Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : [2009]178TAXMAN141(Punj& Har)
ORDERAdarsh Kumar Goel, J.C.M. No. 12076-C-II of 2008:Application is allowed and delay in filing the appeal is condoned.Heard on merits.Main Appeal:1. The revenue has preferred this appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act') against the order dated 12-3-2007 of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh A Bench (B), Chandigarh passed in ITA No. 342/Chd./2006 for the assessment year 1999-2000, proposing to raise following substantial questions of law:(a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble ITAT has erred in holding that the Assessing Officer has not recorded reasons or satisfaction before initiating penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c)? (b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble ITAT was erred in holding that the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is not leviable?2. The assessee is a Co-operative Society and as an agent of Government, procures agricultu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR2009P& H105; (2009)153PLR415
Satish Kumar Mittal, J.1. This order shall dispose of C.W.P. Nos. 20204 and 20188 of 2008 as they are arising out of the same impugned notification dated 11.11.2008. In both the petitions, the petitioners have challenged the Punjab Panchayat Election (Second Amendment) Rules, 2008, notified vide notification dated 11.11.2008. The petitioners are aggrieved basically by two amendments made by the impugned notification.2. Firstly, under the amended rule, no proposer or seconder is required for a candidate for the office of Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat. Earlier, as per the Proviso to Rule 45(1) of the Punjab Panchayat Election Rules, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'), if the office of Sarpanch of a Gram Panchayat was reserved for Scheduled Castes or Women, then the proposer or seconder shall propose or second the name of persons belonging to such reserved categories only. Now, as per the amended rule, there is no requirement to propose or second the name of a candidate. The c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (2009)154PLR260
Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J.1. The present revision petition has been filed against the order of learned Rent Controller, Jagraon, whereby he accepted the eviction petition of landlord that he, being a Non-resident Indian require the premises for his own use and occupation.2. The order passed by learned Rent Controller has been assailed on the following grounds:a) That in the rent petition, ground of personal necessity has been wrongly stated.b) That in the petition for ejectment, four grounds of ejectment have been taken and under Sectionl3-B of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') the landlord could only take one ground of personal necessity as other grounds can only be raised in eviction petition under Section 13 of the Act.c) That only photocopy of the permanent residency card has been placed, therefore, it is not proved that the landlord is a Non-resident Indian.d) That reply to the application for leave to defend the petition wa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : 2009[16]STR19; [2010]24STT354
ORDERAdarsh Kumar Goel, J.1. The Revenue has preferred this appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short, the Act), proposing to raise following substantial questions of law:(i) Whether the Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (in short CESTAT) is correct in relying upon the Extraordinary Taxpayer Friendly Scheme issued by the Hon'ble Finance Minister, Govt. of India (Central Board of Excise & Customs, New Delhi) in the month of September, 2004 and which remained in operation upto November, 2004 when the respondents were caught evading service tax before announcement of said scheme ?(ii) Whether the penalties imposed under Sections 75A, 76, 77 & 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 by the Revisionary Authorities in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 84 of the Finance Act, 1994 are correct when the respondent failed to obtain service tax Registration Certificate, failed to file Service Tax-3 Returns and also failed to deposit the due amount of Servic...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : [2009]181TAXMAN72(Punj& Har)
ORDERAdarsh Kumar Goel, J.1. The revenue has preferred this appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act') against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'A', New Delhi in ITA No. 1975/Delhi/2004 for the assessment year 2000-01, proposing to raise following substantial question of law:Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Id. IT AT was right in law in upholding the order of the CIT(A), deleting the addition of Rs. 10,50,000 made by the Assessing Officer under Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961?2. The Assessing Officer made addition to the declared amount of the assessee by Rs. 10,50,000 treating the amount of cash credit to be an unexplained income. The CIT(A) reversed the finding of the Assessing Officer and held that there was no ground for the addition and there was nothing to doubt the genuineness of credit entries. The Tribunal upheld the said finding and observed:After hearing the submissions we are o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : [2009]179TAXMAN148(Punj& Har)
