|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 101 to 120 of 928 Records
-
2013 (2) TMI 837 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... inted out by the learned senior counsel are not fatal to the proceedings. 16. Shri Altaf Ahmad, would submit that the Trial Court in course of its order has observed that Accused No. 1 is old and is suffering from several ailments and therefore requests for modification of the sentence ordered by the Trial Court and so confirmed by the High Court. We see merit in the submission made by the learned senior counsel. Keeping this aspect in view, we modify the sentence of Accused No.1 from 13 years to 10 years. However, insofar as the conviction of Accused No.2 is concerned, we are not inclined to grant any remission and accordingly confirm the judgment and order passed by the Trial Court and so confirmed by the High Court and maintain the fine imposed on him. We further direct that the appellants will surrender after six weeks to serve out the remaining period of sentence. Their bail bonds stands cancelled. 17. The Criminal Appeal is disposed of accordingly. Ordered accordingly.
-
2013 (2) TMI 836 - CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... t. If such direction is followed, ld.Commissioner (Appeals) shall grant an opportunity of hearing to the appellant on merits subject to verification of deposit particulars 2. In the result stay application is disposed of remanding the matter to ld.Commissioner (Appeals) to carry out above direction subject to verification of challan. (Dictated & pronounced in the open court)
-
2013 (2) TMI 835 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... s appointed as Receiver in respect of the properties described in Exhibit G to the petition with a direction to appoint respondents as his agents on usual terms and conditions and on payment of royalty and or furnishing security. (c) Till the court receiver takes possession of the properties, the respondents, their agents, servants are restrained by an order and injunction from in any manner parting with the possession, creating third party rights, alienating or encumbering the properties described in Exhibit D and Exhibit. G to the petition. (d) The respondents are directed to disclose unencumbered property on oath by filing affidavit within two weeks from the date of this order. (e) Liberty is granted to the petitioner after such disclosure on oath is made by the respondents as directed to apply for further reliefs. (f) Petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. There shall be no order as to costs. Para No. 47 Corrected vide Speaking to minutes Order dated 21.02.2013.
-
2013 (2) TMI 834 - SUPREME COURT
Disciplinary proceeding - Initiated against a Senior Accountant Treasury- Service Jurisprudence - Failed to maintain chest book, movement register - Passed the bills, cheques and challans without Signing - On the basis of the enquiry report, the disciplinary authority, after following the requisite procedure, imposed the penalty of reversion to the post of Junior Accountant for two years with the stipulation that there would be postponement of future increments.
Whether the reversion to the lower post for a period of two years with the stipulation of postponement of future increments on restoration to higher category does amount to two major penalties under Rule 9.
HELD THAT:- The rule making authority has splitted Rule 9(vii) into two parts - one is harsher than the other, but, both are less severe than the other punishments, namely, compulsory retirement, removal from service or dismissal. The reason behind it is not to let off one with simple reduction but to give a direction about the condition of pay on restoration and also not to impose a harsher punishment which may not be proportionate.the same really does not affect any vested or accrued right. It also does not violate any Constitutional protection.hence,the order of punishment imposed by the disciplinary authority is restored.
-
2013 (2) TMI 833 - SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA, MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... C(3) of the SEBI Act, 1992 committed by SFPL. ORDER 56. In terms of the provisions of the SEBI Act, 1992 and Rule 5(1) of the Adjudication Rules, I hereby impose a penalty of 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) under Section 15A(a) of SEBI Act, 1992 on Lucky Holdings Private Limited for the violations as mentioned above. 57. The penalty shall be paid by way of demand draft drawn in favour of “SEBI - Penalties Remittable to Government of India” payable at Mumbai within 45 days of receipt of this Order. The said demand draft shall be forwarded to the Division Chief, Investigation Department (IVD - ID8), Securities and Exchange Board of India, Plot No. C4-A, ‘G’ Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai - 400051. 58. In terms of the provisions of Rule 6 of the SEBI (Procedure for Holding Inquiry and Imposing Penalties by Adjudicating Officer) Rules 1995, copies of this Order are being sent to LHPL and also to Securities and Exchange Board of India.
