|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 21 to 40 of 524 Records
-
2007 (12) TMI 530 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e ITAT was right in holding that for calculating u/s.80HHC of the Act turnover of all independent businesses is to be clubbed and thereby rejecting the Assessee's contention that turnover of only export business is required to be taken into consideration?” Issue notice to the other side. Paper book be filed within 3 months. List the Appeal for final hearing after 3 months
-
2007 (12) TMI 529 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... eard. The Civil Appeal is dismissed. No costs.
-
2007 (12) TMI 528 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... uestion in accordance with its tenor. If the language is not clear then the court has to decide whether, in the light of the surrounding circumstances, retrospective effect should be given to it or not. (See Punjab Tin Supply Co., Chandigarh etc. etc. v. Central Government and Ors. 1984 1SCR428 ). 9. There is nothing in the amendment made to Section 142(b) by the Act 55 of 2002 that the same was intended to operate retrospectively. In fact that was not even the stand of the respondent. Obviously, when the complaint was filed on 28.11.1998, the respondent could not have foreseen that in future any amendment providing for extending the period of limitation on sufficient cause being shown would be enacted. 10. That being so the High Court's view is clearly unacceptable. The impugned order of the High Court is set aside. The proceeding pursuant to respondent's complaint i.e. Complaint No. 120 of 1998 in the Court of JMIC, Chandigarh, is quashed. 11. The appeal is allowed.
-
2007 (12) TMI 527 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... d not be entitled to accumulate leave beyond the permissible limit. However, if the employee is acquitted by being given the benefit of doubt he may be paid such portion of pay and allowances as the management may deem proper and the period of his suspension shall not be treated as period spent on duty unless the management so direct. 13. It is to be noted that Regulation 21(9) does not relate to officers and the respondent herein was an officer and, therefore, Regulation 21 has no relevance as it covers only the award staff. 14. Clause 22(8) obviously is relatable to Clause 15(2), meaning that it provides guidelines for operating Sub-regulation (2) of Regulation 15. The High Court was, therefore, justified in holding that because of Clause 22(8), the respondent was entitled to all benefits to which he would have been normally entitled, had he been on duty. Therefore, no interference is called for. 15. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.
-
2007 (12) TMI 526 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ity. The reason is that most Banks require pre-deposit of equivalent amount of cash for giving of Bank-guarantee. Thus while the assessee suffers due to blockage of his business capital, a bank guarantee does not give any advantage, benefit or gain to the trade tax department/Govt., in as much as the money is not available to the trade tax department/Govt. for utilization. 3. Judged on these parameters we are of the opinion that on the facts of the present case the Assessing Authority was not justified in demanding bank guarantee as security. We, therefore, dispose of this writ petition finally after hearing the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel with the direction that the security to be furnished under Section 10(8) by the petitioner will be to the satisfaction of the Assessing Authority, but will be other than cash or bank guarantee. Let a certified copy of this order be issued to the parties on payment of requisite charges within 48 hours.
-
2007 (12) TMI 525 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ry Interpretation" by Justice G.P. Singh. (Tenth Edition, 2006) at PP. 474 and 475) 18. In The State of Jammu and Kashmir v. Shri Triloki Nath Khosa and Ors. (1974)ILLJ121SC and in Chairman, Railway Board and Ors. v. C.R. Rangadhamaiah and Ors. AIR1997SC3828 , this Court held that provision which operates to affect only the future rights without affecting the benefits or rights which have already accrued or enjoyed, till the deletion, is not retrospective in operation. 19. The above position was highlighted by this Court in S.L. Srinivasa Jute Twine Mills (P) Ltd. v. Union of India and Anr. (2006)IILLJ225SC . 20. In view of the above position in law, the judgments of the Commissioner and the High Court are indefensible and are set aside. The appellant shall be entitled to the protection for the period of three years starting from the date the establishment was set up irrespective of the repeal of the provision for such infancy protection. 21. Appeal is allowed. No costs.
