Delhi Court December 2015 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.
Raj Dulari Bhasin Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-2015
1. This appeal under Section 260A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act') is directed against the impugned order dated 12th May 2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ('ITAT') in ITA No. 2183/Del/2000 for the Assessment Year ('AY') 1990-91. 2. While admitting this appeal the Court by its order dated 18th May 2004 framed the following question of law for consideration: "Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the amount of Rs. 9,32,855 was assessable as an adventure in the nature of trade' and not lone term capital gain' as declared by the appellant?" 3. The brief facts leading to filing of the present appeal are that the Appellant, Smt. Raj Dulari Bhasin, aged about 94 years, who is having no regular source of income, was an owner of a house property at X-24, Hauz Khas, New Delhi ('the property in question'). The land on which the property in question was located, had been acquired by her on 18th March 1958 for a sale consideration of Rs. 5...
Sumer Singh and Another Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-2015
1. The appellants Sumer Singh and Balbir Singh have been convicted for the offence under Section 20 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as NDPS Act, 1985) and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years, fine of Rs.1,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine, further rigorous imprisonment of one year by judgment and order dated 13.04.2011/19.04.2011 passed by the Special Judge, NDPS in Sessions Case No.04/09 arising out of FIR No.470/2008 (P.S. Jahangir Puri). 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 19.09.2008 at about 12:15 p.m., secret information was received by SI Sunil Kumar (PW14) that between 1:30 p.m. to 2:30 p.m., contraband (charas) would be delivered to accused Yogesh and appellant Sumer Singh. The information provided was that the consignment of the contraband would come in a truck bearing registration No.JK-02-AD-4765, which truck would reach Shimla Gate, Fruit Mandi, Azad Pur, Shalimar Bagh Road, Delhi ...
The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. HCL Infosystems Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-2015
Dr. S. Muralidhar, J. 1. This is an appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( ˜Act') against the impugned order dated 3rd October 2002 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ˜ITAT') in ITA No. 1280/Del/2002 for the Assessment Year ( ˜AY') 1998-99. Question of law 2. While admitting this appeal on 1st February 2006 the Court framed the following question of law for determination: Whether the ITAT was correct in holding that receipt of Rs. 6080.95 lakhs by the Assessee as compensation on termination of joint-venture agreement was not taxable as income under the Head Capital Gains'? Background Facts 3. The facts leading to the filing of the present appeal are that the Assessee, HCL Infosystems Limited ( ˜HIL'), which was initially incorporated as HCL Limited under the Companies Act, 1956 on 17th April 1986, was engaged in the manufacture, distribution and sale of computers and services in India. At that stage most of the computer...
Bigtree Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Saturday Sunday Media Internet and ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-2015
Oral: 1(i) These suits are filed by the plaintiff against the defendants seeking permanent injunction restraining the infringement of trade mark, passing off and damages etc. (ii) In both the suits i.e CS(COMM) Nos.53/2015 and 54/2015, the plaintiff is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and it has no office in Delhi be it a principal office or a head office or a registered office or even a branch office. Plaintiff's address as per the memo of parties is at Mumbai. (iii) Defendants in CS(COMM) No.53/2015 as per the address given in the memo of parties in the plaint are situated outside Delhi i.e at Gurgaon and the defendants in CS(COMM) No.54/2015 are situated, as per the address contained in the memo of parties, at Bengaluru in Karnataka. 2. In both the suits, territorial jurisdiction of this Court is claimed on the basis of plaintiff's carrying on business in Delhi because plaintiff is selling its services in Delhi through the internet. The trade mark and the service m...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shiv Dhooti Pearls and Investment Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-2015
S. Muralidhar, J. 1. This appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act') is directed against the impugned order dated 30th April 2003 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ('ITAT') in ITA No. 222/Del/2000 for the Assessment Year ('AY') 1994-95. 2. While admitting this appeal, the Court by its order dated 25th May 2004 framed the following questions of law for consideration: 1. Whether the ITAT has correctly interpreted and applied Section 68 of the Income Tax, 1961 while upholding deletion of Rs. 38 lakhs and Rs. 1,01,007 made by the Assessing Officer by applying the said section? 2. Whether the ITAT has erred in deleting addition of Rs. 38 lakhs and Rs.1,01,007 without going into and examining the credit worthiness of M/s. Tuq Credits Ltd. and genuineness of the transaction with reference to availability of funds with the said company? 3. Whether the order of the ITAT is perverse as it ignores the reasons and grounds mentioned by the Assessing Of...