-
2013 (2) TMI 832 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Jurisdiction - action of issuing summons - petitioner is a foreign national residing in U.K. - petitioner submitted that there is a finding recorded in the order-in-original that the petitioner is not an Indian citizen - Held that: - We find that there is no such finding and there is no such finding is shown to us by the learned counsel. All that is recorded is that the petitioner is having address abroad - at this stage, when only a summons under Section 108 of the Customs Act is issued, no interference is called for in writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India - petition dismissed - decided against petitioner.
-
2013 (2) TMI 831 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... allowing the assessee's claim of deduction u./s.80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act of ₹ 4,42,18,673/- for the A.Y. 2006-07 when the assessee had completed by 31/3/2008 only 11 out of 20 buildings comprised in the housing project in respect of which approval had been sanctioned by the local authority on 29/4/2003?
-
2013 (2) TMI 830 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ompany irrespective of the appointed date. 33. Accordingly, the scheme of arrangement filed as Annexure H to the petition is hereby approved. The said scheme may be read as part of this order. The petitioner-Company to lodge a copy of this order and the scheme duly authenticated by the Company Registrar, High Court, Indore Bench with the concerned office of the Registrar of Companies within 30 days from the date of order. 34. The transferor Company to pay the cost of ₹ 25,000/- to the Official Liquidator for deposit in Common Pool Fund maintained by the Official Liquidator within four weeks from today and also to pay ₹ 10,000/- to the Regional Director within same period. 35. The petitioner (transferor Company) shall stand dissolved without winding up. 36. Filing and issuance of the drawn up order is dispensed with. All concerned authorities to act on a copy of this order along with the scheme duly authenticated by the Company Registrar, High Court, Indore Bench.
-
2013 (2) TMI 829 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... therefore, it was concluded that the assessee has inflated the profits for taking deduction u/s 80IC and a sum of ₹ 1,60,030/- was disallowed out of interest. 10. Before the ld. CIT(A), it was mainly stated that it was not mandatory under the law that the assessee should pay interest to every party and reliance was placed on the decision of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case in ITA No. 345/Chd/2011. 11. Both the parties made similar arguments as made in respect of ground No. 1, therefore, we are of the opinion that it is not necessary for the assessee to pay interest on every unsecured loans and it depend on the arrangement between the parties, therefore, the ratio of the decision of the Tribunal in ITA No. 345/Chd/2011 regarding non-charging of interest on partner’s capital is equally applicable to this issue also and accordingly we decide this issue against the Revenue. 12. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced on 27.2.2013.
-
2013 (2) TMI 828 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... n case, if there is good chance of settlement, the Family Court in its discretion, can always extend the time limit. b) The criminal courts dealing with the complaint under Section 498-A of the IPC should, at any stage and particularly, before they take up the complaint for hearing, refer the parties to mediation centre if they feel that there exist elements of settlement and both the parties are willing. However, they should take care to see that in this exercise, rigour, purport and efficacy of Section 498-A of the IPC is not diluted. Needless to say that the discretion to grant or not to grant bail is not in any way curtailed by this direction. It will be for the concerned court to work out the modalities taking into consideration the facts of each case. c) All mediation centres shall set up pre-litigation desks/clinics; give them wide publicity and make efforts to settle matrimonial disputes at pre-litigation stage. 37. The appeal is disposed of in the aforestated terms.
-
2013 (2) TMI 827 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... company is being sought to be revived and also in view of the fact that the ROC has entered appearance and spent considerable time by filing a detailed statement of objections, it would be suffice if costs of ₹ 10,000/- is ordered to be paid to the Registrar of Companies, apart from the fee that would be determined by the ROC, while accepting the accounts/returns that would be filed by the petitioner-company. Accordingly, I answer the point for determination in favour of petitioner and pass the following order. Company Petition is hereby allowed. Order dated 21.10.2006 bearing No. CVS/560 (5) SES/2005, Annexure-C, insofar as striking off of the name of the petitioner-company is hereby set aside and the name of the petitioner-company is ordered to be restored and shall be continued in the Register by the Registrar of Companies. It is made clear that deposit of costs of ₹ 10,000/- before filing of the annual returns and balance sheets shall be condition precedent.
