Court : Punjab and Haryana
Ajay Kumar Mittal, J. 1. This order shall dispose of a bunch of 85 appeals bearing ITA Nos. 200, 201, 232 to 255, 271 to 273, 283 to 298, 303 to 308, 310 to 316, 332 to 334, 356 to 358 and 361 of 2013, 10 to 16, 25, 26, 73, 74, 90, 110, 136, 191, 192, 253, 254, 278 and 398 of 2014, as learned counsel for the parties are agreed that common substantial questions of law are involved therein in all these appeals. However, the facts are being extracted from ITA No.200 of 2013. 2. ITA No.200 of 2013 has been preferred by the appellant-assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, "the Act") against the order dated 29.7.2013 passed under Section 254(1) of the Act by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh 'B' Bench, Chandigarh (in short, "the Tribunal") in ITA No.448/Chd/2011 for the assessment year 2007-08. On 30.5.2014, these appeals were admitted which raise the following substantial questions of law:- (i) "Whether the transactions in hand envisage a "transfer" e...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
CWP No.13699 of 2014 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.13699 of 2014 (O&M) Date of Decision.19.08.2014 Verinder Singh ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ......Respondents Present: Mr. Sameer Sachdeva, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. H.S. Sethi, Addl. A.G., Punjab for the respondents. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?.2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ?.3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?. -.- K. KANNAN J.(ORAL) 1. The writ petition challenges the order passed on 18.07.2014 directing the sealing of the premises of the petitioner that was said to have been a LPG gas godown. The petitioner's contention was that he had been issued with a letter of intent on 20.03.2014 and the property had been made ready for allotment after securing concurrence from all the statutory authorities. The petitioner would place on record the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Satyawan IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT201408.20 16:32 "I attested to the accuracy and integrity of this document" CHANDIGARH High Court Chandigarh CRA-S-46-SB-2003 Date of Decision : August 14, 2014 Anil Kumar @ Neelu & others .........Appellants Versus State of Punjab .....Respondent ***** CORAM : HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Present : Mr.Amit Rawal, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Manvir Singh, Advocate for appellant No.1. Mr.R.S.Rai, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Gautam Dutt, Advocate for appellant No.2. Mr.Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate for appellants No.3 to 8. Appellant No.6 stated to have died. Mr.Sukhdeep Singh Brar, Addl. A.G., Punjab. **** 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?. 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?. 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?. ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J. The appellants have filed the present appeal against the judgment dated 10.12.2002 passed by Special Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib vide which ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Crl. Appeal No.S-2240-SB of 2013 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Appeal No.S-2240-SB of 2013 Date of Decision: 24.07.2014 Jaspreet Singh ....Appellant Versus State of Punjab ....Respondent Crl. Appeal No.S-1452-SB of 2012 Manpreet Singh ....Appellant Versus State of Punjab ....Respondent BEFORE :- HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY Present:- Mr.Paras Talwar, Advocate for the appellant. Mr.D.S.Virk, A.A.G., Punjab for the respondent-State. ***** DAYA CHAUDHARY, J. By this common judgment, both the appeals i.e CRA-S No.2240-SB of 2013 filed by Jaspreet Singh and CRA-S No.1452-SB of 2012 filed by Manpreet Singh shall be disposed of as the same have arisen out of the same judgment of the trial Court. However, for the sake of convenience, the facts are being derived from CRA-S No.2240-SB of 2013. Accused-appellants, namely, Jaspreet Singh and Manpreet Singh faced trial in case FIR No.247 dated 19.11.2006 registered under Kaur Gurpreet 2014.08.01 16:51 I attest ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
CRA-S-387-SB of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRA-S-387-SB of 2008 Date of decision:17. 07.2014 Jagtar Singh Hawara ........ Appellant Versus State of Haryana ........ Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.P. NAGRATH1 Whether Reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?.2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?.3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?. Present: Mr. H.S. Bhullar, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Anil Kumar, DAG, Haryana. R.P. NAGRATH, J.The appellant was in custody of police in FIR No.88 dated 15.12.1995 for offences under Sections 302, 395, 396 etc. of Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, registered at Police Station Naggal.2. The prosecution story in brief is that on 17.01.1996, the appellant made a disclosure statement while in custody, the relevant portion of which in the light of admissibility under the law is that he has kept concealed 11 kgs. of RDX and passport of one...