which contained an arbitration clause.2. Being a term of the contract, Nussli got issued a bank guarante...
Tag this Judgment!Golu @ Pankaj @ Sanjay Vs. State
Court: Delhi
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: September 18, 2014 + CRL.A. 320/2012 GOLU @ PANKAJ @ SANJAY ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.S.K.Sharma, Advocate with Mr.Rahul Sharma and Mr.Puneet Relan, Advocates versus STATE ..... Respondent Represented by: Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP Insp.Kailash Bisht, TI/GK and Insp.Raman Kumar, P.S.Govindpuri CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) 1. Golu @ Pankaj has been convicted by the learned Trial Judge for having burnt Rahul offence of murder. The judgment is dated January 31, 2012. Vide order on sentence dated February 02, 2012, Golu has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and pay a fine in sum of `1,000/; in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month.2. The learned Trial Judge has relied upon the testimony of Kunti PW-3, Rakesh PW-4, Sheru PW-5 and Chanda PW-6 to rest the verdict of guilt against Golu.3. Case of the prosecut...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Kishan Gupta Vs. Seed Infrastructure
Court: Delhi
$~20. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 1173/2013 Date of decision :18. h September, 2014 % RAM KISHAN GUPTA Through : ..... Plaintiff Mr.Hemant Malhotra, Adv. versus SEED INFRASTRUCTURE AND SOLUTIONS PVT LTD ..... Defendant Through : Mr.Sidharth Tewatia, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI ORDER1809.2014 % I.A.10239/2014 1. Plaintiff has filed the present suit for recovery of money in the sum of Rs.30,66,740/- towards arrears of rent and maintenance charges together with interest at the rate of 24%, per annum till realization, and mandatory injunction.2. Summons were issued in the suit on 31.5.2013. As per the service report defendant was served on 22.1.2014 for 10.2.2014, on which date the defendant entered appearance through counsel and time was granted to file written statement, however, the same has not been filed till date.3. Present application, being I.A.10239/2014, has been filed by plaintiff under Order VIII Rule 10 read with Section 151 CPC for prono...
Tag this Judgment!BernsteIn Litowitz Berger and Grossmann Llp and or Vs. Union of India ...
Court: Delhi
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:18. 09.2014 W.P.(C) 6167/2012 BERNSTEIN LITOWITZ BERGER AND GROSSMANN LLP AND ORS ..... Petitioners versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS + ..... Respondents W.P.(C) 7774/2012 BERNSTEIN LITOWITZ BERGER AND GROSSMANN LLP AND ORS ..... Petitioners versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr M.S. Syali, Senior Advocate with Ms Husnal Syali, Mr Mayank Nagi, Ms Reeta Mishra, Mr Harkunal Singh and Mr Tarun Singh For the Respondents : Mr Abhay Prakash Sahay CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. These writ petitions impugn the Ruling dated 27.08.2012 made by the Authority for Advance Rulings under the Income-tax Act, 1961.2. A few basic facts are necessary for disposal of these writ petitions. Certain shareholders of American Depository Shares have filed suits against Satyam Computer Services Lim...
Tag this Judgment!Sap Ag and anr Vs. Jayanth Kumar and ors
Court: Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:18. h September, 2014 % + CS(OS) 2544/2013 SAP AG & ANR Through: Mr. Rahul Baruar, Advocate .... Plaintiffs versus JAYANTH KUMAR & ORS Through: None ..... Defendants CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J.(Oral) 1. Present suit has been filed by the plaintiffs for permanent injunction restraining infringement of copyright, trademark, passing off, rendition of accounts of profit, damages and delivery up. Summons in the suit and notice in the application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2, were issued on 17.12.2013. On an application for appointment of local commissioner filed by the plaintiffs, a local commissioner was appointed. Counsel for defendant no.3 entered appearance on 09.05.2014 and submitted that defendant no.3 has already blocked the impugned domain and further defendant no.3 would remain bound by the final decree which may be passed. Accordingly, defendant no.3 was deleted from the array of parties vide...
Tag this Judgment!