Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: explosives act 1884 section 4 definitions Sorted by: old Court: delhi Year: 2006 Page 6 of about 411 results (0.180 seconds)

Escorts Limited Vs. G.K. Automobile

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 2006(1)ARBLR346(Delhi); II(2006)BC114; 127(2006)DLT559; 2006(87)DRJ365

..... the obligation to pay the debt is discharged' in the present case at delhi where the company has its registered office. it follows that the offence under section 207 of the act would also occur at the place where the failure to discharge that obligation arises, namely, the failure to post the dividend warrant within 42 days.21. ..... the court further held that the place where the dividend warrant would be posted is the place where the company has its registered office and the offence under section 207 of the act would also occur at the place where the failure to discharge that obligation arises, namely, the failure to post the dividend warrant within 42 days. in ..... to is equivalent to payment and results in the discharge of the obligation.20. in h. p. gupta (supra) the question arose in the context of section 207 of the companies act, 1956 which provides for payment of dividend within 42 days of its declaration by a company and its non-payment within the stipulated period is punishable. the .....

Pfizer Products Inc. Vs. Rajesh Chopra and ors.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 127(2006)DLT783; 2006(32)PTC301(Del)

..... of a trade mark, an application must be filed in the branch office of the registrar of trade marks. it is not in dispute that under section 5(3) of the 1958 act, the central government has issued a notification in the official gazette defining the territorial limits within which an office of the trade marks registry may exercise ..... jurisdiction in the context of order 7 rule 10 of the cpc. the court observed as under:there is another ground for holding that the court has jurisdiction. section 20 of the code of civil procedure shows that a suit like the present can be filed wherever the cause of action wholly or partly arises. the plaintiff has ..... as regards the jurisdiction of the delhi high court were raised. the first being under section 62 of the copyright act, 1957 on the ground that the suit was a composite suit under the copyright act as well as under the trade and merchandise marks act, 1958. the second contention being that the defendants had sought registration of the trademark at .....

Moser Baer India Ltd. Vs. Cc

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in : (2006)(105)ECC511

..... construction items for the building.16. the learned sdr relies upon the following case laws to support the contention of the revenue : section 111(o) of the customs act section 111(o) of the customs act provides for confiscation of exempted goods when condition of exemption not observed. the case of the respondents is that the goods imported by ..... hit by any time bar.19. in view of the foregoing discussions, we are of the view that the appellants have contravened the provisions of section 110(o) of the customs act in as much as they have not utilized the disputed items procured duty free in the way as was prescribed under the exemption notifications. there ..... called for especially when the adjudicating authority not ordered confiscation of the goods. section 112 of the act provides that the persons who n relation to any goods do or omit to do which act render such goods liable to confiscation under section 111 of the act, shall only be liable to penalty. he referred to the tribunal's decision .....

Electrical Manufacturing Company Ltd. Vs. National thermal Power Corpo ...

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 2006(1)ARBLR449(Delhi); III(2006)BC575; 129(2006)DLT224; 2006(87)DRJ465

..... a similar plea raised about the appointment of third arbitrator is thus rejected.26. learned senior counsel for the respondent sought to contend that sub-section 3 of section 4 of the said act would have no application in view of the fact that the arbitration proceedings were still not pending on 8.1.1993 as the first sitting was ..... not valid. in state of haryana v. chandra mani and ors. : 2002(143)elt249(sc) while dealing with the issue of condensation of delay under section 5 of the limitation act, 1963 it was held by the apex court that certain amount of latitude within reasonable limits is permissible having regard to impersonal bureaucratic set-up involving red ..... from retrospective date. this is not so in the present case. not only that there was no analogous provision to sub-section 3 of section 4 of the said act.17. in the present case the said act was introduced inter alias with the object of dealing with the problem of uneven distributed energy sources in the country and multiplicity .....

Cogent Silver Fibre Pte Ltd. Vs. Noble Fibre Technologies Inc. and ors ...

