Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2005SC3425; [2005(4)JCR1(SC)]; JT2005(8)SC77; (2005)7SCC492
C.K. Thakker, J.1. Special leave granted.2. The present appeals arise out of common judgment and order passed by the High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi on January 25, 2002 in Letters Patent Appeal Nos. 462, 472 and 473 of 2001. By the said order, the Division Bench of the High Court dismissed intra court appeals filed by the appellant herein confirming the orders passed by the learned Single Judge. 3. To appreciate the controversies raised in the present group of appeals, few facts in the first matter (Central Coal Fields Limited v. State of Jharkhand and Ors.) may be noted.The appellant Central Coal Field Limited ('Company' for short) is a Government Company within the meaning of Section 617 of the Companies Act 1956 having its registered office at Darbhanga, Ranchi. It is one of the subsidiary companies of Coal India Limited. The Company owns various coal mines in Districts Hazaribagh, Giridih, Palamou and Ranchi. The Company is carrying on business in extracting, selling and distributi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2005SC3270; 2005CriLJ3753; JT2005(8)SC101; (2005)12SCC304
Arijit Pasayat, J. 1. Leave granted.2. Informant calls in question legality of the order passed by a learned Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court granting bail to respondent No. 2 (hereinafter referred to as the 'accused').3. Background facts sans unnecessary details are as follows:On 5.2.2000 complainant lodged the First Information Report. It was stated therein that when he and his son were attending a marriage party, the respondent-accused started firing shots from his gun. When he was asked not to do so, he did not stop and continued the firing. The appellant's son Saurabh received injuries due to the shots fired by the accused and he died due to the injuries. Initially, the police registered a case alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 304A and 338 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the 'IPC'). After investigation charge sheet was filed under Sections 304 and 338 IPC. Cognizance was taken and process was issued. Accused filed an application for being ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2005SC3995; (2005)197CTR(SC)596; 2005(192)ELT22(SC); [2005]277ITR449(SC); JT2005(8)SC113; (2005)7SCC292
Kapadia, J.1. These appeals by special leave have been filed against an additional direction given by the Gujarat High Court vide judgment dated 25.9.2002 holding the appellant liable to pay interest under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998 (for short 'the Scheme') on the tax arrears to be determined by the designated authority (for short 'DA').2. The appellant filed a writ petition in the Gujarat High Court against the rejection of the declarations made by the assessee under the said Scheme.3. By the impugned judgment, the High Court held that the declarations filed by the appellant herein were competent as the assessee's revision applications were pending on the date of filing of the declarations. The department was, therefore, directed to entertain the declarations, to determine the amount payable and to grant a certificate under Section 90(1).4. The decision of the Gujarat High Court dated 25.9.2002 was challenged by the department before this Court vide Civil Appeal No. 4411 of 2...
Tag this Judgment!