-
2007 (12) TMI 524 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ms having received a draft No.460100 drawn on State Bank of India in the sum of ₹ 23.90 lakhs drawn in favour of the Petitioner. Mr. Katyal, learned counsel for the Respondents further confirms that instructions have been issued to the Customs Department and other concerned authorities to facilitate the de-freezing of the account as well as the clearance of the consignment. In that view of the matter no further orders are required to be passed and the file be consigned to the record room.
-
2007 (12) TMI 523 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... oices is similar to the rate mentioned in other invoices and there is no difference between the purchase order and the invoices pertaining to other consignments. 10. It was next contended on behalf of the defendants that there is no stipulation as to the interest in the contract. Having held that the written contract in this case are the invoices, it must be held that there is a stipulation for interest in view of the specific term in the invoice that interest at the rate of 21% p.a. will be charged on over due payments. 11. Hence, the suit is decreed in the sum of ₹ 4,39,585/- i.e. the principal amount plus interest at the rate of 21% p.a. till the filing of the suit. The defendants are liable to pay future interest however at the rate of 18% per annum on the principal sum of ₹ 3,82,096/- from the date of filing of the suit till realisation and/or payment and costs. Decree be drawn up accordingly. Summons for judgment and the suit stands disposed of accordingly.
-
2007 (12) TMI 522 - PUNJAB HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... . Priyadharshini (A-2) v. LIC Housing Finance Ltd. 2005(3) R.C.R. (Crl.) 630 (Madras). 8. For the reasons recorded above, it would not be unsafe to observe that the petitioner is not liable for the cheque drawn by her husband from a joint account relating 10 both of them. She also cannot be held liable with the aid of the provisions as envisaged under Section 141 of the Act. However, accused Pawandeep Singh Grover could be saddled with culpable liability as he is the only "drawer" of the cheque. 9. Resultantly, the present petition is accepted and the proceedings qua the petitioner in complaint titled 'S. Avneet Singh v. S. Pawandeep Singh Grover and Anr. pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jalandhar stand quashed. However, the complaint qua other accused and further proceedings taken thereunder shall continue and will be taken into consideration qua accused Pawandeep Singh Grover. Copy of the order be sent to the Trial Court for intimation.
-
2007 (12) TMI 521 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... relates to demolition of structures and in the light of assertion of the appellant, we are of the view that ends of justice would be met by fresh disposal after affording opportunity to all the parties. It is made clear that we are not expressing anything on the stand taken by the appellant as well as by the respondents including MIDC. In view of the same, we set aside the order dated 17.2.2003 passed by the High Court in W.P. No. 864 of 2003 and restore the said writ petition on its file. The High Court is requested to dispose of the same afresh after affording opportunity to all the parties. They are at liberty to place their respective claim by way of an affidavit/counter affidavit supported by documents within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment and thereafter it is for the Division Bench of the High Court to decide the writ petition on merits as early as possible. 8) The Civil Appeals are disposed of on the above terms. No costs.
-
2007 (12) TMI 520 - CESTAT DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... th intent to evade payment of tax. 4. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the record, I find that levy was introduced on 01.01.2005. The appellant paid the tax for the period April 2005 to December 2005 on the very next day of registration and, therefore, imposition of penalty for this period is not justified. Further, no material was produced by the Revenue in support of suppression of facts with intent to evade payment of tax and imposition of penalty under Section 78 of the Act is not warranted. However, I find force in the submission of the learned DR in respect of imposition of penalty of ₹ 13059/- for delayed payment of tax for the period January 2005 to March 2005. After considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I reduce the penalty to ₹ 13059/- under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 and ₹ 500/- under Section 77 of the Finance Act. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms. (Order dictated and pronounced in the open Court)
-
2007 (12) TMI 519 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... fresh. Therefore, answering the reference against the revenue, we are remanding the matter to find out that out of ₹ 44,69,88,170/- how much amount has been utilized for the purchase of securities or shares from Deutsche Bank, then by applying sec 41 (1) the assessing officer shall find out the liability of the assessee to pay the tax. 12. in the circumstances, we allow the reference in part holding that sec 28(iv) of the I.T Act is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case and the appeal is allowed in regard to sec 41(1) of the Act only to find out whether any amount was utilized by the assessee Bank out of ₹ 44,69,88,170/- which has been written off by the Deutsche Bank toward the purchase of any shares from the Deutsche Bank. Only to this extent, the reference is allowed and the matter is remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration and the Assessing Officer is directed to give full opportunity for the assessee to defend its case.