-
2013 (2) TMI 826 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... nfined to the registration granted under clause (b) of sub-section 1 of section 12AA till before 1st June, 2010 of course, now with effect from 1st June, 2010, the power vests with the Commissioner even to cancel the registration granted under any of the clauses of sub-section (1) of section 12A. In that view of interpretation, we are of the considered view that there was no power vested with the Commissioner to cancel or withdraw the registration granted to the assessee under section 12A(a) in the year 1974.? Therefore, the Tribunal was right in holding that the order dated 31.12.2009 passed by the Director of Income-tax (Exemption) cancelling the registration of the respondent under section 12A was invalid inasmuch as the Director Income-tax (Exemptions) did not have the jurisdiction to do so till 01.06.2010 when the amendment was introduced in section 12AA(3) as indicated above. No other question of law has been sought to be raised in this appeal. The appeal is dismissed.
-
2013 (2) TMI 825 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Trading loss - Application of principles of arbitrariness, unreasonableness and perversity of approach - Held that:- The opinion that the assessee generated a sizeable amount of loss out of pre-arranged transactions so as to reduce the quantum of income liable for tax might have been the view expressed by the AO, but he miserably failed to substantiate that. We are sorry to say that the learned Tribunal fell into the same error. One can generate a loss inter alia by suppressing his income or by selling his goods at an under value.
It is nobody’s case that the assessee either suppressed any income or sold anything at an under value. Therefore, it cannot be said by any stretch of imagination that any loss was generated. Loss might have been suffered. If the loss was suffered, then appropriate deduction has to be made and there is no reason why the Assessing Officer should have refused to do so. Tribunal restored the order of the Assessing Officer and set aside the order passed by the CIT (Appeal) without application of mind. Tribunal ignored the fact that the transaction was carried out at the prevailing price. Therefore, the question of generating loss could not have arisen. The suspicion entertained by the Assessing Officer was misplaced or in any event not substantiated.
-
2013 (2) TMI 824 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... Commissioner of Central Excise, Thane-II confirmed a demand of ₹ 33,14,021/- together with interest and penalty. According to the Revenue the order was served on the Petitioner by hand delivery on 22 August 2006 and an acknowledgement was obtained, a copy of which is annexed at Exhibit 1 to the reply. Thereafter in pursuance of a further request dated 25 March 2010, the department supplied another copy of the order on 3 May 2010 which was received on 5 May 2010 by the Petitioner. Moreover a further copy was supplied on 13 February 2012. Under Section 35 an appeal has to be filed within sixty days of the communication of the order of adjudication and the Commissioner (Appeals) can condone a further delay not exceeding thirty days. No appeal was filed within limitation and an appeal has been filed only in April 2012, which it is stated, is barred by limitation. On these facts, no further relief can be granted in these proceedings. The Petition is accordingly disposed of.
-
2013 (2) TMI 823 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... anted. There is some substance in the submission made by Mr. Khaitan, but the fact remains that the appellant has successfully avoided the liability to pay the sum of ₹ 32,56,079.43p for more than 12 years. Therefore, no effective relief can be granted without first securing the aforesaid sum. In the premises, the following order is passed. In the event, the appellant deposits the said sum of ₹ 32,56,079.43p. the appeal shall be heard on merits by the Commissioner (Appeal), Central Excise, Kolkata. In depositing the said sum, the appellant shall be entitled to take benefit of the amount lying to his credit in his CENVAT Account and the balance amount shall be deposited within three months from date. After such deposit is made, the appeal will be heard and the order under challenge passed by the Tribunal shall stand set aside. In the event, the deposit is not made within the time stipulated herein, this appeal shall stand dismissed. The appeal is thus disposed of.
-
2013 (2) TMI 822 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... bilities. He, therefore, prays that the requirement of the Transferee company initiating proceedings under Sections 391 to 394 of the Act may be dispensed with. 13. In support of his submissions, the learned counsel also placed reliance on the judgments of this Court In Re. Scheme of Amalgamation of Natural Technologies Limited with HCL Infosystems Limited CA (M) No. 124 of 2008 decided by Hon’ble Delhi High Court on 11th August 2008 and In Re. Scheme of Amalgamation of Reliance Jamnagar Infrastructure Limited with Reliance Industries Limited CP No. 80 of 2012 in CA No. 120 of 2012 decided by High Court of Gujarat on 8th October 2012 ; wherein the court has under similar circumstances held that in a Scheme involving the amalgamation of a wholly owned subsidiary with its holding company, the holding Transferee company is not obliged to seek sanction under Sections 391 to 394 of the Act. 14. The application stands allowed in the aforesaid terms. 15. Order be given dasti.
