Uttaranchal Court January 2008 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Enron Oil and Gas India Ltd.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jan-17-2008
Reported in: (2008)218CTR(Uttranchal)411
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. All these three appeals are directed against the same judgment and order dt. 29th Sept., 2006, passed by the Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'H', New Delhi, in ITA No. 1821/2005; ITA No. 1823/2005 and ITA No. 1824/2005, relating to asst. yrs. 1999-2000, 2000-01 and 1998-99, respectively, whereby the depreciation on account of foreign exchange loss allowed to the assessee by the CIT(A), Dehradun, vide his order dt. 11th Feb., 2005, is affirmed.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.3. Following are the substantial questions of law involved in these appeals:In IT Appeal No. 74 of 2007.-Whether, Tribunal erred in law in upholding the decision of CIT(A) on facts and circumstances of the case, in allowing foreign exchange loss of Rs. 11,58,44,887 under Section 42 of the IT Act, 1961, without appreciating the fact that the loss is only a book entry and no loss was incurred by the company/assessee ?In IT Appeal No. 76 of 2007-Whether, Tribunal erred in la...
Smt. Bhagwati Devi Vs. State of Uttarakhand
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jan-17-2008
Reported in: 2008CriLJ2464
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. This appeal, preferred under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred as Cr. P.C.), is directed against the Judgment and order dated 9-7-2007, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Nainital, in Sessions trial No. 115 of 2003, whereby appellant Bhagwati Devi has been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred as IPC), and sentenced to imprisonment for life and also to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/-, in default of payment of which she is directed to undergo imprisonment for a further period of six months.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the entire evidence on record.3. The prosecution story in brief is that Neema Devi (deceased) got married to Bhopal Singh Mehra of Village Bagar, Tehsil and District Nainital. On 18-3-2003, Inder Singh Mehra, brother-in-law of Neema (deceased) told P.W. 1 Nar Singh (complainant), uncle of the deceased, that his niece has received burn injuries and is...
Ram Sukh Vs. Dinesh Agarwal
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jan-15-2008
Reported in: AIR2008Utr33
ORDERB.S. Verma, J.1. Heard Sri Vijay Bahuguna, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri L.K. Tiwari and Sri V.B.S. Negi, learned Counsel for the objector-respondent and Sri. V.K. Bist, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri. V.K. Kaparwan, learned Counsel for the election petitioner on the application under Order 6, Rules 16 and 17 and Order 7, Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short the Code) read with Section 86 of the Representation of People Act 1951 (for short the Act).2. Initially, the election petition was filed against the returned candidate and six others but the election petitioner has sought deletion of names of respondent Nos. 2 to 17, which was allowed vide Court order dated 18-6-2007.3. This application has been moved by the respondent to dismiss the election petition at the threshold mainly on the ground that the election petition does not disclose any legal cause of action and the same does not comply with the provisions of Section 83 of the Act. It has also been alleged th...
Kalyan Singh Vs. Kalyan Singh and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jan-11-2008
Reported in: [2008(116)FLR781]; (2008)IILLJ585UC
Rajesh Tandon, J.1. Heard Shri Yogesh Pandey, counsel for the appellant, Shri D.S. Patni, counsel for the respondent No. 1 and Shri Deepak Rawat, counsel for the respondent No. 2.2. By the present appeal, filed under Section 30 of Workmen's Compensation Act, the appellant has prayed for setting aside the judgment and order dated July 22, 2005 passed by Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Champawat in W.C.C. No. 4/2002 by which the claim petition of the claimant has been dismissed.3. Briefly stated, an application under Section 4 of Workmen's Compensation Act was filed being W.C.C. No. 4/2002 in the Court of Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation, Champawat. According to the claimant, he was employed as driver 1 in the Jeep No. UP 29/1001 belonging to Kalyan Singh i.e. respondent No. 1. On October 4, 2001 the aforesaid Jeep met with an accident during the service near Simalkhet as a result of which the backbone of the claimant got broken. His both legs got also fractured. The claimant wa...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Rajat Kumar JaIn and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jan-08-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ1793
Rajesh Tandon, J.1. Heard Mr. I.P. Kohli, counsel for the appellant and Mr. D.C.S. Rawal, counsel for the claimants-respondent Nos. 1 and 3 and Mr. B.S. Parihar, counsel for respondent No. 4.2. By the present A.O. filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the appellant has prayed for setting aside the award dated 12.3.2007 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/District Judge, Udham Singh Nagar in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 176 of 2005, Joginder Kaur v. Narendra Singh, whereby a sum of Rs. 2,66,000 has been awarded to the claimants towards compensation.3. Briefly stated, a claim petition was filed by the claimant being M.A.C. Case No. 176 of 2005, Joginder Kaur v. Narendra Singh, under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, claiming a sum of Rs. 10,00,000 towards compensation.4. According to claimants, on 24.7.2005, when Harvilas Singh (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') was going to Nainital from Kashipur with his friends Hitank Jain and Ankur ...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Shakeela Begum and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jan-03-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ1988
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. This appeal preferred under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is directed against the award dated 24.3.2006, passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Third Fast Track Court, Nainital whereby in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 297 of 2004, the said Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 7,13,000 as amount of compensation in favour of the claimants (present respondent Nos. 1 to 5).2. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.3. Brief facts of the case are that respondent Nos. 1 to 5, sent a claim petition to the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Nainital, which was received by said Tribunal on 18.12.2004, with the particulars that on 28.12.99, Munney Khan (husband of present respondent No. 1 and father of respondent Nos. 2 to 5) was going on a truck bearing registration No. UP 27-D 9629 from Pilibhit to Ghaziabad. When it reached near village Joya, District J.P. Nagar, Uttar Pradesh, the truck stopped due to technical fault and suddenly tanker bearing the registrat...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›