-
2007 (12) TMI 518 - SUPREME COURT
Jurisdiction of Judiciary for directing creation of posts in any organization - Prayer to sustained and set aside the directions given by the High Court and First Appellate Court to create the posts of tractor driver and regularize the services of the respondents - HELD THAT:- The Court cannot direct the creation of posts. Creation and sanction of posts is a prerogative of the executive or legislative authorities and the Court cannot arrogate to itself this purely executive or legislative function, and direct creation of posts in any organization. This Court has time and again pointed out that the creation of a post is an executive or legislative function and it involves economic factors. Hence the Courts cannot take upon themselves the power of creation of a post. Therefore, the directions given by the High Court and First Appellate Court to create the posts of tractor driver and regularize the services of the respondents against the said posts cannot be sustained and are hereby set aside.
Consequently, this appeal is allowed and the judgment and order of the High Court as well as that of the First Appellate Court are set aside and the judgment of the Trial Court is upheld. The suit is dismissed.
Judiciary has no power over sword or the purse nonetheless it has power to ensure that the aforesaid two main organs of State function within the constitutional limits. It is the sentinel of democracy. Judicial review is a powerful weapon to restrain unconstitutional exercise of power by the legislature and executive. The expanding horizon of judicial review has taken in its fold the concept of social and economic justice. While exercise of powers by the legislature and executive is subject to judicial restraint, the only check on our own exercise of power is the self imposed discipline of judicial restraint.
If the legislature or the executive are not functioning properly it is for the people to correct the defects by exercising their franchise properly in the next elections and voting for candidates who will fulfill their expectations, or by other lawful methods e.g. peaceful demonstrations. The remedy is not in the judiciary taking over the legislative or executive functions, because that will not only violate the delicate balance of power enshrined in the Constitution, but also the judiciary has neither the expertise nor the resources to perform these functions.
Of the three organs of the State, the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary, only the judiciary has the power to declare the limits of jurisdiction of all the three organs. This is a great power and hence must never be abused or misused, but should be exercised by the judiciary with the utmost humility and self-restraint.
Thus, we are clearly of the view that both the High Court and First Appellate Court acted beyond their jurisdiction in directing creation of posts of tractor driver to accommodate the respondents. Appeal Allowed.
-
2007 (12) TMI 517 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... t) in toto. The old Rent Control Act was enacted at the time when there was great scarcity of accommodation in big cities, in order to mitigate the difficulties faced by the tenants in getting rented accommodation at reasonable rates. However, the old Act continued for a very long time though it was enacted considering the prevailing circumstances at that time. With the change of time, considering the need prevailing in the society, the legislature felt it necessary to amend substantially the provisions of the old Act and with that object, the new Act has been enacted, in which also protection has been made available to the tenants keeping in mind the balance between the landlord and the tenant. Therefore, in my view, none of the provisions of the New Act can be said to be unconstitutional or ultra vires in any manner and the enactment of the New Act is accordingly required to be upheld. I, accordingly, concur with the ultimate view expressed by my learned brother Thanvi, J.
-
2007 (12) TMI 516 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... omplaint is filed and in such cases, there may be possibility of unscrupulous persons filing false complaint against innocent persons and therefore in such cases for finding out whether or not there is sufficient ground for proceedings against the accused, a mandatory duty is cast upon the Court to postpone the issue of process against the accused and to enquire into the case by the Magistrate himself or direct investigation to be made by a police officer or by such other person as he thinks fit. 13. For the above said reasons, I am unable to accept the contentions put forth by the Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner. A perusal of the allegation contained in the complaint prima facie reveals commission of an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and as such the proceedings in S.T.C. No. 1079 of 2007 cannot be quashed and therefore the above criminal original petition fails and the same is dismissed. Consequently, the connected M.Ps. are closed.
