Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC999; 2003CriLJ1240; JT2003(3)SC486; 2003(1)SCALE436; (2003)2SCC444; [2003]1SCR555
Variava, J.1. This appeal is against the judgment dated 8th December, 1992. Briefly stated the facts are as follows:2. The Respondent was charged for having committed an offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The case of the prosecution was that on 13th of March, 1987, the Respondent went to the house of the deceased Amiruddin at about 8.30 pm. The Respondent caught hold of the banian of the said Amiruddin. Intend him up, hit him on the right cheek and back portion of the neck. On hearing the commotion two neighbours (PW.6 and PW.7) came. The Respondent then stated to Amiruddin that he would not leave him alive and kicked him with the right knee on his private part. Amiruddin fell down saying, 'O' God, I am dying', and he died there. The prosecution case is that the Respondent tried to run away but was stopped by the neighbours who caught hold of him and thereafter when the police came they handed over the Respondent to the police.3. During trial evidence was led of the wi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC1138; JT2003(1)SC379; 2003(1)SCALE419; (2003)3SCC125
Brijesh Kumar, J.1. Leave granted.2. The appellant is aggrieved by the order passed by the Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, dismissing the writ petition preferred by the appellant and refusing to interfere with the order passed in revision by the Advisor to the Administrator, upholding the demand of the interest from the appellant @ 24% on the amount of delayed payment of instalments.3. Undisputedly the appellant with others purchased SCO Site No. 130-131 Sector 34, City center, Chandigarh in an auction held on 22.2.1987 on leasehold basis at a premium of Rs. 32,72,000/-. As per the requirement the appellant paid 25% of the amount of premium. In pursuance thereof a letter of allotment was issued in favour of the appellant on 13.4.1987. The balance amount of 75% of the premium was required to be paid in instalments by the year 1990. It was not paid and a dispute arose.4. The objection of the appellant has been that necessary development of the area was not done nor t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC1004; 2003(1)CTC489; JT2003(1)SC458; (2003)2MLJ93(SC); 2003(1)SCALE376; (2003)2SCC484; [2003]1SCR522; 2003(1)LC493(SC); (2003)1UPLBEC742
P. Venkatarama Reddi, J.1. In these appeals by Special leave preferred against the judgment of the Allahabad High Court in a First Appeal, two questions arise for consideration: (1) whether the respondents - land holders could claim and get compensation under the Land Acquisition Act over and above what they claimed in an application seeking reference to Civil Court and (2) whether the respondents are entitled to the statutory benefits under Sections 23 and 28 as amended by the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act of 1984?2. An extent of two bighas and 1 biswa equivalent to 6,201 sq. yards situated in the village of Jatwara Kalan of Ghaziabad District was acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, starting with the publication of Notification under Section 4(1) on 18.8.1962. The acquisition was for the purpose of implementation of a scheme for planned development of Ghaziabad Municipal Area taken up by the then Improvement Trust, Ghaziabad - the appellant, being its success...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2003)181CTR(SC)24; [2003]260ITR1(SC); (2005)9SCC579
ORDER1. Between September 30, 1998, and October 15, 1998, the premises of the respondents was searched under Section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The search party was headed by one Harinder Kumar who had been appointed as the authorised officer for the purposes of Section 132 of the Act by the Commissioner of Income-tax.2. Almost two years after the search was carried out when the assessments of the respondents were sought to be completed, the respondents filed a writ petition in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana impugning not only the search which had been carried out but also assailing the authority of the Assessing Officer to carry out the assessments. The High Court did not accept the submissions of the respondents in so far as they had challenged the validity of the search. The only issue on which the writ petition was allowed and the assessments made in favour of two of the respondents herein were quashed was that the Assessing Office...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2003)182CTR(SC)291; 2003(155)ELT452(SC); [2003]261ITR275(SC); (2003)11SCC452
ORDER1. In all these appeals, the pivotal issue involved is : Is it permissible for the Assessing Officer under the Income-tax Act to adopt different methods of valuation of excise duty paid raw material when purchased and the unconsumed raw material on hand at the end of the year ?2. The assessees are manufacturing units liable to excise duty Under the Modvat scheme, they get credit for the excise duty already paid on the raw-materials purchased by them and utilised in manufacture of excisable goods. When they manufacture the goods and sell them, the proportionate part of the modvat credit is set off against their excise duty liability. In each of these cases, the Assessing Officer took the view that the Modvat credit that is available should be treated as an income or an advantage in the nature of income, and, therefore, added back the said amount to the income of each of these assessees. The Commissioner of Income-tax, in some of the cases, agreed with the view of the Assessing Offi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC1459; 2003(2)ALT56(SC); [2003(96)FLR900]; JT2003(6)SC122; 2003(1)SCALE590; (2003)2SCC390; [2003]1SCR532; 2003(2)SLJ62(SC); (2003)2UPLBEC1887