-
2013 (2) TMI 821 - SUPREME COURT
Right of an accused to be released on bail while procedure of remand under Crpc - Despite charge-sheet have been filled within the period, sanction had not been obtained to prosecute the accused and to proceed - No Cognizance has been taken on the basis thereof - HELD THAT:- the filing of charge-sheet is sufficient compliance with the provisions of Section 167(2)(a)(ii). Whether cognizance is taken or not is not material as far as Section 167 Cr.P.C. is concerned. Merely because sanction had not been obtained to prosecute the accused and to proceed to the stage of Section 309 Cr.P.C., it cannot be said that the accused is entitled to grant of statutory bail, as envisaged in Section 167 Cr.P.C. The scheme of the Cr.P.C. is such that once the investigation stage is completed, the Court proceeds to the next stage, which is the taking of cognizance and trial. An accused has to remain in custody of some court.
-
2013 (2) TMI 820 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ay Money Lenders Act, 1946, and when they failed to produce notification, if any, as required to bring such Companies including the present applicant within the ambit definition “Money Lenders”, it is difficult to allow the respondents to continue with such criminal proceeding and Penal Proceeding against the present applicant who is entitled to the benefit of the cited case which confirms that State Authority cannot initiate criminal and penal proceedings against such companies, since the same is controlled by the provision of the Reserve Bank of India. 10. Therefore, application is require to be allowed as prayed for and the same is allowed. Thereby, the proceedings initiated by the respondents by way of Criminal Case No.289 of 2008 which is pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad, under the provisions of the Bombay Money Lenders Act, 1946, wherein process is issued by the learned Trial Judge is hereby quashed and set-aside. Rule is made absolute.
-
2013 (2) TMI 819 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... in reply to Exs.P1 and P2, the first petitioner shall file its objections within two weeks from today. If objections are filed as above, the respondents will hear the first petitioner and enquire as to whether the activity carried on by it, viz., Group Deposit and Credit Scheme, attracts the provisions of the Finance Act, 1994 to fasten the liability of service tax. If this issue is ultimately decided against the society, the respondents will be free to call upon the first petitioner to produce documents which are required to quantify the liability. W.P.(C) No. 6774/12 is disposed of accordingly. 6. The issue raised in all the other captioned writ petitions are similar in all respects with W.P.(C). No. 6774/12. Therefore, the petitioners in those writ petitions will also be governed by the irections in the judgment in W.P. (C). No. 6774/12. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed anything on the merits and the entire issues raised by both sides are left open.
-
2013 (2) TMI 818 - ITAT KOLKATA
Compensation loss on non lifting of materials of as speculative loss - Held that:- It is a situation in which there could not have been any possibility of actual delivery of the goods because even at the point of time when delivery was to take place, the factory was not even likely to come back to the possession of the assessee. The factory was given on lease and as such the purchases cannot be said to have been made for bonafide actual user purposes. CIT(Appeals) has painstakingly analyzed the various contract provision - namely clause 7 to 9, these clauses have inbuilt speculation element embedded in the agreement. The factum of actual non delivery or impact of non delivery could be relevant only in the cases in which genuine business transactions are involved. On the facts of the present cases, these aspects are not really relevant. In view of these discussions, as also bearing in mind entirety of the case, we approve the conclusions arrived at by the CIT(Appeals) and decline to interfere in the matter.
Nature of expenditure - loss on cancellation of booking of 100 TPD Klin, proposed expansion of steel unit - Held that:- We find that in the case of CIT-vs.- Anjani Kumar Co. Ltd. (2002 (7) TMI 44 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT) was in seisin of a situation in which advance was paid to acquire land for expansion of business but since land was not acquired, no capital asset came into existence and there was no question of allowing depreciation on the said asset. On these facts, Their Lordships upheld the view that since no land was acquired and no capital asset came into existence, the loss of advance was to be allowed as business loss. In this view of the matter, and having noted that the loss was incurred in connection with expansion of existing business, we are of the considered view that loss of advance has to be allowed as a revenue deduction of business loss. The question of expense being capital in nature would have arisen only if the machinery was actually acquired; that is not the case here.
............
|