-
2007 (12) TMI 515 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... beginning with Golikari and including Murgai and Gujarat Bottling (supra). 19. In these circumstances, I am view that the relief that has been sought in the Arbitration Petition cannot be granted. However, it would be necessary to conclude the judgment by recording the statement of the First Respondent that without prejudice to the contention of the First Respondent that the term of the agreement has expired and even on the understanding that the agreement is to continue to subsist until 11th December 2007, the First Respondent does not intend to enter into any negotiations or to conclude any agreement with a third party until 11th December 2007. The statement is accepted. Before concluding, it would also be appropriate to clarify that the observations contained in this judgment are confined to the disposal of the application under Section 9 and shall not preclude parties from agitating their rights and contentions before the Arbitral Tribunal. 20. The Petition is dismissed.
-
2007 (12) TMI 514 - CESTAT CHENNAI
... ...
... ... ..... ces each in the form of comments on the observations of the adjudicating authority in paragraphs 8.3, 8.4, 8.5, 8.16, & 8.17. These in any case do not build up a case for the revenue or even an intelligible commentary on or sufficient grounds against the impugned order. 7. We find that the statement of facts are shabbily drafted containing mostly allegations levelled in the show cause notice described as evidence without explaining how the same were dealt with in the adjudication order. No valid or cogent grounds worth the name are advanced in the appeal to assail the order sought to be vacated. The appeal is not accompanied by a paper book with copies of documents such as statements and other evidences relied upon in the adjudication proceedings. The appeal memorandum does not set out proper grounds but only offers shallow comments on a couple of observations contained in the impugned order. We reject the appeal on these grounds. (Order pronounced in the open court on )
-
2007 (12) TMI 513 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... .10.2006 could have considered the merit of the application filed by the appellant in regard to the relief for injunction, the same by itself, in our opinion, did not warrant a direction to consider the matter afresh by the learned Judge, City Civil Court. We are, therefore, are of the opinion that the impugned judgment do not suffer from any in infirmity. We would, however, having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, request the learned Judge, City Civil Court to consider the desirability of disposing of the suit as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of this order. The parties are directed to render all cooperation to the learned Judge in early disposal of the suit. If it is convenient to the learned Judge, the hearing of the suit may be taken up on day to day basis. 21. This appeal is dismissed with costs. Counsel's fee quantified at ₹ 25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only).
-
2007 (12) TMI 512 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... cheques amount was different. All this fortifies the case of the respondent that all these cheques were those cheques which were given by the respondent for Chit Fund Company and misused by the employees of the Chit Fund Company at the instance of the Director or owner of the Chit Fund Company to show personal loans. If the complainants had come up to the Court with clean hands stating that the cheques with filled-in amount were endorsed in their favor by the Chit Fund Company, the case would have been different but all the three complainants had come to the Court with unclean hands, their testimony itself failed them. Their inability to explain during cross-examination various facts was enough to rebut the presumption raised against the accused. 6.1 The trial Court rightly came to the conclusion that there was no privity of contract and the cheques were not issued to the appellants against any loan liability. I find no force in the appeals, the appeals are hereby dismissed.
-
2007 (12) TMI 511 - COMPANY LAW BOARD PRINCIPAL BENCH NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... ioners have failed to make their case that they have been reduced to minority in shareholding and in the management of the affairs of the company. Nor have they been able to refute the contentions of the Respondents supported by case laws meeting the allegations of the petitioners. However, to do justice between the parties, I hereby attract the provisions of Section 402 of the Act in the interest of proper regulation of the conduct of the company's affairs in future and hereby give the petitioners an option to go out of the company on a fair valuation of their share to be got done by a valuer to be appointed by the petitioners and the respondents after the petitioners have been allowed access to the account books and statutory record of the Respondent Company besides paying the petitioner No. 1 all his pay and allowances till date. 15. The petition is disposed of with the above directions. All CAs stand disposed of. All interim orders stand vacated. No order as to cost.
........
|