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.9562 of 2014(O&M) Date of Decision: July 14, 2014 M/s Anaesthetic Gases PVT.Ltd.....Petitioner versus The Union of India and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL. Present : Mr.Kanwaljit Singh, Senior Advocate with Mr.Ajaivir Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?. 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?. 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?. --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) CWP-7996 of 2014 For the reasons mentioned in the application the same is allowed subject to all just exceptions and the documents (Annexures P-16 to P-18) are taken on record. CM stands disposed of. CWP No.9562 of 2014 The petitioner-company has set-up an industrial unit to manufacture Nitrous Oxide Gas in Medium Scale Sector. The aforesaid Gas is supplied to various hospitals and nursing homes a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
CRA-S-927-SB of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRA-S-927-SB of 2009 Date of decision:30. 06.2014 Mohd. Hanif @ Shakurullah @ Amar Singh Gill ........ Appellant Versus State of Punjab ........ Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.P. NAGRATH1 Whether Reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?.2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?.3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?. Present: None for the appellant. Mr. Luvinder Sofat, AAG, Punjab. R.P. NAGRATH, J.Appellant is the resident of Jamerwal, P.S. Damka, District Sayalkot in Pakistan. The Pathankot Police seized a huge cache of arm and ammunition from the appellant on 05.09.2004. The charges against the appellant are for possessing 20 fake currency notes of the denomination of ` 1000/- each, total ` 20,000/- and committed offence under Section 489-C of Indian Penal Code (IPC); huge arm and ammunition, for offence under Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1954 (which in fa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Civil Writ Petition No.24254 of 2013 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.24254 of 2013 (O&M) Date of decision : 26.05.2014 All India LPG Distributors Fed. (Punjab) and others ...Petitioners versus Union of India and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE Ms.JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present: Mr.R.S.Setia, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Sanjiv Pandit, Advocate, for the petitioneRs.Mr.Brijeshwar Singh Kanwar, Advocate, for respondent No.1-UOI. Mr.Ashish Kapoor, Advocate, for respondent No.2. Mr.Raman Sharma, Advocate, for respondent Nos.3 and 4. **** RITU BAHRI , J. The petitioners are seeking writ of certiorari for quashing RGGLVY Scheme (Annexure P-4).Brochure (Annexure P-5) and Advertisement dated 27.05.2013 (Annexure P-6) regarding allotment of gas agencies in rural areas under the Rajiv Gandhi Gramin LPG Vitran Scheme (for short 'RGGLV').The petitioners are challenging the RGGLV Scheme on the ground that it is contrary to the law of land and prejudici...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No.539 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision:14. h May, 2014 Municipal Council, Yamunanagar Appellant Versus Bharat Starch Industries Ltd. Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG1 Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment?.2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not?.3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?. Present: Mr. Sunil Dhanda, Advocate for Mr. Rajesh Lamba, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate for the respondent. RAKESH KUMAR GARG, J.Respondent filed the instant suit seeking the following relief: Suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from forcing to obtain any other further licence in the same premises of the plaintiffs of the factory namely Bharat Starch Industries by depositing license fee for running Generator/engine and to take any coercive action against the plaintiff and its factory on the basis of illegal, arbitrary,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
1 CR.A.No.292-DB of 2009, CR.A.No.632-DB of 2008 & CR.A.No.725-DB of 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:25. 02.2014 CR.A.No.292-DB of 2009 Abdul Latif Adam Momin Appellant Versus Union of India through Central Bureau of Investigation Respondent Present: M/s R.S.Bains & B.S.Sodhi, Advocates, for the appellant. M/s Sukhdeep Singh Sandhu & Y.K.Saxena, Advocates, for the respondent. CR.A.No.632-DB of 2008 Bhupal Man Damai @ Yusuf Nepali & another Appellants Versus State of Punjab Respondent Present: Mr. N.S.Swaitch, Advocate, for the appellants. M/s Sukhdeep Singh Sandhu & Y.K.Saxena, Advocates, for the respondent. CR.A.No.725-DB of 2008 State through Central Bureau of Investigation Appellant Versus Abdul Latif Adam Momin Respondent Present: M/s Sukhdeep Singh Sandhu & Y.K.Saxena, Advocates, for the appellant. M/s R.S.Bains & B.S.Sodhi, Advocates, for the respondent. Kumar Vimal 2014.02.25 13:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this documen...
Tag this Judgment!