Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1963]48ITR92(SC)
KAPUR J. - These two appeals pursuant to a certificate are from the decision of the High Court of Bombay in Income-tax Reference No. 16 of 1955 : [1962]45ITR275(Bom) answering the question referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in the affirmative and against the assessee company. The appellant in both the appeals is the assessee company and the Commissioner of Income-tax is the respondent.The facts of these appeals are shortly as follows : The assessee company was registered in the erstwhile Baroda State and its status during the assessment years was that of a non-resident. The relevant assessment years were 1941-42 and 1942-43 the previous years being the calendar years 1940 and 1941. It carried on the business of dyeing and selling dyed yarn. It effected sales of dyed yarn of the total value of Rs. 14,22,995 and Rs. 19,22,107 in the previous years relevant to the assessment years 1941-42 and 1942-43 respectively. The sales were made to purchasers both in the Indian States and ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : III(2008)BC330(SC); 2008(4)BomCR707; [2008]114CompCas178(SC); (2008)3CompLJ91(SC); [2008]84SCL355(SC); 2008AIRSCW4651; AIR2008SC2805; 2008(7)SCC619; 2008(4)Supreme553; 2008(4)KCCRSN315
S.B. Sinha, J.1. Leave grantedIntroduction2. Interpretation/application of the provisions of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special provisions) Act, 1984 (SICA) vis-`-vis the Companies Act, 1956 (1956 Act) is in question in this appeal which arises out of a judgment and order dated 16th October, 2006 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Appeal No.725 of 2006 arising out of a judgment and order dated 13th February, 2006 passed by a learned Single Judge of the Bombay High Court approving a Scheme filed by the respondent herein in Company Petition No.470 of 2005 which was under Section 391 of the 1956 Act.Background Facts:3. First respondent is a company registered and incorporated under the 1956 Act. It took loan from Tata Finance Ltd, predecessor-in-interest of the appellant on interest @ 18% per annum. Disputes and differences arose between the parties, which were referred to arbitral tribunal. An award was passed on 30th July, 2002 in the Arbitration...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1. Leave granted. 2. These appeals by special leave had been filed against the order dated 2.4.2009 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in two Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions Nos. M-15695/2007 and 23037-M of 2007 for quashing FIR No.13 dated 9.4.2003 which was registered for offences punishable under Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and under Section 168 of the Indian Penal Code, at Police Station, Vigilance Bureau, Ludhiana but were dismissed as the learned single Judge declined to quash the proceedings against the appellants. 3. Relevant facts of the case under which the two cases were registered against the appellants disclose that the appellants are Medical Officers working with the State Government of Punjab against whom first information report was registered on the statement of informant/Raman Kumar alleging that he knew the appellants Dr. Rajinder Singh Chawla who was posted as Government Doctor at Dhan...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No 2566 of 2019 Bengaluru Development Authority ...Appellant Versus Mr Sudhakar Hegde & Ors. ...Respondents JUDGMENT Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J Index A B C D E F Introduction Submissions Issues Date of commencement of the PRR project Applicability of the EIA Notification 2006 Compliance with the procedure under the EIA Notification 2006 1 G Deficiencies in the EIA report G.1 Accreditation of the EIA consultant G.2 Forest land G.3 Trees G.4 Pipeline H Appraisal by the SEAC Courts and the environment Directions I J2PART A A Introduction 1. The present appeal arises from a judgment of the Principal Bench of the National Green Tribunal1 dated 8 February 2019 quashing the Environmental Clearance2 granted to the appellant for the development of an eight lane Peripheral Ring Road3 connecting Tumkur Road to Hosur Road and totaling a length of 65 kilometers. The NGT was of the view that the primary data upon ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 4892-4893 OF2017(Arising out of SLP (Civil) Nos. 33363-33364 of 2016) Union of India . Appellant Versus M/S. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd. .... Respondent JUDGMENT A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.1. The short question that arises for consideration in this appeal is: whether an intra-Court Letters Patent Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent of High Court at Calcutta can be maintained against an order passed by the Single Judge on an application for condonation of delay filed along with the petition (for setting aside an Arbitration Award) under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act)?.2. Briefly stated, the Respondent being the lowest bidder was allotted a contract by the Appellant in respect of work styled as Construction of Tsunami Reconstruction Project in A & N Islands. SH: Construction of 821 units of permanent shelters (single stories) including in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : I(2002)ACC210; 2002ACJ210; JT2001(Suppl1)SC351; RLW2001(2)SC268; 2001(4)SCALE162; (2001)6SCC158; [2001]3SCR759
Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J.1. Leave is granted. 2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Patna in L.P.A. No. 599 of 1998 dated July 2, 1998 holding that the Letters Patent Appeal was not maintainable. 3. The short question that arises for consideration in this appeal is : whether the Letters Patent Appeal No. 599 of 1998 filed against the order of a learned Single Judge of the Patna High Court passed in M.A. No. 494 of 1996 dated April 13, 1998, is maintainable. 4. The following resume of the facts will be helpful in appreciating the question. 5. The appellant is the owner of a truck which met with an accident, on February 1, 1996, resulting in the death of one Pradeep Kumar. The parents of the victim filed a Claim Case No. 31 of 1996 under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. On October 15, 1996, the learned Trial Judge, madhubani, Bihar ordered that interim compensation of Rs. 50,000/- be paid to the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1978SC597; (1978)1SCC248; [1978]2SCR621
..... . it has been decided by the government of india to impound your above passport under section 10(3)(c) of the passport act, 1967 in public interest.you are hereby required to surrender your passport k-869668 to this office within ..... high court in dr. s. s. sadashiva rao v. union of india 1965 mysore law journal, p. 605 and the learned judge there pointed out that 'these observations apply in equal force to ..... arbitrariness, police dossiers, faceless affiants, behind-the-back materials, oblique motives and the inscrutable face of an official sphinx do not fill the 'fairness' bill-subject, of course, to- just exceptions and critical ..... phariscic prescriptions, regardless of essential standards an enacted apperition is a constitutional, illusion: processual justice is writ patently on article 21. it' is too grave to be circumvented by a black letter ritual processed through ..... law satisfies the test laid down in article 19(2) so far as the attributes covered by article 39(1) are concerned'. there can be no doubt that in view of the decision of this court in r ..... been laid down in bank nationalisation case, it is necessary to closely examine the decision particularly from pages 570 to 578 of 1970(3) scr. after holding that:impairment of the right of the individual and not the object of the state in taking the impugned action, is ..... not precluded unless some clear countervailing national interest stands in the way of its assertion.145. i do not take this as wholly valid in our part iii scheme but .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2006SC1194; 2006(2)AWC1580(SC); (SCSuppl)2006(2)CHN173; 2006(2)CTC146; [2006(3)JCR200(SC)]; JT2006(2)SC278; (2006)2MLJ312(SC); 2006(2)SCALE203; (2006)2SCC777
Altamas Kabir, J.1. The submissions advanced in this appeal by way of special leave necessitates a brief glance into the historical origin of the Calcutta High Court. 2. In August 1861, the British Parliament passed the Indian High Courts Act which empowered the Crown to establish, by Letters Patent, High Courts of Judicature at Calcutta, Madras and Bombay. Consequent to such authority, the Letters Patent dated 14th May, 1862 was issued establishing the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta. By subsequent Letters Patent dated 26th June, 1862, the High Court at Bombay and Madras were also established.3. The Letters Patent empowered the High Court of Calcutta to exercise Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction within the local limits of the Presidency town of Calcutta as might be prescribed by a competent Legislative Authority for India. Within such local limits, the High Court was authorized to try and determine suits of every description, except those falling within the jurisdiction of the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REPORTABLE CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 1328-1329 OF2019(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CRIMINAL) NOS. 9981-9982 OF2017 THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH .....APPELLANT(S) AMAN MITTAL & ANR. VERSUS W I T H .....RESPONDENT(S) CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.1330-1331 OF2019(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CRIMINAL) NOS. 1912-1913 OF2018 CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1332 OF2019(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CRIMINAL) No.3321 OF2018 JUDGMENT HEMANT GUPTA, J.1328-1329 Crl. Appeal Nos. of 2019 Crl. Appeal Nos. 1330-1331 of 20191) Leave granted. (@SLP (Criminal) Nos.9981-9982 of 2017) AND (@SLP (Criminal) Nos.1912-1913 of 2017)2) The order dated October 4, 2017 passed by the Lucknow Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad is the subject matter of challenge in these appeals. 13) 4) An FIR No.130 was lodged on April 28, 2017 with Police Station Cantt, Lucknow for the offences punishable under Sections 265, 267, 420, 34, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 18601 and Sections 3/7 of the Essential...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS.802-803 of 2021 (arising out of SLP(C)Nos.18118-18119 of 2019) SUBODH KUMAR ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS SHAMIM AHMED ...RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.Leave granted 2.This appeal has been filed against the judgment of the High Court of Uttarakhand dated 13.12.2018 allowing the Writ Petition (M.S.) No.418 of 2008 filed by respondent No.1 as well as the order dated 24.05.2019 rejecting the Review Petition filed by the appellant to review the judgment dated 13.12.2018. 23.The facts of the case giving rise to this appeal, which are relevant for deciding the issues raised, need to be carefully noticed. The High Court in the impugned judgment although has noted few facts but certain relevant facts have been missed by the High Court which have bearing on the issues which had arisen before the High Court. 4.The facts of any case are the foundation on which the dispute between the parties arises. The ar...
Tag this Judgment!