Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-19-2008
Reported in : 149(2008)DLT205; 2008(101)DRJ283
..... at least twenty electors of the constituency as proposers and at least twenty electors of the constituency as seconders; (c) in the case of a seat reserved for sikkimese of nepali origin, by an elector of the constituency as proposer:provided further that no nomination paper shall be delivered to the returning officer on a day which is a public holiday .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-24-2008
Reported in : [2009]149CompCas402(Delhi)
Mukul Mudgal, J.1. This writ petition challenges the order dated 4th February 2002 passed by the Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (hereinafter referred to as 'the AAIFR') wherein while dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner M/s. Madras Petrochem Ltd. and Anr. it was held that the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (hereinafter referred to as 'the BIFR') had made all efforts to secure the rehabilitation of the petitioner company and the scheme sanctioned in 1991 and 1996 had failed. It was concluded by the AAIFR that the petitioner is heavily indebted and there was no possibility of rehabilitating it. It was held that prolonged proceedings in SICA would no further serve any purpose and would serve the private interests of the guarantors. It is this order which is challenged in this writ petition. 2. Learned Counsel for the appellant has challenged the divesting of the jurisdiction of the BIFR and the AAIFR in these proceedings. The re...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-26-2008
Reported in : AIR2008Delhi192; [2009]149CompCas390(Delhi)
Mukul Mudgal, J.1. This writ petition involves the interpretation of Section 15(1), 2nd Proviso of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as SICA), which reads as follows:15. Reference to Board.-- (1) When an industrial company has become a sick industrial company, the Board of Directors of the company, shall, within sixty days from the date of finalisation of the duly audited accounts of the company for the financial year as at the end of which the company has become a sick industrial company, make a reference to the Board for determination of the measures which shall be adopted with respect to the company:..Provided also that on or after the commencement of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 where a reference is pending before the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction such reference shall abate if the secured creditors, represent...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Apr-23-2008
Reported in : 2008(38)PTC222(Del)
S. Ravindra Bhat, J.1. The plaintiff is a private limited company registered under provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, having its office at 24, Nehru Place, New Delhi 110 019 and is, inter alia, involved in the business of running Lifestyle Brand Stores by the name of 'Ravissant' in India as well as abroad. The Defendant is a Company registered under the laws of France registered in the Companies Register for Paris and is inter alias engaged in the business of hair styling salons. The original name of the Defendant was Franklin Export S.A.; it was later changed to D.F. Export S.A.2. It is averred in the suit that on 1.06.2000 a Franchisee Agreement was entered between the Plaintiff and the Defendant for running an exclusive ladies' luxury hair dressing salon at New Delhi under the brand name of 'Jacques Dessange', the defendant's trade name. The agreement was for an initial period of four years; ending on 31.12.2004, but subject to further renewal. There was no Jacque Dessange Salon...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Aug-08-2008
Reported in : 154(2008)DLT346
Manmohan Singh, J.1. This Appeal has been filed against the impugned order dated 23rd July 2001 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in I.A. No. 2467 and 2468 of 2000 in Suit No. 2480/98 whereby the application of the Defendant under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 CPC was allowed and the plaint as such was rejected mainly on the ground that the suit is barred by strict provisions and rigours of Sub-section (1) of Section 86 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the suit is not maintainable under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of Code of Civil Procedure.2. In the nutshell, brief facts for deciding the appeal are that on 12th November, 1996, there was a mid air collision of Saudi Arabian Airlines Boeing 747 ( flight SV 763) with Kazakistan Airlines near Charkhi Dadri, Haryana. One Ms. Farah Mumtaz was a passenger on board of Saudi Arabian Airlines. She died as a result of the said collision. The plaintiffs are the legal heirs of deceased Farah Mumtaz and claim compensation and damage...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on : Jul-29-2008
1. In this OA applicant has challenged recovery of penal rent from his gratuity for overstaying in the quarter unauthorisedly on the ground that without following the provisions of Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, no recovery could have been made.2. He has further sought 18% interest on delayed payment of gratuity and leave encashment.3. It is stated by the applicant that he was allotted Quarter No. 9C/1, NPL Colony, New Delhi while working as Technical Officer 'C'. He retired on 31.1.2001 and was allowed to retain the said quarter up to 31.5.2001. As his wife was very sick, he sought further extension vide letters dated 24.5.2001, 4.11.2003 and 29.4.2004 but no reply was given. They asked him to vacate and filed OA No. 3046/2002 seeking direction to the applicant herein to vacate the premises and for recovery of dues. The said OA was dismissed on 21.10.2003 (page 37) for want of jurisdiction.4. Grievance of applicant is that respondents have deducted pe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on : Feb-15-2008
Reported in : (2008)116TTJ(Delhi)513
1. This appeal by the Revenue for asst. yr. 2001-02 arises out of order of CIT(A)-XXX, New Delhi.2. The only issue for consideration relates to treating the period of 41 days spent by the assessee in Pakistan, Sri Lanka and U.K. were for performance of duties outside India. The effective grounds of appeal are reproduced as under: (1) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, learned CIT(A) is not justified in holding that a period of 41 days spent by the assessee in Pakistan, Sri Lanka and U.K. (2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, learned CIT(A) has erred in holding that as per contract the visits to Sri Lanka and Pakistan were on account of work done in those countries where as per record, the assessee had completely failed to submit copies of such contract/ appointment letter before the AO. (3) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, learned CIT(A) has erred in holding the separate tax treatment should be given to on periods and off periods sala...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on : Apr-11-2008
1. These are the two appeals filed one by the assessee and other filed by the Revenue and both are against the order of the CIT(A)-XXIX, New Delhi dt. 14th July, 2000. There are six grounds in the appeal of the assessee. Grounds 3 to 6 of the assessee's appeal are narrative and the issue that arises from them is whether the CIT(A) would have taken a decision based on the available facts and delete the addition of Rs. 1,61,86,880 instead of setting aside the issue relating to the alleged low GP to the files of the AO with certain guidelines. Further, the CIT(A) is directing the AO to apply the provisions of Section 92 of the IT Act and issuing certain directions in this regard. Finally, other two grounds Nos. 1 and 2 are: 1. That the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in sustaining disallowance of commission of Rs. 11,07,251 paid to RTP Business Enterprises, Rs. 8,500 paid to JK Traders and Rs. 8,400 paid to Technomed Services on the ground that the appellant failed to bring any evidence...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Aug-29-2008
Reported in : 153(2008)DLT92
P.K. Bhasin, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the two appellants, who are real brothers, against the judgment dated 21.11.2001 and order dated 22.11.2001 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi in Session Case No. 90/2000 whereby they were convicted under Sections 302 and 307 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code ('IPC' in brief) and sentenced to imprisonment for life and also to a fine of Rs.5000/- each, with a default stipulation, for the murder of one Kapil and rigorous imprisonment for seven years and a fine of Rs.5000/-each, with a default stipulation, for the attempted murder of his mother. 2. The incident leading to the prosecution of the two appellants(hereinafter to be referred to as the accused persons) was narrated by PW-2 Santosh Sharma in her first information statement to the police(Ex.PW- 2/A) on 12th December,1998 when the incident had taken place. She had claimed that that day i.e. 12th December, 1998, her sons Kapil(the deceased) and Anuj(PW-5) ha...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Nov-17-2008
Reported in : [2010]321ITR104(Delhi); [2009]182TAXMAN59(Delhi)
Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.1. These two appeals arise out of the common order dated 21.4.2006 passed in IT Appeal Nos 3416 and 3417/Del/2003 in respect of financial years 2000-01 and 2001-02, respectively. The sole issue sought to be raised in these appeals is whether the services rendered by the non-resident company Noble Denton and Associates Ltd, (NDAL), UAE for the transportation and jacking up of rigs, review of design and issuance of suitability certificate is covered under Section 9(1)(vii) read with Explanation 2 thereto or under Section 44-BB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. This is in connection with deduction of tax at source.2. The Tribunal concluded that a reading of the provisions of Section 44-BB as well as Explanation 2 to Section 9(1)(vii) of the said Act clearly showed that the consideration in question paid or payable by the assessee to NDAL for the services rendered was covered by the provisions of Section 44-BB and not by Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act.3. This conclusion of t...
Tag this Judgment!