C.A. No. 137/19991. The respondent herein Brij Mohan Gupta was born on 2nd July, 1939. He was directly appointed from the Bar as a Judge of City Civil & Sessions Court, Bombay (Maharashtra Higher Judicial Service). He assumed charge on 4th November, 1988. In normal course, the respondent would have completed 10 years of service on 4th November, 1998. He would have attained the age of 58 years on 2nd July, 1997 and the age of 60 years on 2nd July, 1999. 2. The High Court of Bombay, in view of the decision of this Court in All India Judge's Association and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors., : (1993)IILLJ776SC (hereinafter referred to as 'Judges Case-II'), appointed a Committee to review the case of the respondent for giving him the benefit of continuity in service till the age of 60 years. The Committee made an adverse report against the respondent and recommenced that he may be made to retire on attaining the age of 58 years. The High Court, in view of the recommendation of the Committee,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT2003(3)SC585; 2003(4)SCALE428
ORDER1. The appellants in the above appeals have been found guilty of offences punishable under Section 5 and 6 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (TADA) and were sentenced to 5 years' Rl with fine of Rs. 500/- each; in default a simple imprisonment for 3 months was awarded. They were also sentenced under Section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 and were sentenced to Rl for a period of 2 years with fine of Rs. 500/-; with default clause to suffer further imprisonment for 3 months if the fine was not paid. Both the sentences were to run concurrently.2. The prosecution case, briefly stated, is that on 10.11.1990, when PW-4, Jagdish Narain, ASI, the incharge of the Highways police checking along with his colleagues received a wireless message that a maruti van which had met with an accident, had got away without stopping, therefore, these police were on the look out for the said van. It is stated that in the midnight at above 12.25. a.m., a maruti van...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC1088; 2002(1)ALD(Cri)710; 2003(1)ALD(Cri)378; 2002(1)ALT(Cri)257; 2003CriLJ1262; JT2003(3)SC599; 2003MPLJ297(SC); RLW2002(2)SC347a; 2003(1)SCALE407; (2003)3SCC21;
Dharmadhikari, J.1. The High Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Gwalior by impugned judgment 11.3.2002, reversed the verdict of the trial court and convicted the three appellants before us for the offences for which they were charged and sentenced them to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 10,000/- each with directions that they shall suffer RI for one year in default for payment of fine.2. The present three appellants were acquitted along with the co-accused Pooran Singh by the Court of Special Judge, Bhind by Judgment dated 06.9.1985 for offences alleged to have been committed by them under Sections 302/34, 396, 460, 404 of Indian Penal Code [for short 'I.P.C.'] and Section 11/13 of M.P. [Dacoity Vihavaran Kshetra] Adhiniyam 1981.3. The charge against them was that on the intervening night of 28th, 29th February, 1984, they entered the house of deceased Mata Prasad. They killed him and hanged him in the house and also killed his daughter Munni Devi. 4. The case of the prosecution se...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2003(85)ECC718; 2003(153)ELT257(SC)
ORDERShah, J. 1. Heard the learned counsels for the parties at length.2. In pursuance of licence issued to the appellant in the year 1985, the appellant imported cardboard sheets. It was contended by the Assistant Collector of Customs that samples of the imported goods had been taken and referred to the Chief Chemist, Central Revenue Board, New Delhi and the Institute of Paper Technology, Saharanpur for verifying whether 'carboard' sheets were 'ivory boards'. After receipt of the report and after adjudicating the matter by final order dated 4th November, 1986, the Collector passed the order confiscating the goods and gave the above to the appellant to redeem the same on payment of redemption of fine of Rs. 47,000 by holding that imported goods were ivory boards and not cardboards. Against that judgment and order, the appellant preferred an appeal before the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (CEGAT) which was also dismissed by order dated 8th February, 1992. That order...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [2003]128TAXMAN857(SC)
ORDERWe have (sic) learned counsel for the parties.2. We see no reason to interfere with the judgment under appeal. The civil appeals are accordingly dismissed without any order as to costs....
Tag this Judgment!