Puneet @ Titu Vs. State of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-2015
R.K. Gauba, J. 1. By judgment dated 26.02.2000 in sessions case No.97/96, the appellant was held guilty and convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 ( IPC ?), the gravamen of the charge being that on 09.09.1993 he had committed the murder of Savita Mohan Verma in premises No.809/7, Govindpuri, New Delhi and thereafter destroyed evidence by cutting her body into several parts and throwing them off at difference places with the intention to screen himself from legal punishment. By order dated 01.03.2000, he was sentenced to imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 1,000/- and rigorous imprisonment for five years with fine of Rs. 500/- on the two counts with direction that in the event of default in payment of fine he would undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one month and simple imprisonment for 15 days respectively and be entitled to set off under Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ( Cr.P.C. ?). 2. This appeal was p...
Lt Col Naresh Dahiya Vs. UOI and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-2015
Deepa Sharma, J. 1. The petitioner joined the Indian Army on 15.12.1984 and was promoted to the rank of Major in 2001. He was posted as Officer Commanding (OC), 530, Stores Supplies and Transport Company i.e. SS and TC (GREF), Project HIRAK, located at Bhandara (Maharashtra). 2. In brief, the facts necessary for disposal of the present writ petition are that in April, 2002, the process of auction for disposal of unserviceable vehicles/equipments/plants and other salvage stores lying under the custody of 530, SS andTC (GREF) at Bhandara was initiated by the Chief Engineer, Project HIRAK, he being the competent authority. The auction was scheduled for 09.08.2002. For the said auction, a catalogue showing details of 12 lots containing all class DEE/V/E/P and other salvage stores held with 530, SS and TC (GREF) was prepared and forwarded to HQ (P) HIRAK during the last week of April, 2002. On the basis of cost details of salvage stores in the auction catalogue, the Board of Officers conven...
Dongh Lian Kham and Another Vs. Union of India and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-2015
Crl.M.A No.12618/2015 Exemption allowed subject to just exemptions. The Application is disposed of accordingly WP(CRL) No.1884/2015 1. Dongh Lian Kham and Zel Khan Mang, whose country of origin is Myanmar, have prayed for a direction to respondent No.2, Foreign Regional Registration Officer (hereinafter referred as FRRO) not to deport them or their family members to their country of origin. In the present Writ Petition, it has also been prayed that the respondents be directed to produce before the Court the request made by the Ministry of Home Affairs (hereinafter referred as MHA) for deportation of the petitioners and their family members to their country of origin and to quash the decision of the Ministry of Home Affairs on the issue. An additional prayer has been made by the petitioners for a direction to the respondents to consider sympathetically the application preferred by them for grant of long term VISA as per the guidelines of Ministry of Home Affairs. 2. During the course of...
Rakesh and Another Vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-2015
R.K. Gauba, J. 1. On the basis of report under Section 173 of the Code of the Criminal Procedure, ( Cr.P.C. ?) submitted on conclusion of investigation into FIR No. 21/2005 of police station Bawana, the two appellants were put to trial (with two others) on the charge of they having entered into a criminal conspiracy on or about 12.1.2005 and, in furtherance of the common object thereof, having abducted Yogender Kumar son of Baljit Singh sometime around 6.30 p.m. on the said day from Bawana along with motor vehicle used as taxi make Tata sumo bearing registration No.DL 3C W 1174 ( the taxi ?) with the intention of causing him (Yogender) to be secretly and wrongly confined and thereafter committing his murder near village Ahmednagar, falling within the jurisdiction of police station Bulandshahr (UP), on the same night, causing disappearance of the evidence of the said offences by throwing the dead body in the fields of wheat and selling off the taxi for consideration and thereby having c...
Mohd. Aslam Vs. Ramesh Thakur
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-18-2015
1. The present leave to appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 14.10.2015 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate (NI Act) South-East District, Saket Courts Complex, New Delhi, in CC No.1244/E whereby the respondent has been acquitted of the charges of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act (hereinafter referred as NI Act) and the complaint of the leave petitioner has been dismissed. 2. The petitioner is said to have advanced a loan of Rs.2 lacs to the respondent on 03.12.2007 as the respondent had approached him for such loan in order to defray the expenses which were incurred while addressing personal needs. Four post-dated cheques of Rs.50,000/- each was allegedly given by the respondent. On presentation of one of the cheques namely cheque no.118492, the same was dishonoured with the remark that the 'account has already been closed'. The return memo is dated 12.11.2009. 3. A legal notice was sent to the respondent. 4. A grievance has been raised that not...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »