|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 21 to 40 of 578 Records
-
2003 (1) TMI 743 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... J. ORDER Delay is condoned. The appeal is dismissed.
-
2003 (1) TMI 742 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... there did not exist any notification particularly as on the date on which the inspection was made covering the watches issued under Section 1(3)(d) of the Act, the proceedings initiated against the petitioner by the first respondent are without jurisdiction and without any lawful authority. The same are accordingly quashed. 10. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has also advanced the contention that the goods, which are manufactured with brand name are not susceptible to be sold exclusively by weight, or number and in view of Clause 5 of Statement of objects and reasons of the Bill, which ultimately came to be enacted, cannot be brought' within the fold of the Act. She placed reliance on part 5 of Statements of objects of the Bill when it was introduced. In view of the fact that writ petitions are allowed on a different ground this Court feels that it is not necessary to go into that aspect. 11. In the result, all the writ petitions are accordingly allowed. No costs.
-
2003 (1) TMI 741 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... mbers of the rival group cannot be ruled out. 8. Having heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties, we are of the opinion that the trial court was quite justified in acquitting the appellants of the charges as the view taken by it was reasonable one and the order of acquittal cannot be said to be perverse. It is well settled that appellate court would not be justified in interfering with the order of acquittal unless the same is found to be perverse. In the present case, the High Court has committed an error in interfering with the order of acquittal of the appellants recorded by the trial court as the same did not suffer from the vice of perversity. 9. In the result, the appeal is allowed, impugned judgment passed by the High Court convicting the appellants is set aside, the order of their acquittal rendered by the trial court is restored and they are acquittal of all the charges. The appellants, who are on bail, are discharged from the liability of bail bonds.
-
2003 (1) TMI 740 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
... ...
... ... ..... n thereunder. The assessee worked out the deduction under section 80HHC at ₹ 20,523. The Assessing Officer, however, observed that as per the provisions of section 80HHC applicable from assessment year 1993-94 the adjusted profit i.e. assessed profit minus 90% of capital incentive of ₹ 79,400, interest received ₹ 29,27,678 and ₹ 76,00,986, rent and taxes amounting to ₹ 4,36,740 and financial charges of ₹ 12,15,450 worked out in a negative figure and, therefore, denied the claim of the assessee. The CIT(A) upheld the order of the Assessing Officer as the assessee has not been able to explain as to how the action of the Assessing Officer in this regard could be faulted. 19. Before us also, no material has been placed on record which could justify a contrary view. In these circumstances, we have no option but to uphold the orders of the authorities below. This ground of the assessee is rejected. 20. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed.
-
2003 (1) TMI 739 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... inst the first contemnor is equally binding upon the second contemnor K.T. Baskaran. Indeed a Power of Attorney has been executed by contemnor No. 1 K.T. Rajendran in favour of K.T. Baskaran to the effect to attend to all the matters relating to the tenancy of house, ground and premises No. 7, IV Main Road, Gandhi Nagar, Adyar - 600 020, which is the tenanted premises in the present case in that document there is no mention of his independent right to the premises as claimed now. In these circumstances, we overrule the objections raised by the said K.T. Baskaran for vacating the premises in question. 4. We, therefore, direct that the Principal Judge, City Civil and Sessions Court shall take steps to give effect to our order, if necessary, with the help of police for ejecting the said K.T. Baskaran from the said premises and the possession is delivered to the complainant in these proceedings by removing all obstructions thereto and make a report after compliance of this order.
-
2003 (1) TMI 738 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... the Adjudicating Officer thereon, and also in view of the Supreme Court's guidelines in the Hindustan Steel's case, imposition of monetary penalty on the Appellant, in my view is unwarranted. 61. For the reasons stated above, the impugned order cannot be sustained. Therefore the appeal is allowed and the impugned order is set aside." 62. There is nothing in the impugned order to show that the Appellant acted deliberately, in defiance of law or was guilty of conduct contumacious or dishonest or acted in conscious disregard of its obligation. On the contrary the evidence on record shows that the appellant had acted bonafide. Therefore, imposition of penalty was unwarranted. 63. In the light of the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, I am of the view that the view taken by this Tribunal in HDFC and Samrat Holding is applicable to the present case also. 64. For the reasons stated above the impugned order can not be sustained. 65. The appeal allowed.
-
2003 (1) TMI 737 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ent. When the petitioner has come forward with a specific plea that the said Sivananda Steels Ltd., the defaulter is liable to pay certain amount and the amount mentioned by the respondents has to be adjusted towards the same, this Court cannot direct the petitioner to pay the amount as if the petitioner is liable to pay the amount to the fourth respondent. Admittedly, when the parties raised a dispute regarding the payment of amount, the respondents cannot insist the petitioner to pay the amount irrespective of the dispute regarding the claim between the petitioner and the fourth respondent. Hence, the impugned order cannot be sustained against the petitioner and the same is set aside. 6. If the respondents are able to get materials to show that the petitioner is having money payable to fourth respondent, they can proceed against the said money on that basis. Giving such liberty, the writ petition is allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected W.M.Ps. and W.V.M.P. are closed.