Adarsh Kumar Goel, J.1. The assessee has preferred this appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act') against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar passed in ITA No. 371 (Asr.)/2006 for the assessment year 2000-01, served upon the appellant as on 2-2-2008, proposing to raise following substantial questions of law:1. Whether the Tribunal had erred in law by failing to appreciate that the Assessing Officer in light of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshajts (India) Ltd v. ITO [2003] 259 ITR 19 was under a 'statutory obligation' to dispose of the 'Objections' filed by the assessee challenging the initiation of the reassessment proceedings, by way of a 'separate' and an 'independent' order, before proceeding with and framing assessment in the hands of the assessee?2. Whether the Tribunal had gravely erred in law and acted in gross violation of the 'Principles of Natural justice' by relying on the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (2009)153PLR372
Rakesh Kumar Jain, J.1. This judgment shall dispose of 7 appeals bearing R.F.A. Nos. 758 of 1991 and X-Obj No. 59-Cl of 1991, 760 and X-Obj No. 58-CI of 1991, 763 of 1991 and X-Obj No. 57-CI of 1991, 759, 761, 762 and 764 of 1991 filed by the State of Haryana and the Cross Objections filed by the landowners/claimants as common questions of law and facts are involved therein.2. Land measuring 26.01 acres situated in villages Satnali Tehsil and District Mahendergarh was acquired by the Department of Irrigation, Government of Haryana at public expense for public purpose, namely for the construction of Satnali Distributory. Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 (for short, 'the Act') was published in the Haryana Govt. Gazette on 14.12.1981 followed by a notification of declaration issued under Section 6 of the Act.3. The Land Acquisition Collector (in short, 'the Collector') vide his award No. 6 dated 28.1.1986 assessed the compensation @ Rs. 9,000/- per acre for Ch...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : 2009[16]STR18
ORDERAdarsh Kumar Goel, J.1. Delay condoned.2. The Revenue has preferred this appeal under Section 35 G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Section 83 of Finance Act, 1994 against the Order dated 30-8-2007, : 2008 (9) S.T.R. 100 (Tri.-Del.) passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, proposing to raise following substantial questions of law:(a) Whether in view of the habitual conduct of the respondent in deliberately not appearing before the statutory authorities on the dates of hearing, the learned Tribunal is justified in remanding the matter?(b) Whether the opportunities already granted to the respondent amount to sufficient opportunity?(c) Whether when the minimum penalty provided under Section 76 of the Act, as held/interpreted by Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal cited as : 2006 (3) S.T.R. 429 (Tribunal-LB) : 2004 (174) E.L.T. 19 (Tri.-LB), has been imposed, the Tribunal is justified in remanding the matter?(d) Whether the Tribunal is justified in se...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR2009P& H76; (2009)153PLR69
Satish Kumar Mittal, J.1. (1) Whether under Section 24(2) of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 (hereinafter referred to as' 'the Act'), the Government can decline to notify in the Official Gazette the election of President of a Municipal Councilor, who has been declared elected as such in the first meeting of the Municipal Council, convened under Rule 3 of the Punjab Municipal (President and Vice-President) Election Rules, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1994 Rules') read with Section 20 of the Act, on the ground that quorum of the said meeting was not 'complete and the President elect, being a Scheduled Caste Councilor, was not eligible to be elected to the office of the President, which is reserved for the General category.?(2) Whether there is any quorum prescribed for the first meeting of the members of the Municipal Council convened under Rule 3 of the 1994 Rules read with Section 20 of the Act, for the purpose of administering oath and election of the President and Vice-Presid...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (2009)153PLR374
M.M. Kumar, J.1. This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution prays for quashing notice dated 10.12.1999 (P-l), notification dated 22.11.2001 (P-4), award dated 20.11.2002 (P-7), amended award dated 22.11.2002 (P-8) and all the subsequent proceedings thereto.2. Brief facts of the case are that Smt. Devinder Kaur, mother of petitioner Nos. 1 to 4 was owner of land measuring approximately 70 Kanals, comprised in Khasra No. 25//5(8-0), 6(8-0), 7(8-0), 8(7-12), 9(8-0), 12(4-18), 13(4-4), 14/1(3-18), 15(34)), 26//1/1(0-12), 9/3(1-12), 10(8-0), 11/1(3-9) and 12/1(0-15), in the revenue estate of village Jawaddi, Tehsil and District Ludhiana. The said land was bequeathed by her in favour of petitioner Nos. 1 to 4 in equal shares and after her death petitioner Nos. 1 to 4 inherited the land in question. The land in dispute falls within the municipal limits of Ludhiana and various amenities viz. water, electricity, sewerages, telephone and other civic amenities are available in the ...
Tag this Judgment!