Court : Delhi

Reported in : AIR2006Delhi292; 127(2006)DLT707; 2006(87)DRJ583

..... distributorship agreement was revokable and the same being admittedly for rendering personal service, the relevant provisions of the specific relief act were automatically attracted. sub-section (1) of section 14 of the specific relief act specifies the contracts which cannot be specifically enforced, one of which is a contract which is in its nature determinable ..... any other party. learned counsel for the defendant no. 1 argued that in view of legal position contained in section 14(1)(c), section 19 read with section 41(e) of the specific relief act such a clause cannot be specifically enforced. the learned senior counsel in support of this submission, highlighted following aspects:( ..... best an agent of the defendant no. 1, a declared principal and, thereforee, suit against the agent is not maintainable in view of section 230 of the contract act. he has also stated that there is no agreement between the plaintiff and the defendants including the defendant no. 1. the plaintiff approached the .....

Indian Herbs Research and Supply Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in : (2006)101TTJ(Delhi)786

..... company but only on lease, therefore, it cannot be held that the appellant had infringed the provisions of clause (ii) of sub-section (2) of section 80-ia of the act. the provisions of section 2(47)(vi) of the act, in my opinion, are not applicable to its case as plant and machinery so taken on lease is not an immovable property and ..... was formed by transfer to a new business of plant and machinery previously used for any purpose--a condition laid down in clause (ii) of sub-section (2) of section 80-ia of the act and on this very basis, even if the said plant and machinery previously used and now taken on lease by the appellant-company and used in the ..... , does not entitle the appellant getting deduction if it otherwise qualifies for the same, therefore, 1 hereby hold that the appellant is entitled to a deduction under section 80-ia of the act and hence the ao was not justified to disallow the same. the ao is, therefore, directed to allow such a deduction to the appellant accordingly.17. the .....

United Airlines Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and ors.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : [2006]287ITR281(Delhi)

..... international airport. the short question in the case is whether the landing and parking charges can be deemed to be rent under section 194-i, expln. (i) of the it act.4. learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the landing and parking charges cannot be treated as rent within the aforesaid provision.5. explanationn (i ..... ) of section 194-i of the it act reads as follows:(i) 'rent' means any payment, by whatever name called, under any lease, sublease, tenancy or any other agreement or arrangement for the use ..... markandeya katju, c.j.1. this writ petition has been filed against the impugned order of the cit, dt. 16th dec, 1999 under section 264 of the it act.2. heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.3. the petitioner is an airline incorporated in usa. its aircrafts land at indira gandhi .....

Jai Shree Agro Industries Ltd. Vs. Panipat Roadlines Regd.

Court : Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

..... be oral and in case of urgency may be through fax message other any kind of communication. thus, the act of delivering the consignment comes within the definition of deficiency in service as defined under section 2(1)(g) of the consumer protection act, 1986. 5. at the same time, we cannot be oblivious of the fact that in the past the amount .....

Lake City Service Centre Vs. Cce

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

..... paid by them. to that extent the order-in-appeal in this case is wrong and is set aside.7. in respect of penalty under section 76 and section 75a of the finance act, 1994 i find that the board vide its circular no.137/39/2004-cx.4 dated 20.9.2004 has directed field staff as follows: ..... tax, interest and penalty within 30 days of the date of the order-in-original. hence, they are eligible to claim the benefit extended under section 78 of the finance act, 1994. the appellate authority in his order-in-original has not considered the implication of this provision and has upheld the total penalty imposed under ..... 2003. the adjudicating authority confirmed the demand and also imposed equivalent penalty under section 78 of the finance act, 1994 and penalties under section 76 & 75a. the appellant discharged their service tax liability and interest under section 75 along with 25% of the penalty imposed under section 78 and preferred an appeal with the appellate authority. the appellate authority after .....

Ramesh Anand Vs. Cocord Motors Ltd. and Others

Court : Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

J.D. Kapoor, President: 1. The complaint of the appellant seeking compensation for having been sold defective Indica Diesel Car of DLX model was dismissed merely on the premise that there was no manufacturing defect in the car and if there was such defect the same could have been ordered to be removed. 2. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant has preferred this appeal. 3. We are sorry to point out that the appellant had visited the garage on more than 33 occasions for removing the defect and there are large number of job cards. Merely because there was no manufacturing defect does not mean that the vehicle sold was not defective. Manufacturing defect in a vehicle saddles the manufacturer with the liability of replacing the vehicle by new vehicle and if the vehicle has such defects that it is taken to the garage time and again such a vehicle comes within the definition of defective goods as defect means any fault, imperfection or shortcoming in the quality, quantity, potency, purity or stand...