-
2003 (1) TMI 736 - CESTAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... of the tubes. Therefore, we hold that the Adjudicating Commissioner has correctly applied the extended time limit for demand of duty. 6. In view, of our findings as above, we uphold the demand of duty confirmed by the Adjudicating Commissioner. However, considering all aspects of the case we are of the view that the penalty of ₹ 41 Lakhs imposed by the Adjudicating Commissioner is excessive and we reduce the same from ₹ 41 Lakhs to ₹ 5 Lakhs. As regards the interest on delayed payment, we find that it has been clarified by the Board in its Circular dt. 26.8.2002 that Section 11AB can be invoked only in respect of clearance effected after 28.9.1996. Since the clearances in the instant case, took place during the period March 1990 to September 1994. On interest can be charged under the said Section 11AB . We order accordingly. 7. The appeals are dismissed except for the modification in respect of penalty and interest as indicated above. (Pronounced in Court)
-
2003 (1) TMI 735 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ent, as the subordinate rule-making authority, is restricted in the manner set out in Section 15. The power to control the sale and the sale price of a minor mineral is not covered by the terms of clause (o) of sub-section (1-A) of Section 15. This clause can relate only to the regulation of the grant of quarry and mining leases and other mineral concessions and it does not confer the power to regulate the sale of already mined minerals." 25. Section 21(4) relied upon by the respondent has no application at all, nor it could be relied upon to the facts of the present case. In the circumstances, the order impugned deserves to be quashed and accordingly it is quashed. 26. The writ petition is allowed and there will be a direction to release the bank guarantee furnished for release of the vehicle and granite block. The respondent shall release the bank guarantee within four weeks from the date of communication of this order. Consequently, connected WMP is closed. No costs.
-
2003 (1) TMI 734 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... principles of English law and the said reasons cannot be valid grounds to interdict prosecution of the action in the English Court of choice. And the second is that English Court has no connection with either of the parties or the subject-matter and it is not a court of natural jurisdiction. This reason can be taken note of when strong reasons are shown to disregard the contractual obligation. It cannot be a good and sufficient reason in itself to justify the court of natural jurisdiction to interdict action in a foreign court of choice of the parties. We, therefore, find no valid reasons to grant anti-suit injunction in favour of the appellants, in disregard of jurisdiction clause, to restrain the respondent from prosecuting the case in the foreign forum of the choice of the parties - the English Court. For the aforementioned reasons, interference in the order of the High Court, under challenge, is not warranted. The appeal fails and it is accordingly dismissed with costs.
-
2003 (1) TMI 733 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
... ...
... ... ..... rovisions contained in section 112 which prescribe specific rate for capital gains. Therefore, the CIT(A) is justified in his action. 6. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case we are of the view that the provisions of section 167B is not a non obstante clause and it does not override the provisions contained in section 112 which prescribe specific rate for capital gains. In our view, the assessee is BOI and has income from capital gain and other sources like interest and dividend income. In our opinion, the CIT(A) is justified in holding that long term capital gain of ₹ 1,61,006 included in the total income, the provisions of specific section 112(1)(d) of the Act apply and on the balance of the total income, the maximum marginal rate as provided as General provisions under section 167B. So, our interference is not required and we uphold the action of the CIT(A). In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
2003 (1) TMI 732 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... Deepti R.Mehrotra, Mr.Garvesh Kabre, ORDER Mr. Harish N.Salve, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner started his arguments at 10.30 a.m. and concluded at 1.00 p.m. Thereafter Mr. G.L.Sanghi, learned senior counsel a ppearing for the respondent started his arguments and was on his legs when the Court rose for the date. The matter remained part-heard. (Suman Wadhwa)(S.Malkani) Court Master Assistant Registrar
-
2003 (1) TMI 731 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... m No. 5 being in possession of the tenants, we cannot compel the respondents to take Item No. 5 of the plaint schedule and force them to face one more round of litigation to evict the tenants. For the reasons stated above, we do not find any ground to interfere with the order of the learned Judge. 18. However, we make it clear that taking into consideration of the statement made by the learned counsel for the respondents that the appellant can pay the value of the land in respect of Item No. 6 and then to take the same, we give liberty to the appellant to seize the opportunity and to purchase peace by paying the land value, as determined by the Advocate-Commissioner Mr. K.M. Srirangan in his report dated 19.9.2000 to the respondents and the respondents are also directed to receive the same, in case if the value of the land is paid by the appellant within one month from today. With the above observation, the appeal is disposed of. Consequently stay C.M.P.19104/2002 is closed.
-
2003 (1) TMI 730 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ember, 1977. Therefore, applying Section 10(2) of the Nationalisation Act the Petitioner cannot be held liable for payment of gratuity to the 1st Respondent for the period prior to the taking over of management of the undertaking under Section 18FA of the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act i.e. 11th March, 1977. 20. In the result, the Petition is allowed. The impugned order is quashed and set aside. Rule made absolute accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. 21. It is made clear that the heirs of Respondent No. 1 shall be at liberty to resort to such proceedings for recovery of such sums of gratuity as may be due from the Official Liquidator from the funds made available by the State Government under the provisions of the Nationalisation Act No. XXXIII of 1982. P.A. to give ordinary copy of this order to the parties concerned. All Authorities concerned to act on an ordinary copy of this order duly authenticated as true copy by the Sheristedar of this Court.
