Court : Delhi
Decided on : Aug-01-1984
Reported in : (1985)49CTR(Del)249; ILR1985Delhi299
Anand, J.1. This is a composite petition, under section 482 of the Cr. P. Code, by PNB Finance & Industries Ltd., for short, the company, its chairman, director and secretary, to quash 220 complaints against them filed by the Income-tax Officer, Company Circle, respondent herein, for offences under section 276B of the Income-tax Act; 1961, for short, the Act, and the orders summoning the petitioners in the complaints to stand their trial not only for an offence under the Act but also for an offence under section 409 of the Indian Penal Code.2. Prior to July 19, 1969, the company, which was then known as the Punjab National Bank Ltd., was a banking company, and the banking business of the company was transferred to and vested with the Punjab National Bank, a Corporation, wholly owned by the Government, with effect from the aforesaid date by virtue of an ordinance, which was later replaced by the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970. The company was paid a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Oct-01-1984
Reported in : [1986]59CompCas235(Delhi); 1985(1)Crimes1094; [1986]157ITR385(Delhi)
Anand, J.(1) This is a composite petition, under Section 482 of the Code, by P.N.B. Finance & Industries Ltd, for short, the Company, its Chairman, Director, and Secretary, 'to quash 220 complaints against them by the Income-tax Officer, Company Circle, respondent herein, for an offence under Section 276B of the Income-tax Act 1961, for short, the Act, and the orders summoning the petitioners in the complaints to stand their trial not only for an offence under the Act but also for an offence under- Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code.(2) Prior to July 19, 1969, the Company, which was then known as The Punjab National Bank Ltd., was a banking company, and the banking business of the company was transferred to and vested with the Punjab National Bank, a Corporation, wholly owned by the Government, with effect from the aforesaid date by virtue of an Ordinance, which was later replaced by the Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of the Undertakings) Banking Act 1970. The Company was' paid a ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-23-1984
Reported in : ILR1984Delhi552
Yogeshwar Dayal, J.(1) This petition has been filed by Suraj Bhan and 24 others under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing an order dated 25th March. 1981 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court No. 1, Delhi dismissing an application filed by them under Sub-Section (2) of Section 33C of the Industrial Disputes Act, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) as incompetent.(2) The petitioners and one other had filed a petition purporting to be under Sub-Section 2 of Section 33C of the Act alleging inter alias as under : THEapplicants, named above, the workmen of above named employer, are entitled to receive from the said employer, the benefits mentioned in the statement annexed, on the following facts and grounds: THAT all applicants are employees of the aforesaid employer. They were coerced to submit resignation in the month of May, 1976 under guise of Emergency. In this way they were turned out of employment, and this termination amounts to illegal retrenchment, havin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-06-1984
Reported in : AIR1984Delhi215; 53(1994)DLT854b; 1984RLR252
G.C. Jain, J. (1) This appeal is directed against the judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court, dated November 5, 1976. It was dismissed by us by a short order dated February 1, 1984. Now we proceed to give our reasons for that order. (2) Sunlight Insurance Co., Ltd., now represented by Life Insurance Corporation of India, purchased a piece of land measuring about 78,500 sq. yards abutting on the Ring Road and situate in the revenue estate of Mohd. Pur Munirka village, Tehsil and District Delhi. The said Company, it is stated, developed the said land and demarcated the same into plots of various sizes. To encourage the sale of plots, it is stated to have constructed three houses which were purchased by respondents on, hire-purchase basis. (3) On 6.11.58 a notification u/s 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, ('the Act') was issued stating that the land mentioned therein was likely to be required to be taken by the Govt. at the 'Public expense for a public purpose, namely, for '...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-20-1984
Reported in : II(1984)ACC20; [1986]60CompCas193(Delhi); 25(1984)DLT229; 1984(7)DRJ192; 1984RLR323
M.L. Jain, J. (1) In Rameshwar Prasad and others v. Shambehari Lal Jagannath and another, : [1964]3SCR549 , it was held that the provisions of Order 41 Rule 4 and Order 22 Civil Procedure Code deal with different stages of the appeal and provide for different contingencies Rule 4 of Order 41 applies to the stage when an appeal is filed. Order 22 operates during the pendency of an appeal and not at its institution. Moreover, as explained in State of Punjab v. Nathu Ram, : [1962]2SCR636 , Order 22 Rule 4 does not provide for the abatement of an appeal against the co-respondent of the deceased respondent and as such there can be no question of abatement of the appeal against him. To say that the appeal against the co-respondent abated is not a correct statement of law. The correct position is that looking to the nature of the relief sought in the appeal, if it can proceed against the surviving co-respondent, it may do so Order I Rule 9 enjoins that if the court can deal with the matter in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-29-1984
Reported in : [1985(50)FLR56]; ILR1984Delhi734; 1984(2)SLJ502(Delhi)