-
2003 (1) TMI 729 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... apart, the Court is not entitled to assess the respective merit of the candidates for adjudging their suitability for being promoted and the only right the employee has is a right of consideration. The said right of consideration not having been infringed in the present case, the High Court was not justified in issuing the impugned direction for reconsideration of his case..." 44. The said decision, therefore, mutilates against the contentions of the respondents. 45. Furthermore, the first respondent herein in these cases Shri P.P. Singh, Shri G.P. Pandey has been granted selection scale in RHJS with effect from 1.8.2000 and Shri P.K. Bhatia has been given with effect from 29.3.2000. Shri P.P. Singh has also retired from service on superannuation. 46. We are of the opinion that impugned judgment of the High Court cannot be sustained which is set aside accordingly. The appeals are allowed but in the facts and circulation of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.
-
2003 (1) TMI 728 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... having held that the sections in the Act impose no limitation on the Assessing Officer on the authorised officer being the same person and that it could not be said that action taken pursuant to such statutory empowerment was coloured, only by reason thereof, by any bias. 12. Ultimately, the question of bias will have to be decided on the facts of each case. If the assessee is able to establish that the Assessing Officer was in fact biased in the sense that he was involved or interested in his personal capacity in the outcome of the assessment or the procedure for assessment, no doubt, it would be a good ground for setting aside the assessment order. But to hold, as the High Court has that bias is established only because the authorised officer under Section 132 and the Assessing Officer are the same person is, in our view, an incorrect approach. 13. In the circumstances of the case, we set aside the judgment under appeal. The appeal is allowed without any order as to costs.
-
2003 (1) TMI 727 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ction 15-A(1)(q) of the Act. The Tribunal had committed manifest error of law in deleting the penalty. 6. Having heard the submission, I find that the Tribunal has recorded categorical finding of fact on the relevant material available on record that the goods in question had been delivered to the purchaser at Bikaner (Rajasthan). Even it is assumed for a moment that the opposite party has not surrendered the transit pass on the exit check post the presumption raised under Section 28-B is reputable as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sodhi Transport Company vs. State of U.P. and others reported in 1986 UPTC-721. The Tribunal has recorded the finding that the goods in question has been delivered to the purchasing party at Bikaner in the State of Rajasthan. Thus, the presumption under Section 28-B has been rebutted. In this view of the matter, no penalty under Section 15-A(1)(q) can be imposed. In view of the above the revision lacks merit and is dismissed.
-
2003 (1) TMI 726 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e case, we deem it proper that the Council, which is the Controlling Authority, can consider the report afresh and may proceed in accordance with law. It is also made clear that any observation made by the learned Single Judge approving the report of the Disciplinary Committee will not come in the way of the Council taking suitable action, if any, and will not prejudice the case of the parties made to that effect. 10. As discussed, we are of the view to modify the order of the learned Single Judge to the extent stated above. Accordingly, it is modified. It is directed that the Council shall consider the report of the Disciplinary Committee independently and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Since the matter is pending for over 12 years after its initiation, it is expected that the Council will consider the same and the respondents will co-operate so as to dispose of the matter at the earliest. Accordingly, writ appeal is disposed of with the above observations.
-
2003 (1) TMI 725 - COMPANY LAW BOARD, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... able name of a valuer to value the shares. In case the parties do not agree on the valuer, this Bench will appoint a valuer and give consequential directions. One other aspect that I must indicate is that the respondents have submitted that the petitioners should account for the loss of business by the company on account of acceptance of resignations of the Engineering employees by the 1st petitioner and also due to diversion of the business. I find from paragraph 38 of the plaint of the civil suit in Delhi High Court that the respondents have sought leave of the court to file subsequent proceedings for recovery of damages against the petitioners as and when they are assessed. Since the suit was filed prior in time and is substantive in nature. I do not propose to deal with the same and the respondents are at liberty to agitate this issue in that suit. The petition is disposed of in the above terms reserving the right to appoint a valuer and to give consequential directions.
-
2003 (1) TMI 724 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... situation in law would have been entirely different if the title of the appellant would have come to an end by any event happening or change taking place after the making of the award by the Collector as was the case in Dr. G.H. Grant Vs. State of Bihar (1965) 3 SCR 576. The title of Dr. Ghosh had come to an end by change of law referable to a date subsequent to the making of the award. In this context it was held "there is no reason why the right to claim a reference of a dispute about the person entitled to compensation may not be exercised by the person on whom the title has devolved since the date of the award" and "there is nothing in Section 30 which excludes a reference to the Court of a dispute raised by a person on whom the title of the owner of land has, since the award, devolved". For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is allowed, the judgment of the Division Bench is set aside and that of the learned Single Judge restored with costs throughout.
........
|