..... act, 1956 or it may be a society registered under the societies registration act, 1860 or any other similar statute. whatever be its genetical origin, it would be an authority within the meaning of article 12 if it is an instrumentality or agency of the government the concept of instrumentality or agency of the government is not limited to a corporation created by a statute but is equally applicable to a company. shri a. b. saharya, the learned counsel for the corporation fairly conceded that in view of the objects of the corporation disclosed in the memorandum and articles of association of the corporation ..... , the question arose as to the rules and regulations framed by the oil and natural gas commission, life insurance corporation and the industrial finance corporation as having the force of law. it was ruled to use the words of ray, c.j. that voice ..... confidence in the employee or possible threat to the security and interest of the corporation. it is an act of dismissal in public employment. in public employment, the employer is required to observe the principles of natural justice. (17) rules 43 to 51 provide a reasonable opportunity of being heard before an ..... all the directors on the .board of directors of the corporation shall be and are appointed by (he president. the directors hold office at the pleasure of their appointing authority or until their office become vacant in terms of provisions of section 283 of the companies act, whichever is earlier and they are not liable .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-07-1984
Reported in : (1985)ILLJ57Del; (1985)ILLJ57Del
1. The management of Hamdard Dawakhana (Wakf), Delhi, has filed this petition under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a writ of certiorari quashing the award of the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Delhi (Respondent No. 1) in L.C.I.D. No. 82 of 1975 dated 4th June, 1976 (annexure 'A'), holding that the termination of the services of the workman, Vishwa Nath (respondent No. 2) was illegal and unjustified; that he is entitled to be reinstated with full back wages and continuity of service. 2. Briefly, the facts are that the workman (respondent No. 2) was employed as a section in-charge with the petitioner-establishment in its Dawakhana at Lal Kuan, Delhi. The management is governed under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act and it has Standing Orders duly certified by the Competent Authority which have been in force since 27th April, 1971 (annexure 'B'). The workman, on 4th May, 1974, (annexure 'C'), applied for casual leave from 6th to 8th May, 1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on : Jan-06-1984
Reported in : (1984)(16)ELT156TriDel
1. M/s. Hindustan Shipyard Limited, Visakhapatnam is a Government Company incorporated under Section 617 of the Companies Act, 1956.During the period 1978-79 they had manufactured among other things a Floating Cassain Gate and a Flap Typj Gate in their factory situated at Gandhigram, Visakhapatnam and supplied the same to Naval Dry Dock Authorities under a contract valued at Rs. 1,12,55,050.00 (including the cost of towing and transport) without payment of any Central Excise duty.2. M/s. Hindustan Shipyard Ltd., Visakhapatnam did not inform the Department about the fact of the manufacture of these Gates and supply of the same to the Naval Dry Dock Authorities, Visakhapatnam. The Excise Authorities came to know about this fact from the Audit Reports and after perusing the balance sheet of the company for the year ending 31-3-1979.3. Show cause notice C. No, V/4/1/649/81 dated 2-11-1981 was issued by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Visakhapatnam to M/s.Hindustan Shipyard Ltd....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-21-1984
Reported in : AIR1985Delhi358; ILR1984Delhi473
D.P. Wadhwa, J. (1) The contractor (M/s. Shah Construction Company Limited) has filed the present appeal against the decision of the learned single judge (Sultan Singh, J.), allowing an application of the respondent Corporation (Municipal Corporation of Delhi) under S. 20 of the Arbitration Act (for short 'the Act').(2) To the application , the contractor had raised various objections. The court framed the following issues: 1. whether the petition is within time 2. Whether the claims are barred by the principles, of rest judicata 3. Whether any valid arbitration agreement is subsisting between the parties 4. If issue No. 3 is found in favor of the petitioner, then are the disputes between the parties liable to be referred for arbitration 5. Relief.(3) Issue Nos. 1 and 2 were treated as preliminary issues and were decided by a judgment dated 22nd December 1978. Both the issues were decided against the contractor. The other issues were decided by a judgment dated 10th July 1979. These v/...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-13-1984
Reported in : [1984]147ITR624(Delhi)
Chadha J.1. These four references under s. 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), at the instance of the Department, raise the following question of law for the opinion of the court : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally right in holding that the amount of Rs. 4 lakhs paid by the assessed was not in the nature of penalty for infraction of municipal laws or bye-laws and was thereforee a permissible deduction in arriving at the profits of the business ?' 2. The facts are that in the returns filed for the assessment years 1968-69, 1969-70, 1970-71 and 1971-72, the relevant previous years ending on March 31, 1968, March 31, 1969, March 31, 1970, and March 31, 1971, respectively, the assesseds claimed a deduction of Rs. 4 lakhs having been paid as alleged penalty levied under s 195 of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911. The assesseds are a partnership firm formed on January 1, 1967, for the purpose of construct...
Tag this Judgment!